Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Wikileaks: Julian Assange's internet access 'cut'

bbc.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 1001 posts

Re: Wikileaks: Julian Assange's internet access 'cut'

#71

Post by astn »

mbreedlove wrote: post #42
varjag wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or there's no insurance files and Assange is bluffing. He won't sit on some scoop harming the United States for long, his ego and power trip would force his hand.

The insurance files are public. They just have to release the keys. 3.6GB - http://wlstorage.net/torrent/wlinsurance-20130815-A.aes256.t... 49GB - http://wlstorage.net/torrent/wlinsurance-20130815-B.aes256.t... 349GB - http://wlstorage.net/torrent/wlinsurance-20130815-C.aes256.t... 94GB - https://file.wikileaks.org/torrent/2016-06-03_insurance.aes2... I don't know why they would put out a few hundred gigabytes of fak…

>I don't know why they would put out a few hundred gigabytes of fake files.

Looks like you can check it now. The keys went public:

pre-commitment 3: UK FCO f33a6de5c627e3270ed3e02f62cd0c857467a780cf6123d2172d80d02a072f74

pre-commitment 2: Ecuador eae5c9b064ed649ba468f0800abf8b56ae5cfe355b93b1ce90a1b92a48a9ab72

pre-commitment 1: John Kerry 4bb96075acadc3d80b5ac872874c3037a386f4f595fe99e687439aabd0219809

https://twitter.com/wikileaks

Re: Wikileaks: Julian Assange's internet access 'cut'

#72

Post by AvenueIngres »

seanhunter wrote: post #68
AvenueIngres wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is not clear whether Assange is tweeting or a third-party is. For all we know, they could have stormed and the only information available to the person maintaining the Wikileaks twitter account is that Assange cannot be reached. The situation is not clear atm.

Seriously? Here's the Ecuadorian Embassy: https://goo.gl/maps/gtwjXtGrv9p Note that it's not in the middle of nowhere, it's right behind Harrods (ie 100 yards away from one of the busiest shopping streets in one of the world's largest and most diverse cities, with 1000s of people walking by every minute carrying cellphones). Do you honestly think anyone could storm such an embassy and not have a massive media footpri…

1. Calm down. No one is saying this is what happened. No need to get on your high horses.

2. At the time the Internet got cut-off it was 6:40am in the UK. Pretty early.

3. The British government has the power to issue DA-notice to media outlets.

4. "Storming" the Ecuadorian embassy would not take a lot of manpower. This isn't a raid of a Mexican cartel. There is no resistance to expect, the adversarial repercussions would be diplomatic.

5. "For all we know" - means that this is an hypothesis. We are speculating. If you have up-to-date information, feel free to share.

Re: Wikileaks: Julian Assange's internet access 'cut'

#73

Post by johansch »

anondon wrote: post #60

When Assange accesses the internet, I am guessing that state actors would be trying to see what his traffic contains. How would a person in such a situation access the internet and be sure that his traffic cannot be decrypted and/or there is no man in the middle modification of his traffic. For the sake of discussion, assume he has a brand new laptop with Debain/tails or another FOSS OS. The general consensus seems t…

If he has a laptop it almost certainly hacked if it's in any way connected to the Internet. How could it not be?

Re: Wikileaks: Julian Assange's internet access 'cut'

#74

Post by labster »

astn wrote: post #71
mbreedlove wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The insurance files are public. They just have to release the keys. 3.6GB - http://wlstorage.net/torrent/wlinsurance-20130815-A.aes256.t... 49GB - http://wlstorage.net/torrent/wlinsurance-20130815-B.aes256.t... 349GB - http://wlstorage.net/torrent/wlinsurance-20130815-C.aes256.t... 94GB - https://file.wikileaks.org/torrent/2016-06-03_insurance.aes2... I don't know why they would put out a few hundred gigabytes of fak…

>I don't know why they would put out a few hundred gigabytes of fake files. Looks like you can check it now. The keys went public: pre-commitment 3: UK FCO f33a6de5c627e3270ed3e02f62cd0c857467a780cf6123d2172d80d02a072f74 pre-commitment 2: Ecuador eae5c9b064ed649ba468f0800abf8b56ae5cfe355b93b1ce90a1b92a48a9ab72 pre-commitment 1: John Kerry 4bb96075acadc3d80b5ac872874c3037a386f4f595fe99e687439aabd0219809 https://twitte…

Those tweets came out 7 hours before the Internet link message.

Re: Wikileaks: Julian Assange's internet access 'cut'

#75

Post by Xylakant »

AvenueIngres wrote: post #72
seanhunter wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seriously? Here's the Ecuadorian Embassy: https://goo.gl/maps/gtwjXtGrv9p Note that it's not in the middle of nowhere, it's right behind Harrods (ie 100 yards away from one of the busiest shopping streets in one of the world's largest and most diverse cities, with 1000s of people walking by every minute carrying cellphones). Do you honestly think anyone could storm such an embassy and not have a massive media footpri…

1. Calm down. No one is saying this is what happened. No need to get on your high horses. 2. At the time the Internet got cut-off it was 6:40am in the UK. Pretty early. 3. The British government has the power to issue DA-notice to media outlets. 4. "Storming" the Ecuadorian embassy would not take a lot of manpower. This isn't a raid of a Mexican cartel. There is no resistance to expect, the adversarial repercussions…

> 3. The British government has the power to issue DA-notice to media outlets.

Surely they can suppress all blogs and all of twitter and facebook at the same time. Oh, hold - why didn't they suppress the tweet we're discussing.

> 4. "Storming" the Ecuadorian embassy would not take a lot of manpower. This isn't a raid of a Mexican cartel. There is no resistance to expect, the adversarial repercussions would be diplomatic.

It require a little more than a bobby walking up to the door and asking politely. It's fairly likely that this would get noticed by someone passing by - mind you: That's not somewhere in the woods, it's central London.

> "For all we know" - means that this is an hypothesis. We are speculating.

No. You are speculating. The null hypothesis is that nothing of that sort happened. Apart from handwaving speculation you haven't offered anything that would even resemble proof or supporting evidence.

Re: Wikileaks: Julian Assange's internet access 'cut'

#77

Post by Jonnax »

akerro wrote: post #76
werid wrote: post #64

Verizon support is on the case... https://twitter.com/VerizonSupport/status/787890336270090240

Why does Verizon end their messages with something like ^FEM or DB or DMW? What does it mean?

Multiple support agents use the same account so by having a small tag at the end the customer knows who they are speaking to.

Re: Wikileaks: Julian Assange's internet access 'cut'

#78

Post by Chris2048 »

Xylakant wrote: post #65
phy6 wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think if this election cycle has taught us anything, it's that allegations of the worst kind can be created for political reasons. Surely Bill Clinton AND Donald Trump AND Julian Assange AND Anthony Weiner can't all be rapists, right? What kind of a world do we live in if they all are?!

> can't all be rapists, right? Why not? Considering that not too long ago it was deemed legal to rape your wife? It's not too long ago that rape wasn't exactly treated as the crime it is now. Without wanting to apologize any of the behavior, it's less than my lifetime ago that the man who took a woman against her will wasn't considered a rapist but rather a role model in large chunks of the population. So yes, it's q…

> wasn't considered a rapist but rather a role model in large chunks of the population

Pop history. Be specific (time, place, evidence) or stop with the demon-haunted characterisations of the past.

Re: Wikileaks: Julian Assange's internet access 'cut'

#79

Post by AvenueIngres »

Xylakant wrote: post #75
AvenueIngres wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1. Calm down. No one is saying this is what happened. No need to get on your high horses. 2. At the time the Internet got cut-off it was 6:40am in the UK. Pretty early. 3. The British government has the power to issue DA-notice to media outlets. 4. "Storming" the Ecuadorian embassy would not take a lot of manpower. This isn't a raid of a Mexican cartel. There is no resistance to expect, the adversarial repercussions…

> 3. The British government has the power to issue DA-notice to media outlets. Surely they can suppress all blogs and all of twitter and facebook at the same time. Oh, hold - why didn't they suppress the tweet we're discussing. > 4. "Storming" the Ecuadorian embassy would not take a lot of manpower. This isn't a raid of a Mexican cartel. There is no resistance to expect, the adversarial repercussions would be diploma…

Ok whatever.

Re: Wikileaks: Julian Assange's internet access 'cut'

#80

Post by pilif »

Kenji wrote: post #70
anondon wrote: post #60

When Assange accesses the internet, I am guessing that state actors would be trying to see what his traffic contains. How would a person in such a situation access the internet and be sure that his traffic cannot be decrypted and/or there is no man in the middle modification of his traffic. For the sake of discussion, assume he has a brand new laptop with Debain/tails or another FOSS OS. The general consensus seems t…

He needs good friends who host VPNs for him. TOR would also be a good thing. Maybe a combination of both. Of course, those friends would have to visit him in person and give him some public keys or something to verify their identity.

> He needs good friends who host VPNs for him

then the state actors would just bug that good friend.

Post reply on HN