Leaker Leaked!
We live in a world where it is apparently OK for an independent website to publish highly classified documents with total disregard for the sensitivity of that information. But when the boot is on the other foot and a password that apparently allows access to WikiLeaks’ classified files hits the public domain then it is a ‘betrayal’ of WikLeaks’ sources and informants which could ‘put their lives in danger’.
The real irony of all of this is that the leaker of the number one leaking site in the world is the UK’s Guardian newspaper which, until the end of last year, was one of WikiLeaks’ main publishing partners. “A Guardian journalist has negligently disclosed top secret WikiLeaks’ decryption passwords to hundreds of thousands of unredacted, unpublished U.S. diplomatic cables,” WikiLeaks wrote in a statement. “Knowledge of The Guardian disclosure has spread privately over several months but reached critical mass last week. The unpublished WikiLeaks’ material includes over 100,000 classified unredacted cables that were being analyzed, in parts, by over 50 media and human rights organizations from around the world.”
David Leigh, a Guardian journalist has published a book (WikiLeaks: Inside Julian Assange's War on Secrecy) which was released seven months ago and apparently included this password. So you have to ask why has this storm only just developed, and why didn’t they change the password as soon as they had an inkling that the book was being written. These things don’t just appear without any prior knowledge by the target, in this case WikiLeaks.
The newspaper said in a statement, “It’s nonsense to suggest the Guardian’s WikiLeaks book has compromised security in any way. Our book about WikiLeaks was published last February. It contained a password, but no details of location of the files, and we were told it was a temporary password which would expire and be deleted in a matter of hours. It was a meaningless piece of information to anyone except the person(s) who created the database. No concerns were expressed when the book was published and if anyone at WikiLeaks had thought this compromised security they have had seven months to remove the files. That they didn’t do so clearly shows the problem was not caused by the Guardian’s book.”
Continued on the next page
Follow Technorati