Are You A Reliable Source Or An Accident Waiting To Happen?

Kathy, I have a lot of government friends and sometimes run errands for them. Confidential information should always remain confidential information until vetted properly. Just because a person stumbles across something doesn't mean he/she/they/we should abuse our ability to engage in free speech. Journalists have editors and magazine/news agencies have protocols and policies for a reason. Freedom of the Press does not mean there will be no consequences if a writer is irresponsible. Of course, irresponsibility is relative... (LOL).    

Confidential, classified information, regardless of content, should be treated with a healthy dose of respect because in the game of information/disinformation, the release of content before its time can have dire consequences... Releasing bogus information for people to respond/react to can also trigger a positive/negative impact on a lot of economic markets just like an accurate memorandum can.

Kate,  I will check off the re-blog authorization button just for you (LOL). I was an investigator for a Mayoral agency so as a retired government employee I know just how dangerous and bad a breach of security can be. Finding the sources of leaks can run up a serious taxpayer tab. Prosecuting the offenders will cost even more... Then we have to pay to feed, clothe and house them... :-)

Bill, if a person selectively releases 10 items out of X portfolio, an investigator would never assume they only have 10 items. An investigator would acknowledge the known releases, attempt to reverse engineer how they came to be in the possession of unauthorized personnel while searching every nook and cranny available for traces of every document available in that specific portfolio of information. The search gets expanded to every portfolio of information branching from the entity that suffered the security violation. Everyone known to have access will get investigated for inclusion or exclusion in/from prosecution. It is not draconian to attempt  to keep potential witnesses separated from the offenders by restricting account access and handing down a sequestering order. Judges tell jurists not to watch the news or read the papers so they don't have their memories tainted during a trial. Jurists don't get to read what everyone else is reading for a reason - so the accused can have a fair trail by a jury of his/her/their peers.

If having a copy of an unauthorized classified document is a crime, then restricting the curious from downloading it on the site actually helps the innocent workers from getting into trouble. An investigator will have to forensically examine the computers to determine the uploads and downloads. Every time you click a link your browser is downloading digital information and processing the packets so you can view it... What if a leak is from a script in the cookies? There is a bigger picture here...  

Lane, very true, which is also a reason why we as writers have to be careful not to get dragged into virtual business way above our virtual pay grade. The twitter chatter is interesting because business people around the world are discussing the loss of revenue for the site and various governments not being pleased... The speculation is now shifting to the alleged encrypted insurance file... Is there a poison pill? Will there ever be a fair trial? Hmm...

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2010/12/05/wikileaks-ready-release-massive-insurance-file-shut/

Bill, the original information was taken from corporations, governments, storage units/facilities which was private, confidential material NOT publicly available until they placed it on over 200 mirror sites to leak it to the public. You must remember that the FOURTH AMENDMENT [U.S. Constitution] states, "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

I am a person. I work for X. I send a cable. The secretary knows, the cable company knows, the routers that send my digital package have the encrypted information, the person who receives it knows. That is private information. If the college intern on the receiving end takes a flash USB drive and copies 16 gigs of information a day off of my hard drive every time they relieve me of my post so I can go to meal and passes it on for publication because he/she/they don't like the fact that (XYZ, insert any reason you please here), those actions do not make the cybercrime/physical theft issues moot. Receiving stolen property is a crime.

Amazon hosted their servers and Paypal processed their financial transactions. The site has lost those services because of their actions. If you were a hypothetical customer of the bank(s) they had unauthorized data from, would your attitude change if it were alleged that your company's financial transactions, e-mails, tax returns and TRW were being posted on-line as part of a 500,000 page chronological file to embarrass lending institutions and the government? If a website allegedly said in sum and substance we're releasing these files unredacted to show loan modifications are a possible scam and we have the hypothetical proof that less than 1% of eligible homeowners have received this benefit while XYZ had denied approximately 99% of applicants while taking a fee to process the application would you want your info included in there or feel better about it because the public should know? 

When it is not us specifically we sometimes don't feel the empathy and/or sympathy of what another person or entity is going through. This is our government having to adapt to a cybercrime that altered diplomatic relations with other countries and that is now consuming a significant amount of our investigative resources because of the extent of the breach in security. No one knows how much material they have... You do understand an enemy with a stolen launch code or date and time of a sensitive meeting could potentially kill off key political figures... Abraham Lincoln was shot in a theater. A forgotten, casual RSVP mentioned in an e-mail could be worth mad money to an enemy looking to whack a specific person. 

A bunch of classified/confidential 256-encrypted files on-line being downloaded that only require a published password is something everyone should be concerned about... Each file that gets unlocked triggers a global reaction. Get ready for new domestic/international laws and treaties to be written people...  The extradition negotiations on some of the people involved will probably prove to be very interesting...