Daniel Domscheit-Berg, WikiLeaks Defector, Says Assange Lost Control Of WikiLeaks Data

Forbes:

When former WikiLeaks spokesperson Daniel Domscheit-Berg walked away from WikiLeaks in September of last year, he may have taken more than just a few engineers with him: He now claims that WikiLeaks' defectors also took the keys to Julian Assange's kingdom.

In an excerpt of Domscheit-Berg's upcoming book, Inside WikiLeaks, that was leaked to the document-publishing site Cryptome, an English-language version of several pages states that he and one "architect" of WikiLeaks' submissions platform took control of WikiLeaks' system for submitting leaks away from Assange--along with at least some portion of the leaked material that WikiLeaks had obtained--to ensure the security of the site's sources.

Read the whole story: Forbes

Comments

[Ccronk]

12:33 AM on 03/14/2011

Majority of these comments are anti-daniel. I highly reommend you read his book before you judge him. I dont know much about him, and im not trying to praise him but he raises many valued points. He isnt anti wikileaks, or totally anti Julian. He just strongly disagrees with how Julian has handled Wikileaks and how he has turned wikileaks into what it is fighting against. One example, he should have stepped aside during hes rape accusations so all the media wouldnt be on him and taking spotlight away from wikileaks which he has done. Julian has made many mistakes with Wikileaks which is expected because it is the first of its kind. Julian craves attention and the US has figured that out and are using that against him succesfully. Why havent we heard much about wikileaks since the accusations? Because all the attention has been on Julian not wikileaks. I am all for wikileaks and strongly believe in what it stands for. As I will with Openleaks.

[ExtraO]

01:17 AM on 02/12/2011

Don't know that much about Assange or what he is like, but it's starting to appear that a number of his (ex)associates sure are pukes. Can his options really have been that limited or his judgement of character that poor?

[moutonnoir]

10:59 PM on 02/11/2011

i agree very strongly with what wikileaks stands for.. all i can really see here is people who wanted some of the hundreds of thousands of dollars wikileaks took in, were treated poorly, and have left.

however, who know?

[logicanada]

03:06 PM on 02/11/2011

28 comment -oops 29 now. It's good to see this traitor getting the attention he deserves.

[netzwerg]

05:18 AM on 02/11/2011

I think this guy is a BND (Bundesnachrichtendienst = German secret service) operative.

[logicanada]

01:14 AM on 02/11/2011

He should prove it. My guess is he stole it himself.

[yippiekiaay]

09:52 PM on 02/10/2011

All this time I limited defectors to being people who decided to leave their country for another. I never thought to apply it to employees leaving a company.
See how flexible our language can be when there are clicks to be had and advertising to be sold and spin to be spun?

[BoFo]

06:43 PM on 02/10/2011

If Dumscheit-­Berg was really dedicated to the mission and merely disagreed over procedure, he would have quietly left WikiLeaks and set up shop somewhere else.

The fact that he has chosen to sabotage WikiLeaks, both internally and in the media. and to steal leaked material from them is a clear indication that he has a hidden agenda that includes the destructio­n of WikiLeaks.

I'd guess he's either been bought off or turned rat in exchange for immunity, or perhaps he was a plant from the beginning. It is interestin­g that, while at WikiLeaks, he used the pseudonym Daniel Schmitt, while Assange used his real name.

[life-of-riley]

01:34 AM on 02/11/2011

"The fact that he has chosen to sabotage WikiLeaks, both internally and in the media. and to steal leaked material from them is a clear indication that he has a hidden agenda that includes the destructio­­n of WikiLeaks."

Isn't that exactly what Assange has done? (sabotage, steal, leak, media).

[SayBlade]

05:39 PM on 02/11/2011

No. This is not what Assange has done.

[BoFo]

06:18 PM on 02/11/2011

WikiLeaks hasn't stolen anything and hasn't sabotaged anyone. Everything they have published has been provided to them by anonymous sources. You obviously haven't bothered to learn anything about how WikiLeaks operates -- that might be a good idea if you want your comments to be taken seriously.

Oh, nevermind about being taken seriously, I just glanced at your recent posts. You are obviously one of those posters who just writes short, snarky, replies to other people's thoughtful comments and never writes anything of substance yourself.

Your most recent flurry of childish posting involves articles about the size of Mick Jagger's privates, a groomer who fondled a horse, Lindsay Lohan, a porn channel for Dutch women, the sexiest cities in America, and Julie Henderson rolling around in the sand. I guess we all know what type of sites you spend most of your time on.

[life-of-riley]

11:25 PM on 02/11/2011

Bo- fo-ungu, Bofo!

[Artos]

04:37 PM on 02/10/2011

This may explain why we haven't gotten much of anything from WikiLeaks recently. Their explanation seemed rather lame that they had stuff but weren't ready to put it out there. Maybe the fact is that it's been compromised. You wouldn't expect the U.S. Government and powerful banks like BofA to just sit on their laurels and not try to sabotage WikiLeaks.

[life-of-riley]

07:29 PM on 02/11/2011

Maybe, just maybe, I'm just saying - maybe, it was more smoke than fire. Seems to me, the Wiki's didn't end up being earth-shattering. Certainly, not as earth-shattering as the advance Assange will get on his forthcoming and inevitable book.

[goodog]

01:44 PM on 02/10/2011

"excerpt of Domscheit-Berg's upcoming book, Inside WikiLeaks, that was leaked to the document-publishing site Cryptome"

This is yet MORE abuse of the word "leaked".

Excerpts of a book about to launch are common publishing procedure, and spinning it as a leak is brilliant.

We're so horny for controversy we'll swallow anything.

[Henk]

01:06 PM on 02/10/2011

This is interesting, just yesterday I read an article about Bank of America hiring three different tech firms and the plan that they had laid out for combatting Wikileaks. One strategy was to do exactly as this book is doing, which is to discredit Assange and the security of his computer platform. This guy specifically states that they Bank of America stuff is stale and uninteresting. Could this be coincidence?

[drjasonmd]

09:51 AM on 02/10/2011

Domscheit.

[European1919]

02:24 AM on 02/10/2011

Oh, Danny boy, the pipes, the pipes are calling. From glen to glen, and down the mountain side. The summer's gone, and all the roses are falling. ...

[Staxx]

02:21 AM on 02/10/2011

Slimey thievery!

[goodog]

01:48 PM on 02/10/2011

information intrinsically yearns to be free or it doesn't.

[kizzie]

02:20 AM on 02/10/2011

Could it be possible jealousy that Assaunge gets the most attention? He is the one taking the heat. I wonder if this (defector) would have had the sllɐq (Upside down word) to do it.
Interesting, though. Possibly why the BOA stuff hasn't come out---they have control over the main papers and codes?
I'm still donating to and supporting Assange's defense.

We do need to give credit to the other people at Wikileaks, too. I think they feel left out.

[logicanada]

01:16 AM on 02/11/2011

You can type balls here.