WikiLeaks Crippled, Can't Protect Leakers' Anonymity, Sources Say

(Reuters) - WikiLeaks's ability to receive new leaks has been crippled after a disaffected programer unplugged a component which guaranteed anonymity to would-be leakers, activists and journalists who have worked with the site say.

Details of the breakdown are contained in a book by estranged Assange collaborator Daniel Domscheit-Berg which is due to be published on Friday, a source familiar with the contents of the book told Reuters.

Neither WikiLeaks's embattled Australian founder, Julian Assange, nor members of his entourage responded to an e-mailed request from Reuters for comment but a WikiLeaks spokesman confirmed the website's submission system was being overhauled.

Domscheit-Berg also took a backlog of leaks sent to the WikiLeaks website with him when he left, the source familiar with the contents of "Inside WikiLeaks: My Time With Julian Assange at the World's Most Dangerous Website," said.

In a statement issued to the Forbes website on Wednesday, Kristinn Hrafnsson, a WikiLeaks spokesman, said the website was suing Domscheit-Berg, who with Assange served until late last year as one of WikiLeaks's two principal spokesmen.

"In (his) book Domscheit-Berg confesses to various acts of sabotage against the organization. The former WikiLeaks staffer admits to having damaged the site's primary submission system and stolen material," Hrafnsson's statement said.

"The sabotage and concern over motives led to an overhaul of the entire submission system, an ongoing project that is not being expedited due to its complex nature and the organization's need to focus its resources on publication and defense," Hrafnsson added.

CRIPPLED FOR MONTHS

The activists and journalists who have worked with WikiLeaks and Assange, who faces a sexual misconduct investigation in Sweden, say the website's ability to receive new leaks of data has been crippled, if not totally disabled, for months.

Domscheit-Berg recently announced that he was creating a WikiLeaks spinoff or rival called OpenLeaks.org with support from a former WikiLeaks programer, believed to be a German, whose programing skills are more dazzling than Assange's.

Precisely how much material sent in to WikiLeaks is now under the control of Domscheit-Berg and the programer, known only as "The Architect," is unclear.

Domscheit-Berg has not publicly characterized the subject matter or volume of material he has stashed away, though he has indicated that at some point, he might be willing to cede control over it back to Assange.

In an e-mail to Reuters, Domscheit-Berg said he planned to offer a public clarification of what happened at a news conference scheduled for Thursday.

To avoid what Domscheit-Berg has condemned as Assange's dictatorial leadership of WikiLeaks, OpenLeaks will be a more decentralized organization, he has said.

The new website will not itself publish or analyze leaks which it receives but instead will serve as a conduit to relay the information to partners in the website, who could include media outlets, NGO groups, and labor unions.

WikiLeaks insiders say Assange still has control over substantial quantities of data leaked to the website before the WikiLeaks founder became entangled last August in a sexual misconduct case in Sweden. He has said in the past this includes a huge cache of data from the hard-drive of a Bank of America executive.

In an interview with the German weekly magazine Stern, Domscheit-Berg is quoted saying that Assange's cache of bank data is old and "completely unspectacular."

Copyright 2011 Thomson Reuters. Click for Restrictions.

Comments

[gmb007]

01:06 PM on 02/12/2011

Massive, effing FAIL. That’s all one can say about Domscheit-Berg.

His actions display the worst kind of opportunistic, self-serving turncoat. His supremely aggressive ambitions clearly signal only one goal: to make a spectacular name for himself - and with his “tell-all” book, a spectacular fortune.

Anyone truly invested in free speech, concerned with freely disseminating critical info to the world - in the interest of promoting the global common good - would never do what he’s done.

Why?

The volume of secret docs being continually generated worldwide is massive and to willfully disable the world’s premier whistleblowing site impedes, if not effectively stops, the free flow of info to the world’s people - all in the interest of personal vengeance and self-promotion.

There's too few sites doing what Wikileaks does, which is already overloaded with massive data it's trying to process, so to strangle any such site openly displays one’s true allegiances - and it’s not the public good.

Domscheit-Berg deliberately sabotaged critical Wikileaks security technology to blatantly advance his own site and leaks empire. Vindictiveness is not an attractive virtue. He is NO "white hat" hero to Assange's "black hat" - he’s simply a common thief, opportunist and shameless, self-aggrandizing fame-and-fortune hunter, hoping to cash in on the original groundbreaking work of Julian Assange and Wikileaks.

One does NOT burn down the building - especially a non-profit community food pantry - because one has discovered and taken a personal, vitriolic dislike to an annoying mouse.

[Australopitenico]

08:59 AM on 02/12/2011

Yeah, I can see why this guy was kicked out.

[Impishparrot]

08:22 AM on 02/11/2011

Daniel Bomscheit-Berg can not constrain his jealously and contempt toward Wikileaks and Assange, and has made his attacks very personal in a 'tabloid' way talking about his former colleague's sex life -- and even his pet. Now Bomscheit-Berg, is blabbing all over the internet selling his new site, Openleaks, while bragging that he ‘crippled’ Wikileaks before leaving. Answer this? In light of the fact that Bomscheit-Berg can’t keep his freaking mouth shut about Assange and Wikileaks’ secrets – both technical and personal, would you feel comfortable leaking ANYTHING to his new site, OpenLeaks? Bomscheit-Berg has a peculiar way of launching a 'secret-keeping-leaking' site. He admits to theft and destruction of property, and has viciously attacked his former colleagues. This man has NO business in the leak business.

[gmb007]

01:24 PM on 02/12/2011

BRAVO!! Perfectly said. :)

fanned

[MaToLa]

01:07 AM on 02/11/2011

What goes around, comes around.

[Russ Vanover]

12:46 AM on 02/11/2011

What about the BoA Dump..? That doesn't sound unspectacular to me...

[mikesw]

11:37 PM on 02/10/2011

"WikiLeaks's ability to receive new leaks has been crippled after a disaffected programer unplugged a component which guaranteed anonymity to would-be leakers, activists and journalists who have worked with the site say."

Sounds like sabotage to me.

"Domscheit-Berg also took a backlog of leaks sent to the WikiLeaks website with him when he left, the source familiar with the contents of "Inside WikiLeaks: My Time With Julian Assange at the World's Most Dangerous Website," said."

Sounds like theft to me.

Dishonest, vengeful and totally missing the big picture: obviously it was a very good decision to kick this guy out of Wikileaks.

[rosa100]

10:29 PM on 02/10/2011

Since this place has been bought by AOL, it's whatever, but in case you still have half a mind, this news with the German discrediting Assange and wikileaks security is almost verbatim from the plan to dismantle WL prepared for Band of America.

You can find the vomiting inducing pdf here: http://www.wikileaks.ch/IMG/pdf/WikiLeaks_Response_v6.pdf or go directly to wikileaks.ch

What gives the German away is the nanny bit and the tone, please... If he had a legitimate complaint THIS would not be the time to bring it up... disgusting... all of it.

[rambisfan]

08:55 PM on 02/10/2011

Wikileak the wilileakers....tit for tat. Same should happen to some media hit people...who are they dating,what are they eating etc etc....

[naughtYmike]

08:51 PM on 02/10/2011

WikiLeaks has already proven that the American government is no more than a pack of greedy, untrustworthy liars. If one can't grasp the significance of that already, what use is more?

[Genders]

08:50 PM on 02/10/2011

What's better than wikileaks? Two wikileaks.

[Eric Korpela]

09:32 PM on 02/10/2011

This guy sabotaged wikileaks in a way that jeopardizes anonymity. What make you think he wouldn't expose sources at openleaks if he gets pissy again? You'd have to be stupid to trust this guy.

[rosa100]

10:31 PM on 02/10/2011

What really gives him away is the nanny bit, please... also how intriguing that this giy comes forward right at this time... have you read the Bank of America pdf posted on wikileaks site?

[OMEGA MAN]

08:44 PM on 02/10/2011

ThinkProgress has learned that a law firm representing the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the big business trade association representing ExxonMobil, AIG, and other major international corporations, is working with set of “private security” companies and lobbying firms to undermine their political opponents, including ThinkProgress, with a surreptitious sabotage campaign.
http://thinkprogress.org/2011/02/10/lobbyists-chamberleaks/

[DenverBigDaddy]

08:35 PM on 02/10/2011

The best part is that this whole charade is supposedly about openness and transparency, yet those "sources" can't be identified. Not sure if that is a double standard, laughably ironic, or both.

[Eric Korpela]

09:34 PM on 02/10/2011

Actually, it's necessary.

[mikesw]

11:40 PM on 02/10/2011

Why is it ironic? When people talk of transparency of power institutions, many of which are supposed to be held accountable to the public, why do you confuse it with personal privacy?

Wanting to know how the government spends taxpayer money is not equivalent to posting your credit card purchases online, is it?

[BrassOnes]

08:28 PM on 02/10/2011

Daniel Domscheit-Berg sounds like the real hero. I for one praise his actions and support his sabotage. Jail Assange.

[Johnson Schwanz]

08:06 PM on 02/10/2011

Good to know. Why shouldn't the identities of the people who commit treason be exposed?

If they are such champions of the open exchange of international secrets, stand up and be recognized!

[TStringfellow]

09:45 PM on 02/10/2011

Oh, I see, so when the Chinese government arrests and tortures human rights dissidents, I suppose they deserve it for breaking Chinese law? Or do you only support state violence when the U.S. is the one committing it.

[Johnson Schwanz]

10:46 PM on 02/10/2011

I don't understand your example. In the WikiLeaks case, the identities of the people that submit the information cannot be protected by the site. My argument stems on the fact that if they were bold enough to submit sensitive state information to a website, they should be bold enough to take responsibility for their actions.

BTW, I don't believe in torture at all...especially against human rights dissidents. I don't know how you could have extracted that from my post.

[tuff guy]

02:07 AM on 02/11/2011

i'd also like to know what constitutes treason more than a president and cabinet who illegally invaded a sovereign country? if that's not enough for you, how about a government that is robbing its taxpayers blind, time and again.

the u.s. government has the utmost contempt for its citizenry.

and, if the u.s. government was so against human rights violations by going after countries in the middle east, why not go after china?

i've said it before, but there is no bigger human rights violation than having millions of people out of work. the u.s. needs to look in, and clean up, it's own backyard.