Yes this is true, but a little bit of common sense on wikileaks behalf could have been exercised, you know?
On Sat, Oct 23, 2010 at 1:59 PM, John Bond <[email protected]> wrote: > On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 11:44 PM, Cal Leeming [Simplicity Media Ltd] > <[email protected]> wrote: > > You do raise a very good argument, especially the part about "security > > through obscurity". > > I don't know if Wikileaks have done a good thing or not, but rather than > > release everything, they should have had someone analyse the documents, > and > > pick out the bits which they felt the public needed to know (anything > > considered a scandal etc) .. We don't care about soldiers movements or > > tactics, but an insurgent might... I see little reason why they'd need to > > release all the documents, other than out of lazyness/insufficient staff > to > > review all the info.. > I was trying hard to not respond to this thread. I am not condoning > or condemning wikileaks however the above statement sort of misses the > point of wikileaks. the mass media does what you have suggested and > look how well that works. wikileaks rightly or wrongly (and possibly > unsuccessfully) tries to overcome these issues by presenting the raw > information so people can make there own mind up. > -- Cal Leeming Operational Security & Support Team *Out of Hours: *+44 (07534) 971120 | *Support Tickets: * [email protected] *Fax: *+44 (02476) 578987 | *Email: *[email protected] *IM: *AIM / ICQ / MSN / Skype (available upon request) Simplicity Media Ltd. All rights reserved. Registered company number 7143564
_______________________________________________ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
