WikiLeaks publishes list of worldwide infrastructure 'critical' to security of U.S.

[^_^ 5,021]

A list drawn up by U.S. officials of companies and installations around the world regarded as "critical" to the security of the United States has been published online by controversial website WikiLeaks.

The list includesfactories, ports, fuel companies, drug manufacturers, undersea cables, pipelines, communication hubs and a host of other "key resources."

...

The document was drawn up after the State Department asked diplomats in February 2009 to identify "systems and assets, whether physical or virtual, so vital to the United States the incapacitation or destruction of such systems and assets would have a debilitating impact on security, national economic security, national public health or safety, or any combination of those matters."

The cable is marked "secret state ... noforn, not for internet distribution." "Noforn" means it should not be shown to foreign governments or other non-U.S. interests.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/40526224/ns/us_news-wikileaks_in_security/

[Amby 490]

I just read his money in a swiss account was froze

[Obama 2012 1,714]

If you want to play conspiracy theory, all of this is being allowed as the internet 9/11 to allow the government(s) to control what you are allowed to do and not do on the internet even more.........

[Craneman 2]

How did he come by all this information.

A PFC in the airforce has access to this?

I am missing something

[Amby 490]

I could be wrong, but I think I read there was a guy who was supposed to destroy info and he made a copy of it before destroying it? I could be totally off on this one but for some reason I remember reading something like that.

just saw on the news that lawyer is arranging to talk with police in the UK

[mawilson 2,133]

I like this guy more and more.

Security by obscurity doesn't work. The companies and installations in question must be protected;

keeping the list "secret" isn't going to accomplish that.

[SMOKE 1,426]

why is this douchebag still alive?

because we need to torture his @ss & find out how he got this info.

[alienlovechild 75]

Security by obscurity doesn't work. The companies and installations in question must be protected; keeping the list "secret" isn't going to accomplish that.

Security by telling them where we are vulnerable isn't smart. You're assuming the enemy already knows all this but I doubt it. Consider, by comparison, that during Pearl Harbor the Japanese didn't attack vital oil supplies on Hawaii because they wrongly assumed the Americans would easily just ship more oil to Hawaii.

"The document was drawn up after the State Department asked diplomats in February 2009 to identify "systems and assets, whether physical or virtual, so vital to the United States the incapacitation or destruction of such systems and assets would have a debilitating impact on security, national economic security, national public health or safety, or any combination of those matters."

[alienlovechild 75]

How did he come by all this information.

A PFC in the airforce has access to this?

I am missing something

The intelligence agencies decided to "connect the dots" of data into one database to overcome the fragmentation of sources that up to 9/11. Supposedly, around 600,000 people had access to this info but that PFC wanted to be famous. He should have been careful what he wished for. He's going to be jail for a long time while Assange goes on the lecture circuit.

[mawilson 2,133]

Security by telling them where we are vulnerable isn't smart. You're assuming the enemy already knows all this but I doubt it.

Assuming the enemy doesn't know isn't smart either.

[Ban Hammer 12,836]

How did he come by all this information.

A PFC in the airforce has access to this?

I am missing something

absolutely not. there are no pfc's in the air force.

[DEDixon 39]

I like this guy more and more.

[scandal 951]

Security by telling them where we are vulnerable isn't smart. You're assuming the enemy already knows all this but I doubt it.

Right!

Security by obscurity is a correctly refuted principle when designing data systems. But it doesn't mean that the very concept of data security and protecting information privacy is wrong and all data should just be put out for public consumption.

You certainly shouldn't "hide" info by leaving it in cleartext in what you think is an obscure directory no one will "think" to look in.

What you should do is use 128bit strong cipher encryption algorithms, restrict physical and network access to those with a need to know, and closely guard passwords and encryption keys.

Obviously we failed on this latter part, but that doesn't mean it isn't the right approach. Putting out vital national security secrets for all to see is downright dangerous. Assange is an a$shole who should get what's coming to him.

[DEDixon 39]

Assange is an a$shole who should get what's coming to him.

i'm thinking that if bush was president the left would be loving this guy.

[ready4ONE 5,400]

i'm thinking that if bush was president the left would be loving this guy.

Nobody who cares about this country and others he has damaged should love this guy. Personally I think he is a dangerous, reckless, A-hole.