[ExI] inserting backdated posts, was RE: Who is safe?

[David Lubkin]

Spike wrote:

>I agree.  The story itself contains contradictions.  We hear of 
>classified information that was taken from an unsecured link, but 
>nothing of the leakers, those who put the info on an unsecured 
>medium, which really is illegal.  I don't mean PFC Manning, but 
>rather the apparent authors.  Neither do I hear the obvious: if 
>classified info was copied, how can it be verified that it was 
>genuine?  I suspect it was counterfeit, or was liberally mixed with 
>intentionally counterfeit posts.

A tweet led me to a URL with an odd "document", allegedly from the State
Department leaks: <http://www.ding.net/wikileaks/234867.txt>.

Was this an actual DoS document that some clown classified? Or is it a
hoax page?

It occurs to me that, if I were in US intelligence, I'd either reduce the
reliability of a document that asserted that X1 did Y1 with a flood of docs
that asserted X1 did not do Y1, X2 did Y1, X1 did Y2, etc., or use
WikiLeaks to spread disinformation.

An example of the latter: a document that asserts that Z is a US intel asset
when he is actually an adversary may succeed in undercutting Z's position
among his enemy pals.


-- David.