Hosting a Highly Inflammatory Document? 471
IndianaKim writes "I have been asked if I can host or assist in hosting a highly inflammatory document that reflects poorly on a Police Department. I want to help, but I also do not want the headache and possible subjection to search warrants and/or illegal searches. The document is so inflammatory that it could interest the FBI and DoJ and cause them to investigate the government officials involved. I live in the same county, but not the same city, and therefore could be subject to a search (legal or not) by some of these government agencies. I have been asked to host it on a server outside of the US. At this time, I do not have the ability to do that, but I could set it up if I needed to. My question is: would you host it if you were asked? How would you go about protecting the document and yourself?"
Re:I know where . . . (Score:5, Insightful)
You wouldn't want to have your local hometown heroes shoot you and plant a dime bag on your corpse or anything.
Re:1. Upload to Wikileaks with Xerobank 2. Link to (Score:5, Insightful)
It's posts like this that make me fall in love with /. all over again!!
Balls Out (Score:5, Insightful)
Post it everywhere.
Don't hide.
Print that shit out and nail it to the wall, Martin Luther style.
Post it on 4chan (Score:4, Insightful)
Use Tor (Score:5, Insightful)
Why use Xerobank, a commercial service? I recommend installing Tor (which is free) and accessing Wikileaks only through their .onion address, http://gaddbiwdftapglkq.onion/ [gaddbiwdftapglkq.onion]. That way you don't use any exit servers, so nobody can sniff your traffic or even know that you're talking to Wikileaks except Wikileaks themselves (who won't know who you are).
Re:Host it or don't. (Score:4, Insightful)
Simple, either you host it cause you feel that the document is important enough. Or you don't.
Important enough for what? Important enough to justify the risk. What you call a simple choice isn't. To make that decision, the OP has to know what the possible consequences of their actions are, and the chances they will have to face them, and weigh that against the importance of the information in question. To know the risk, they have to weigh their options for publishing, the chances of adverse consequences being linked to the amount of personal exposure involved in going public. A person might perform an act that has a chance of landing them in jail, but might decline to do so if it were certain they would be imprisoned for it.
What seems to you like a case of "not having the balls" seems to me like someone weighing their options and trying to make a rational decision.
Re:Host it or don't. (Score:5, Insightful)
How appropriate considering the other story today [slashdot.org].
Well said. You do what's right even if it means it won't be easy. The good news is, we live in a country where the chances of being assassinated by government officials is not as great.
My opinion to the submitter...
Could mean some headaches, so prepare for them by consulting with an attorney.
More importantly, if this is something that the FBI or other agencies are going to be interested as you say, then why not go straight to them?
Don't put something out on the internet because it's cool to do so. That's not the right way. Take it through the proper legal channels. Then if it doesn't go forward, you put it out in the wild.
You didn't give details, but it is possible that leaking the information could hinder any potential investigation that the FBI or whoever may need to conduct to get more evidence.
What exactly are you afraid of though? (Score:5, Insightful)
However if you are more concerned with being thought to have been part of the distribution (as that is, after all, what's going to get you raided) then you have a bigger problem. You don't care so much whether in 5 years anybody can show you were involved, you only care about right now, can you stay under the radar.
I would build a suitable alibi (get out of town) and then receive the document from the source. Afterwards, have a change of heart, convince the source that you are NOT going to host it anywhere, convince them you have destroyed the media, and lay low for a while.
Then upload it to WikiLeaks at your leisure. If your source is convinced that you didn't upload it the Man hopefully won't think so either.
Re:I know where . . . (Score:3, Insightful)
Actually, he didn't come here for legal advice. It sounds like he's asking for technical advice. And your legal point is irrelevant - if he can mask his role in distributing the document, the legal powers of the police will be irrelevant. If they don't know who he is, they can't harass him.
Re:1. Upload to Wikileaks with Xerobank 2. Link to (Score:3, Insightful)
Except that would only lead them to the author, not the person who uploaded it. And if this person's trusting you that much, I doubt they'd give you up to the cops, especially when they're *the author*. Who cares about the distributor at that point, unless you're going for a "salt the earth" strategy.
Re:Host it or don't. (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Paranoid much? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Use Tor (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:I know where . . . (Score:5, Insightful)
His question was neither technical nor legal. He was asking if he should do it or not.
I think the answer given here is no, let Wikileaks do it. Good reasons for doing so are technical and legal, which I think is really the justification he was looking for.
Other factors to consider might be whether he believes the document is "real", whether it has some supporting evidence and whether it can be used to do some good.
Re:I know where . . . (Score:5, Insightful)
Exactly. Wikileaks is the premier inflammatory doc hosting site out there.
There is a system for subverting the system and you should use that system!
Re:I know where . . . (Score:4, Insightful)
If you pay cash for your printer, I can't see any way to trace it back to you; and I doubt very much that the shops have the facility to record serial numbers of individual printer sales, link them to credit cards, and report them to the authorities.
This is probably more useful for where they get a search warrant for your place, and they can establish whether or not it was your printer that was used to print it.
Re:I know where . . . (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:I know where . . . (Score:2, Insightful)
I'm not sure I believe your story. Police can't just randomly detain citizens
point is, is it wasn't "random". Perhaps some sort of nefarious intent was involved.
Re:Grow a pair (Score:1, Insightful)
few countries have as strong a free speech protection as the United States.
I was with you until this line.
Freedom of speech in the US is quickly becoming a thing of the past, thanks to Bush, and now Obama, who really took the ball and is running with it.
Speak out against the government, and be branded a terrorist (instead of a patriot.) These days that is not a conspiracy theory, it is a FACT. Don't be surprised if you just vanish off the street one day and wind up in Gitmo (which won't be getting closed after all)
Your advice is good, other than the absurd last line.
Re:I know where . . . (Score:3, Insightful)
I would guess you never tried "driving while Black" in L.A. Yes, police do randomly detain citizens. It happens more in big cities here in America then in rural areas but it does happen, especially if they don't like your politics. Trust me, an uncomfortably large percentage of cops are just bullies with a badge.
Oh, and forget about trying to sue them. Cops lie to protect each other and courts really are not very interested in seeing cops get sued even if you have a case. Sorry guy, but when it comes to cops the deck is stacked against you.
Re:I know where . . . (Score:4, Insightful)
Print it at the UPS store, Staples, or the local document copier. Geez, simple problem, simple answer, guys.
Re:I know where . . . (Score:5, Insightful)
Anyway one day the cop who'd done most of the harrassing came on my neighbour's property without a warrant, just to give him shit, and my neighbour came out with a shotgun and ran off the cop. And that was the end of the problem -- no more harrassment.
Don't try this at home, kids. Seriously. Pulling guns on anyone is a bad idea, but pulling guns on cops is truly idiotic, I don't care how in the right you are.
Re:I know where . . . (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:I know where . . . (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:I know where . . . (Score:5, Insightful)
Well, you're probably right 99% of the time, but in this case it proved the right thing to do... especially since he caught the bad cop by surprise, and with no backup.
As to whether pulling a gun is always a bad idea... I've had to use threat of deadly force to run off scum four times myself... twice saving someone's life (one being my own). IMO, getting beat up or robbed or killed because you won't defend yourself is a worse idea. :)
Re:I know where . . . (Score:5, Insightful)
Never confuse "can't" with "not supposed to". One represents an impossibility, the other a mere legal impediment that may or may not be followed or enforced.
Parent is quite correct (Score:3, Insightful)
If the FBI is interested in it presumably because they'd be investigating the local PD for fucking up, well then let them have a copy and do their job. You think that police on any level have a magic sense that lets them know when something is wrong? No, they have to see evidence. So if the FBI really might be interested in acting on this, then let them at it.
As far as getting the word out in general, well the established press is a great way to go. Just about every newspaper out there -loves- seeing the government get egg on their face. So give them a copy and let them publish it. You get the added benefit that there are some strong protections of the press so it is very difficult for the cops to stop the publication, and very difficult for them to make the paper reveal their source. As a practical matter, you can always send it to the paper anonymously.
But the parent is correct, if you really care about this, you've got to stand up to some extent. If you don't, ok I won't tell you that is wrong, but then don't bitch if whatever it is that these document reveal keeps on happening. If you don't stand up for your rights, you kinda lose the privilege of crying when they are stepped on.
Re:I know where . . . (Score:2, Insightful)
Most people on Slashdot often refer to specific formal definitions while being "grammar Nazi's", often without realizing that the professionals get there definitions from the places like Slashdot by people who actually use the words in contemporary and cultural context.
I think I speak for all the grammar nazis here when I say my head just asploded.
Re:I know where . . . (Score:2, Insightful)
I think I speak for all the grammar nazis here when I say my head just asploded.
It's ironic. I've taken linguistics courses at school and have always been keenly interested in the use of language, so I thought I would share some of my insights (I'm also interested in psychology). I've gotten labeled a Troll and had both posts down-modded, even both posts were both correct and were not "controversial, inflammatory, irrelevant", and there was certainly no intent, which is one of the fundamental differences of defining a troll from a non troll). I could only assume it was by people who consider themselves "grammar Nazis". To quote Will of Good Will Hunting; "People amaze me!".
Re:I know where . . . (Score:4, Insightful)
I'm not sure I believe your story. Police can't just randomly detain citizens, and if they did there's recourse like suing the department for violating Supreme Court rulings.
Do you only watch Fox News? I honestly cannot believe someone said that.
Re:I know where . . . (Score:5, Insightful)
As to whether pulling a gun is always a bad idea... I've had to use threat of deadly force to run off scum four times myself... twice saving someone's life (one being my own). IMO, getting beat up or robbed or killed because you won't defend yourself is a worse idea. :)
Maybe you should try moving to a better part of town? I have never once been in a situation that would have been improved by the presence of firearms (including being robbed). I've certainly been around gun-carrying thugs before but I generally find you're left alone if you treat others with respect and without fear. I love shooting guns and I don't dispute the right to own them, but I've never felt the need or urge to run around armed myself. YMMV, I suppose.
Re:I know where . . . (Score:2, Insightful)
An unintended consequence of camera-phones is nicer cops and less crime. It takes only seconds to upload a photo of a crime in action, whether a robbery or cops beating someone senseless.
Re:I know where . . . (Score:2, Insightful)
Some around here have displayed a lack of knowledge of citizens' constitutional rights, the state weapons laws (whether or not it's legal to carry in certain places, with or without a License to Carry Firearms which allows concealed carry), and I've heard and read stories of cops who refuse to tell someone they've detained whether or not they're free to go on the basis that they're buying time to dig for a reason to arrest, which is frankly a pattern of behavior I find unsettling. When cops work on the assumption that you are guilty until proven innocent during a Terry Stop [uslegal.com], on the basis that they think they have articulable suspicion ("he was walking funny and looked at me wrong"), they're going to do everything in their (limited) power to find you guilty right then and there so they can drag you in to jail, and worry about proving it later because chances are you won't take them to court even if you weren't guilty of anything more than picking a wedgie as the cop drove past.
I'm not saying that all cops are bad or are ignorant of the law - far from it. But those who are seem to be popping up more often and getting away with more, and legal recourse is all well and good until they come knocking on YOUR door and you have to pay the legal fees to defend what should be a clear right not to be harassed by someone in uniform. I'm all for pulling a weapon (gun, baseball bat, cactus, court papers) on a cop if he's abusing his power and shrugging off his responsibility to the law. If we can't defend ourselves and our own rights, we can't expect the cops to be able to do it for us, because they are us - in uniform, with guns.
Re:I know where . . . (Score:4, Insightful)
The neighbourhood was all right when I moved there. (This was a highly rural area.) Over the years it deteriorated, as scum got run out of Los Angeles and moved out to the boonies, where the living was cheaper and no one was around to keep an eye on them.
After the first incident, it was several years before any of the local thugs came around again, because word got around that "there's a crazy person with a gun living on that ranch". :) (Actually, I get dead-calm in such situations, which is a lot more scary to perps than if you brandish your gun and yell.)
I don't live there anymore... However, I still own guns, and if you're up to no good against my person or property, I won't just crawl in a hole and let you get away with it. The cops are half an hour away at best, and meanwhile it's up to me to defend my person and my property.
Re:I know where . . . (Score:3, Insightful)
Read my other response above. This was a single bad apple, not a corrupt department. The dept. itself would have fired his ass and maybe prosecuted him, if my neighbour had thought to file a complaint. I speak from firsthand experience, having myself filed such a complaint on my later neighbour the bad cop (same dept.) which incident I describe somewhere else in this discussion.
If the whole dept. is bad, or has reached the "US vs THEM" stage of fascism, well, maybe people should have stood up to the thugs before things reached such a sorry state, eh??
Re:I know where . . . (Score:3, Insightful)
Spoken with eloquence. I applaud you, and salute your father.
My experience is less dramatic, but still traumatizing and ultimately encouraging. I was beat up a lot as a kid over physical differences. I knew they were stronger, so I never fought back.
One day, I had taken enough and started fighting back. Even though I lost every fight I participated in, once I started participating I was able to get some good punches and kicks in, and the bullies then moved on to another softer target.
This completely agrees with your statement: regardless of whether you win or lose, if you fight back, the bullies and tyrants will not only think twice about abusing you, they may think twice about abusing anyone.
Especially if you can manage to poke one of their eyes out.
Re:I know where . . . (Score:3, Insightful)
The other consequence is the police attempting to find/lobby for laws which forbid members of the public photographing the police. Something the "nothing to hide, nothing to fear" brigade is strangely quiet about.
Send it to the Feds (Score:3, Insightful)
If the information is damning enough that it would interest the feds, send it to them. Why waste the time of Data-Wikileaks-PublicDisclosure-FedsGetInvolved when you can cut out the intermediate steps? If the information itself can be used to identify the source, why does it matter if it is posted off-shore?
Ideally, I think you'd want to do both: Wikileaks as a fail-safe guarantee that it won't disappear, and contact the feds (or, more accurately, have your friends contact the feds). If they want it anonymous for witness-protection types of reasons, I imagine the Feds are much better at that than we are, short of the "STFU" principle. If there is whistle-blowing that needs to go on, it CAN be done anonymously and still be given to the feds. Heck, post it to Wikileaks and then notify the feds, if necessary. Clearly, someone things enough shady is going on that there'll be an investigation anyways.