Wikileaks has withstood countless efforts to get their site offline, sometime by dedicated groups and/or state sponsored actors. You may remember how all hell broke loose with cablegate, including DDOS and Senator Lieberman's call to Amazon. Calling Wikileaks incompetent at security is completely ridiculous.

I bet that the whole thing went down like this: author of this backchannel article wanted to rag on Wikileaks for their dissemination of personal details, and wanted to bring up email #117 as prime example (medical bill!!) and got infected herself for lack of security competence. Author then contacted some security outfit to perform a security evaluation, security outfit performed a simple virus scan. Author then cooked up a click bait article, how Wikileaks is out there to recklessly infect everyone with malware.

Let's face it: Wikileaks is plenty competent securitywise, as evidenced by their very presence for so many years. They expect their readers, especially professional journalists scouring their site to bring at least a moderate skill set to the table, and Mrs. Upson apparently failed miserably.

Riyadh al-Adhadh is not some random raghead insurgent whom Laura suddenly decided to fund. He was the primary focus of her film 'My Country, My Country', so little surprise that she was in contact with him and supported him. He was jailed for months on false terrorism charges, and apparently still served as Baghdad Provincial Council Chairman last year.

Evidently she knew him better than the whole bunch of all-seing, all-scanning, all-collecting, "we need to listen to your granny or we can't catch the terrorists" three letter agencies together. We should all sit down and weep in despair, if this wire transfer is still the reason for the ongoing harassment Laura on every single flight.

AFAIK Stephen Henson was the guy who also approved the patch that ultimately led to the heart bleed exploit. Call me paranoid all you want, but I'm getting nervous about OpenSSL at this point.

NIST recklessly broke our trust in them by allowing known to be broken encryption into their standard. Their new document may come with all the best intentions, but it will take years to rebuild that trust. Let's wait for what the crypto community has to say about these documents, before we blindly follow their latest standards.

4. Their report states on page 5, that instead of "PROP" the exploit code used the word "HASHVA" on multiple occasions. While this could be a short form of "hash value", it just by pure coincidence means "thought" in Hebrew ...

I can't confirm or deny your claim here, but the link you provide doesn't confirm it either:

Nothing is said about whether Assange was free to leave Sweden or not, but a court order banning you from leaving the country usually means you hand over your passport. Since the UK is not part of the Schengen Area, he would have needed a passport to enter the UK from Sweden.

If the variability of muzzle speed between rounds is the limiting factor for accuracy, how would radar guidance be an improvement? It's not like you could control an artillery shell after a shot has been fired ...

IIRC, AWS ditched wikileaks.org like a hot potatoe after a simple phone call by some US official. Of all the services suggested here, AWS would probably be the last service one should look at for this purpose.

You have to tell them, that flashing firmware could be used for bypassing DRM, and they'd force push out signed firmware the minute after :-P

I hope you are aware that this could go wrong in terrible ways: there are some files that you actually want to have only in encrypted state. If your operating system always keeps a backup of their unencrypted versions, you may be secure against certain kinds of ransomwares, but open to all kinds of other data leakage.

And to the video that you linked to: that's a nice part they make with that laser machine, but it is thin walled. One wonders how accurate that part will be once it has gone through a few heat cycles.

The video shows a single layer ring welded onto a metal substrate, but nothing of substantional height or volume. Hearing the guy talk in this video tells me he had quite a few software and electronics issues to work out, and he did not show any large parts made my this process. His machine in the present configuration also doesn't provide a method for making overhanging features (a problem already solved by Shape Deposition Manufacturing), so I really wonder when we are going to see the first piece of art coming out of this machine ...

There was a project going on, first at Carnegie Mellon University and then at Stanford's Rapid Prototyping Laboratory, where a very similar but more sophisticated process (Shape Deposition Manufacturing) was investigated to make precise metal parts with full strength (unlike the sintering methods mentioned here and elsewhere). A number of methods were used or tried to melt the metal, including TIG welding, laser fusing and induction heating.

The biggest hurdle to success was the huge internal stress that built up in the process. Remember that one puts layer after layer of molten metal on top of the previous one. The new metal layer solidifies and shrinks, creating lots of compressive on the previous layer. Put down enough of these layers and the part will crack.

And no, doing this process with Invar won't help, because Invar doesn't have this beautiful near zero thermal expansion close to its melting point.

Lets hope the blogger reads what has been published about this process before he commits more effort and resources to his project ...