Print 105 comment(s) - last by iiiears.. on Dec 12 at 3:08 PM

Wikileaks has lost its domain name and is now only reachable by direct IP. It has lost virtually all its primary sources of funding.

An hacker activist has helped make Wikileaks difficult to reach, even before the recent domain name takedown.  (Source: Vimeo)

Wikileaks founder Julian Assange has been arrested in England on supposedly unrelated charges.  (Source: AP Photo)
Site's options continue to shrink

Wikileaks aired hundreds of thousands of classified documents on the Iraq and Afghanistan wars that were stolen from the U.S Military, and shared 250,000 stolen classified U.S. State Department cables with The New York Times and other news organizations worldwide. The website certainly irritated the governments of U.S., China, Britain and many other organizations worldwide.  They moved to cut off the site's funding, first convincing Amazon to throw it off its hosting platform, then working with Paypal to sever its primary source of funding.  

But when 
Wikileaks yesterday published a list of top targets to hurt U.S. national security, the site seemingly sealed its own fate.  Its Swiss bank account was closed, and Wikileaks reportedly lost the money in it (the bank contended that Wikileaks founder Julian Assange lied in the paperwork, saying he resided in Switzerland, which he does not).

Now the DNS Company, the web listing organization which provided 
Wikileaks with the right to use the domain name "", has terminated its affiliation with the site.  That means that attempts to reach the site by domain name no longer succeed.

The site also lost another hosting service -- -- and has jumped to a mix of Swiss and French hosting at the present.  But France's government is already moving to ban the site from its nations servers.

Meanwhile the site is under a distributed denial of service attack from a "hacktivist" who goes by the moniker The Jester – or "th3 j35t3r".  On his Twitter feed, The Jester writes, "TANGO DOWN - for attempting to endanger the lives of our troops, 'other assets' & foreign relations."

An earlier attack exceeded a modest 2-4 Gbps, but a Tuesday attack was even more potent, reaching a mean 10 Gbps.

About the only way to get to Wikileaks these days is via a Google search, which comes up with its direct IP address, which is occasionally reachable, depending on the current volume of fake service requests.

Facing the possibility of his masterwork being taken offline and complete loss of funding,
Wikileaks founder Julian Assange surrendered to authorities in Britain on Swedish rape charges unrelated to the recent leaks.  He has warned his followers that if anything happens to him while he is imprisoned, that a secret key will be released which will unlock a distributed archived file containing all the site's unreleased secrets.

One of Mr. Assange's accusers in the Swedish sex crimes trial coincidentally has ties to the CIA.  Mr. Assange was denied bail, as he is to be extradited to Sweden for questioning on outstanding allegations of rape, molestation and unlawful coercion.  When asked if he understood the ruling, he commented, "I understand that and I do not consent."

Apparently the matter was not left up to his determination.

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: I'm conflicted...
By FITCamaro on 12/7/2010 12:16:43 PM , Rating: 1
Knowingly and intentionally releasing information that is classified and potentially aids our enemies is not covered under the freedom of speech.

Is he even a US citizen either? If not, he isn't covered under our right to free speech.

RE: I'm conflicted...
By MrBlastman on 12/7/2010 12:25:52 PM , Rating: 2
Nope, he's not a citizen. He's Australian, actually. I'm quite sure that if he released Australian information, their oppressive parliament would have him thrown in jail indefinitely. Freedom of Speech as far as I'm concerned is dead there. It died when they started censoring their pipe to the internet for the whole country.

But yes, I'm with you and it falls under "being used responsibly." The information he released was classified and aids our enemies in routing out the guys in their countries who are aiding us. People have died as a result of these postings.

At some point, Julian should have asked himself, "Gee, is this information I'm about to release going to cause someone to die as a result--someone who is tertiary to the information but as a indirect result, I've jeopoardized their position?" He then should have followed up that question with: "Am I willing to die as a result of releasing this information in place of others who might die because of it?"

If his answer to the question was: "No," then he should have not released it. If his answer was "Yes," then he should now be willing to stand up in front of a firing line and take a bullet for his cause.

I really, honestly, think Julian has gone about this in an incredibly wreckless manner. I don't want to see the freedom for information exchange to die also, though.

RE: I'm conflicted...
By kerpwnt on 12/7/2010 1:37:01 PM , Rating: 2
I feel like wikileaks walks a fine line with horrible balance. On one hand, they expose war crimes and shady operations that destabilize countries and further anti-American sentiment in hostile regions. On the other hand they publish internal U.S. investigations, exposing potential 'weak spots' for terrorist attacks.

RE: I'm conflicted...
By thurston on 12/7/2010 7:09:01 PM , Rating: 2
No he is not a US citizen. Can you not find this out on your own? Why are you commenting when you don't even know the basic facts?

RE: I'm conflicted...
By rdawise on 12/7/10, Rating: -1
RE: I'm conflicted...
By chick0n on 12/7/10, Rating: -1
RE: I'm conflicted...
By rdawise on 12/8/2010 7:27:35 PM , Rating: 1
So it is ok to hurt other people to protect US Citizens

You do realize that is the definition of war correct? But, where did you see me endorse that?

I'm dare to say 99% of the DT readers never actually read the docs on Wiki leaks. Most of u got the ideas of "hurting US Citizens" from Fox or some other US biased media group.

Yes, i did see some (not all of the documents) and they are hurtful because they contained intel (though some of it already know) that put our allies in danger. A better question would be did you read it? Please don't lump me in with people who watch Fox, I like to think for myself...

Try to read some of them first b4 u talk again

Try taking your own advice...

"Paying an extra $500 for a computer in this environment -- same piece of hardware -- paying $500 more to get a logo on it? I think that's a more challenging proposition for the average person than it used to be." -- Steve Ballmer

Most Popular ArticlesAre you ready for this ? HyperDrive Aircraft
September 24, 2016, 9:29 AM
Leaked – Samsung S8 is a Dream and a Dream 2
September 25, 2016, 8:00 AM
Inspiron Laptops & 2-in-1 PCs
September 25, 2016, 9:00 AM
Snapchat’s New Sunglasses are a Spectacle – No Pun Intended
September 24, 2016, 9:02 AM
Walmart may get "Robot Shopping Carts?"
September 17, 2016, 6:01 AM

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki