Wikispooks:FAQ

In the spirit of FAQ's generally, the questions on this page are largely hypothetical. They have all been asked - if mostly by the site operator - but a FAQ is nonetheless a good way of dealing with the issues raised.

Q - Why should I trust WikiSpooks?

A - The WikiSpooks project has clearly stated objectives and would self-destruct the moment a clear betrayal of the trust of an anonymous contributor were demonstrated. So the question devolves to: "What is the risk that I will be the first (and thus likely the last) to be so betrayed?" - see Q2

Q - How can I be sure that WikiSpooks is not some kind of 'honeytrap' type set up?

A - Balance of evidence is the best we can offer. Doubtless the Spooks do indeed experiment with such things. There are those for example who reckon 'Facebook' is one gigantic CIA sponsored operation - and frankly it would be a BIG surprise if CIA and/or related NSA sources of funding were NOT involved; same goes for 'Twitter' and IRC generally. Also, the capabilities of the US/UK Spook operations effectively mean that the internet itself is one gigantic spying operation.

So - bottom line - you simply have the word of the site operator, which currently means just one individual whose credentials are set out clearly on the WikiSpooks site. You believe them or you don't. It's that simple.

Q - How can I be sure WikiSpooks declared objectives are genuine.

A - You can't but, as with everything else in life, you can reach a judgement on the evidence. The WikiSpooks site contains copious evidence that it's stated objectives ARE genuine and it would be interesting to know of any evidence that they are not.

Q - I have information which, if made public would compromise the national security interests of (enter name of State here).

A - WikiSpooks seriously doubts that for two reasons:

1. 'National Security Interest' is a nebulous concept of convenience, arbitrarily defined by Governments and Agencies of the State to justify military/police/security and/or other actions and which, for the purposes of promoting/defending the 'Official Narrative', must be kept nebulous, mysterious and hidden. There is no clear way of knowing beforehand, exactly what WILL be so defined.

2. If the secrecy of your information really is of such grave import, you can be certain the State will already have taken serious steps to prevent any such leak and that, in the supremely unlikely event they failed, the consequences would be dealt with in an utterly ruthless fashion, which neither WikiSpooks nor anyone else can guarantee will not result in the identity of the leaker being discovered.

WikiSpooks is not prepared to make ANY judgment about 'national security interest' and will facilitate publication based solely on the criteria set out in the Anonymous Uploads page

Q - But what if my information really IS that important?

That's your call. Subject to the procedure outlined in the 'Anonymous Uploads' page, WikiSpooks will publish and/or assist others to do so, unless and until ordered, by a court with jurisdiction, to desist - which currently means an Irish court. WikiSpooks technical measures ensure we do not know your identity. They also ensure that the most obvious information that could assist in tracing you (originating IP addresses held in log files for example) is securely deleted on a regular basis

Q - How secure is the WikiSpooks site?

A - How long is a piece of string? We do our best. No site can be guaranteed secure against the technical and 'humint' capabilities of the Spooks. On a routine basis those capabilities are probably limited to traffic analysis and selected diversion and interception of traffic. From a user/browser perspective, the most effective counter-measures are respectively: use of an anonymising proxy service such as Tor for browsing and encryption of messages/files for uploads. The anonymous upload form is currently Flash-based and NOT encypted - this is a priority 'to-do' item. However, files can be sent in encrypted form as email attachments using the WikiSpooks PGP key. Consideration is also being given to implementing SSL for the entire site. However, there are pros and cons for all these measures and, no matter what you may see claimed elsewhere, NONE are 100% secure against the targeted capabilities of the Spooks.

The site is backed up hourly and resides on more than one server at sites in more than one legal jurisdiction.