Online Snafu exposes CIA names

Online Snafu exposes CIA names
Kevin Poulsen, SecurityFocus 2000-06-22

The text uncovered within an electronic document airs old secrets.

"Blunder" is right! 2000-06-26
Anonymous (1 replies)

I can only agree with Young: With others taking out that information, concealing it himself for any longer would have only put others at risk. He clearly took necessary precautions to hide that information, and only released it once it was known that the names were being used by others. Blaming him ...

[ more ] [ reply ]

The CIA released the names to the public 2000-07-01
Anonymous

..unless you don't consider the Times part of "the public". The Times was probably just trying to limit their exposure to lawsuits and other acts of retribution....

[ more ] [ reply ]

"Endangering people's lives" 2000-06-26
Anonymous (1 replies)

The NYT reporter who published the PDF document is the

only person who could conceivably have responsibility

if anyone dies because of this incident (other than his

superiors who authorized publication), since it was

he who published the information. Any other conclusion

would have to be based...

[ more ] [ reply ]

Endangering peoples' lives 2000-07-01
Anonymous

The CIA released the document to the Times with the names intact. It may or may not be presumptive to believe the CIA knows what it's doing when releasing these things, but that's where the fault (if any) lies in releasing the document containing the names. The Times was just trying to do some ext...

[ more ] [ reply ]

Times causes SNAFU 2000-07-10
Anonymous

After illegaly accessing (and publishing) classified information, the Times is whining about Young being able to read the names of people who now may have been put in mortal jeopardy. I suppose they believe this is their first ammendment right. They should be shot for that, except that in New York...

[ more ] [ reply ]