WikiLeaks insurance password (possibly) incoming!

reply to post by acceler18


Something interesting Reston is a suburb of Washington DC. Project BO? Could that mean Barrak Obama? Could it be that simple?

reply to post by ExPostFacto


Ever since they've posted this I've trying to research these terms "Reston 5" and I can't find it.. and so far no one seems to know what the heck it means. I'd assume that Assange is using twitter to send instructions to their IT team.

I personally hope they don't release the password to their insurance file because this will mean the end for Wikileaks as they would probably only release that information if Wikileaks was about to be shut down for good.

I hope Julian is safe... seems the whole world is against him. If ever he's in Canada he can stay at my place

Judging from the response on Twitter it is probably meant to be satire. You can google reston5 and choose updates to see some pretty funny tweets.

Originally posted by Vandalour
Did I just find the password ?? on ISOhunt forum there is a guy claming to know the password.. can anyone confirm this:

Ok so far this works ...

AES PASSWORD == ONION
$ openssl enc -d -aes256 -in insurance.aes256 > outONIONAES.dec BF

PASSWORD == ROUTER
$ openssl enc -d -bf -in insurance.aes256 > outROUTERBF.dec BF

PASSWORD == ONION
$ openssl enc -d -bf -in insurance.aes256 > outONIONBF.dec

Those would be the OpenSSL commands to decrypt the file if it was encrypted with aes256 and used the password of "ONION" or if it was encrypted with blowfish and used the password of "ROUTER". The quote you made is from a thread here on ATS (WikiLeaks Posts Mysterious 'Insurance' File) where someone tried those two passwords and strangely didn't get an error when all other passwords threw an error response. However, none of those combinations actually decrypted the file successfully.

So, it is confirmed that it is *NOT* the password and someone on the ISOHunt Forum just copied & pasted from a post on ATS.

has anyone tried reston5 as the password ????? or something along those lines, i have tried doing it but i am not very compitant.

well think about it, wikileaks released the document as an insurance policy, in case of an attack??

well that sounds like an attack to me!!

reply to post by donttellthefeds


Wouldn't you think that they would just say "the password is reston5" if they wanted and it was absolutley necessary to give out the password ?...

I could post something now but nobody would ever believe me.

just wanted to share that with you!

EDIT:
I will say one thing though.
The file is not full of random junk data, if you have the file DELETE IT, dont open it, i have not only deleted the file but ive smashed my hard drive in to thousands of pieces, i advise you not to go anywhere remotely near that file, you will regret it lol

reply to post by Itop1


Who cares what others think, what could you post that I or others would not believe. Do not think all of us require proof in an absolute form to be able to entertain an idea.

reply to post by Itop1


? huh did I miss somthing ?

reply to post by Itop1


Now you've have got to develop on that, our ears are open. You have of course said to much now

Originally posted by WeSbO
reply to post by Itop1

 

Now you've have got to develop on that, our ears are open. You have of course said to much now

What do you want to hear?

reply to post by Itop1


If you're telling the truth, well, then why destroy your hard drive after getting a hold of the file? Now I'm even more curious.

Someone else said this could be the Worm that's being planted and the CIA could use Assange as a scapegoat. The result would be blaming Wikileaks for mass spread of the Worm and forcing it to shut down for good.

.... What if it isn't the Worm but something else? Perhaps child porn? Wasn't Assange accused of it at one point? What if this is the plant to get him busted?

I'm just throwing it out there. I mean why else would someone destroy their hard drive after opening a file?

Originally posted by Itop1

Originally posted by WeSbO
reply to post by Itop1

 

Now you've have got to develop on that, our ears are open. You have of course said to much now

What do you want to hear?

Everything what the file contained? If you even obtained it.

Originally posted by SeventhSeal
reply to post by Itop1

 

If you're telling the truth, well, then why destroy your hard drive after getting a hold of the file? Now I'm even more curious.

Someone else said this could be the Worm that's being planted and the CIA could use Assange as a scapegoat. The result would be blaming Wikileaks for mass spread of the Worm and forcing it to shut down for good.

.... What if it isn't the Worm but something else? Perhaps child porn? Wasn't Assange accused of it at one point? What if this is the plant to get him busted?

I'm just throwing it out there. I mean why else would someone destroy their hard drive after opening a file?

All i will say is you are all sheep being led to a cliff edge in the dark, its not a worm or child porn, its legit, but answer this question..... do you want to see your friends and family again? if the answer is yes then delete the file and move on, if not then carry on, this is specifically aimed at the contents of the recent torrent file, the original and the torrent file are different sizes for your information.

reply to post by Itop1


So why not save the trouble and inform us what the file contained? Or are you leading us to the cliff with your nonsense?

Originally posted by Itop1

Originally posted by SeventhSeal
reply to post by Itop1

 

If you're telling the truth, well, then why destroy your hard drive after getting a hold of the file? Now I'm even more curious.

Someone else said this could be the Worm that's being planted and the CIA could use Assange as a scapegoat. The result would be blaming Wikileaks for mass spread of the Worm and forcing it to shut down for good.

.... What if it isn't the Worm but something else? Perhaps child porn? Wasn't Assange accused of it at one point? What if this is the plant to get him busted?

I'm just throwing it out there. I mean why else would someone destroy their hard drive after opening a file?

All i will say is you are all sheep being led to a cliff edge in the dark, its not a worm or child porn, its legit, but answer this question..... do you want to see your friends and family again? if the answer is yes then delete the file and move on, if not then carry on, this is specifically aimed at the contents of the recent torrent file, the original and the torrent file are different sizes for your information.

ooh scary! give me a break...

Originally posted by SeventhSeal
reply to post by Itop1

 

So why not save the trouble and inform us what the file contained? Or are you leading us to the cliff with your nonsense?

I dont know whats inside the file

reply to post by Itop1


look if it is that bad and you want us all to delete it then just tell us what it is! have you opened the file and seen it decripted? if so whats on it!!! and if not, then how do you know that i should delete it!!

Originally posted by Itop1

Originally posted by SeventhSeal
reply to post by Itop1

 

So why not save the trouble and inform us what the file contained? Or are you leading us to the cliff with your nonsense?

I dont know whats inside the file

I think I speak for most of us: Thank you for wasting our time.

But we knew you were bogus. Moving on. Anyone actually figure this thing out yet?

I won't be downloading this because other people will but it better be good. I'm rather tired of wikileaks revealing useless or unimportant information. They have in the past released some truly fantastic stuff, like the Julius Baer banking data among various other bits and pieces. However their recent releases were medicore at best. Even the heliocopter gun footage was easily handled because in the end, it's war and people will make excuses for it.

They need something good and i can't help but think that the various government agencies are feeding information to wikileaks that is on one hand mildly embarrassing but not overly damaging. They can of course attack the leaders behind wikileaks but that approach is difficult because even the mainstream media can't ignore the fact that discrediting a source is common practice among the intelligence services.

If you have a leak you can't plug then what do you do? Do you simply allow it to run or do you minimise it by showing damp rags over the pipe? I think that's what is going on, they are throwing vast quantities of chaff at wikileaks, from legitimate sources who reveal information that is interesting but hardly news worthy. This causes wikileaks to waste resources.