The Great Firewall of China blocks access to WikiLeaks cables

China has reportedly blocked Internet access to the latest "massive leak" of U.S. cables by WikiLeaks.

PCWorld reports that access to the cablegate page and Chinese news articles covering the leak have been blocked since Monday. "China takes note of the government reports. We hope the U.S. side will handle the relevant issues," Hong Lei, a spokesman for China's Foreign Ministry, said at a Beijing news conference on Tuesday. "As for the content of the documents, we will not comment on that."

The ban comes as WikiLeaks struggles to keep their site functional. The site has been under a heavy DDoS attack since Sunday. "DDOS attack now exceeding 10 gigabits a second," wrote a company official on the Wikileaks twitter account today. Wikileaks has decided to move their operation to Amazon's EC2 cloud computing platform. Amazon hosts a variety of big corporations' data and is headquarted in the United States. However, not all Amazons's servers are based in the U.S. and wikileaks is taking advantage of its cloud power.

China is widely known for censoring its media and western websites and services. In May this year, popular cloud storage service Dropbox was blocked by China. Google has also suffered regular blocks on its content over the past couple of years. Despite having 298 Million Internet users the country continues to block social networking sites like Facebook and Twitter. China also attempted to impose further restrictions on the way its people use their computers by trying to pass legislation which would have required all personal computers sold within the country, to be shipped with software blocking access to certain websites. Fortunately the software, Green Dam Youth Escort, is only required on schools, internet cafes and other public use computers.

Wikileaks is an international non-profit organization that specialises in releasing leaked documents and information. On November 28 the site leaked 200,000 U.S. cables and documents. Wikileaks plans to issue 251,287 documents in total. Western governments have condemed the leaks whilst media and journalists have been picking through the documents in detail to highlight any important information.

WikiLeaks spokesperson, Julian Assange, said in an interview with Forbes magazine that the organization's next target will be a major American bank in early 2011. "We have one related to a bank coming up, that’s a megaleak. It’s not as big a scale as the Iraq material, but it’s either tens or hundreds of thousands of documents depending on how you define it," said Assange.

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

FaceTime randomly making phantom phone calls

Next Story

Daily Gaming: November 30, 2010

55 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

China better be damn glad I was not born there. By now China would have ceased to exist!!


America would be a lot bigger..

hotdog963al said,
Is anyone actually surprised by this?
Only thing that surprises me is that the world still does not give a ****! If they did China would cease to exist!


Would be a totally different Country by now. Or part of another if I was in power.

I don't like Wikileaks. People really don't need all that info, and while its ~great~ to have someone keeping the big guys accountable, that's not their reason for doing it. It doesn't matter how they may try to cast themselves as the good guys; when they release information that places the lives of good people in harms way, when the information they release makes it harder for people to trust others and interferes with the diplomatic process...I don't know, but its not helping. Take the King for example, how candid will he be now? More red tape, more treading on nails, more screened and filtered communication. North Korea spouts all this political BS to act big, but how willing are they going to be, to actually have candid and frank conversation behind "closed doors", what they really want, if they don't believe the doors are really closed?

I've never seen Wikileaks come out in the news first and say, "Hey, we took this info to the feds and asked them to comment, to come out and make amends for any wrongs, but they refused, so here it is. We've filtered the content to prevent abuse; CNN, BBC, etc, we can prove the legitimacy of these documents behind closed doors to prove the authenticity". No, they just release it regardless of the consequences or the people it hurt. They release details that are only relevant and useful to those that are going to abuse it.

thornz0 said,
I've never seen Wikileaks come out in the news first and say, "Hey, we took this info to the feds and asked them to comment, to come out and make amends for any wrongs, but they refused, so here it is. We've filtered the content to prevent abuse; CNN, BBC, etc, we can prove the legitimacy of these documents behind closed doors to prove the authenticity". No, they just release it regardless of the consequences or the people it hurt. They release details that are only relevant and useful to those that are going to abuse it.
They've spent a lot of time filtering names to prevent reprisals. However, they have released the documents publicly in order to expose some of the deplorable acts that are going on behind the scenes. This is not only relevant to "those that are going to abuse it" but to everyone, especially those with any interest in the political process.

thornz0 said,
I've never seen Wikileaks come out in the news first and say, "Hey, we took this info to the feds and asked them to comment, to come out and make amends for any wrongs, but they refused, so here it is.

You are wrong.

Wikileaks tried to take the steps to not harm individuals. The US Gov't refused to assist. They did assist news corporations in this process though.

Wikileaks vs US Gov't correspondence:
http://www.indexoncensorship.o...-department-correspondence/

You want to lie to people to keep them safe, so be it, but the victims of some of the US' more deplorable acts needs representation too. How will you tell their side of the story?

Spy work and intelligence gathering is not a clean business and everybody is involved in some way, its all part of being an independent country. Some of the leaks detail how the middle eastern countries were trying to get the US to take out the Iran nuclear program for them (doing their dirty work), many are just regular stuff detailing what they were able to find out about something (like the China hack of google). And there are a few nuggets in there of some messed up stuff.

Personally I don't think WikiLeaks posting information it obtains is any worse then the NY Times doing it and no one seems to care there. Do I think Julian Assange is scum, sure. But I think the Editors of the NY Times are as well and I don't think either should be killed or arrested. Publishing leaks are what they do, it's stupid to go after the messenger. The real criminal(s) here are the ones LEAKING the information. They need to focus on plugging the leaks and punishing the leakers and stop trying to kill the messengers. Now if you could prove WikiLeaks actively sought out the information instead of just being given it that's another story but I haven't heard anyone saying that.

I don't know why, but that Julian Assange to me comes off as a major pompus ass... not someone who is out to right the world, but someone who is using the world for his personal gain.....

neufuse said,
I don't know why, but that Julian Assange to me comes off as a major pompus ass... not someone who is out to right the world, but someone who is using the world for his personal gain.....
What gain is that? Spending tons of money on keeping this stuff online and being the official target for Wikileaks for everyone to point their crosshairs at?

DVSBSTD said,
What gain is that? Spending tons of money on keeping this stuff online and being the official target for Wikileaks for everyone to point their crosshairs at?

Going from a pratical nobody to a household name isn't a gain?

neufuse said,
I don't know why, but that Julian Assange to me comes off as a major pompus ass... not someone who is out to right the world, but someone who is using the world for his personal gain.....
Who cares about Assange, he's merely the lightning rod. His character doesn't make the material any less relevant.

neufuse said,
Going from a pratical nobody to a household name isn't a gain?

That's a weird way of looking at it. Yes, many people know Assange. The man probably fears for his life and probably lives in a paranoid manner (and rightfully so).

If you're the type of person who desires fame at any cost, I can see how you would feel that he's out for personal gain. In my opinion, fame be damned, he is probably living a nightmare.

neufuse said,
Going from a pratical nobody to a household name isn't a gain?

Not if you're being known as a serial killer or rapist.

PotatoJ said,
Who cares about Assange, he's merely the lightning rod. His character doesn't make the material any less relevant.

Exactly. He takes all the criticism so that his organisation can get on with what they do best, instead of having to deal with the publicity.

... But yeah, he's kind of an asshat when you listen to him sometimes.

DVSBSTD said,
What gain is that? Spending tons of money on keeping this stuff online and being the official target for Wikileaks for everyone to point their crosshairs at?

Well, where does his money come from (I know he claims it to be from donations, but who donates?)? How come he has a multiple country sofisticated financial system? It may be to prevent his accounts being frozen, but it may as well be a money laundering system.