

Wikileaks DNS killed - adam-_-
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/blog/2010/dec/03/wikileaks-knocked-off-net-dns-everydns

======
andrewcooke
I don't understand. The site is visible via <http://wikileaks.ch> (announced
by Wikileaks via Twitter) and according to whois the NS for that is provided
by EveryDNS.

Meanwhile, <http://wikileaks.com> is pointing to a Godaddy blank page and
whois reports that the name being provided by DomainControl.

This seems to contradict the Guardian article at
[http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/blog/2010/dec/03/wikileaks-k...](http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/blog/2010/dec/03/wikileaks-
knocked-off-net-dns-everydns) which says that EveryDNS has dropped them.

~~~
andrewcooke
Update: the ".com" was probably always parked - Wikileaks is a ".org" (sorry).

------
mahmud
WTF? EveryDNS killed the WikiLeaks site? David, where you subpoenaed?

<http://twitter.com/wikileaks/statuses/10567274838622208>

------
goombastic
Funny to see a government running scared. Open government is so much of a
threat?

------
splat
Wikileaks can still be accessed via its IP addresses:

<http://213.251.145.96/> <http://88.80.13.160/>

------
guelo
What does DNS have to do with a DDoS? Are the bots doing a dns lookup before
every SYN? It doesn't make sense.

And what about these supposed hackers that are generating the DDoS, what are
the chances that it's actually the CIA, NSA or other evil 3 letter org.

"The first serious infowar is now engaged. The field of battle is WikiLeaks.
You are the troops. "
<https://twitter.com/#!/JPBarlow/status/10627544017534976>

------
corin_
"only accessible through a string of digits known as a DNS address"

"wikileaks.ch [...] still only points to an IP address, suggesting WikiLeaks
has been unable to quickly find a new hosting provider"

Both those statements made me question the level of knowledge required to
write this kind of article...

------
InclinedPlane
I don't see any evidence presented backing up the notion that the US
government "killed" wikileaks' DNS. What I see is that their DNS provider
discontinued service due to wanting to avoid fallout of the continuing DDoS
attack on their other customers.

At this point I assume that the implication is that the US government is
behind the DDoS attack, which is at best speculation without evidence.

This whole wikileaks spectacle has led to a whole hell of a lot of emotional
foofaraw, considering the actual "revelations" from anything that wikileaks
has done to date have been rather underwhelming (mostly confirming what had
been widely speculated before, typically).

~~~
guelo
"Nothing to see here" is the first thing they would tell you to make you stop
paying attention. You bought it hook line and sinker.

~~~
InclinedPlane
You can use that line of reasoning to believe in anything.

I haven't stopped paying attention, I'd like to know who's responsible for the
DDoS attacks against wikileaks, but I don't see any evidence that the US
government is responsible. Nor has DDoS ever been the modus operandi of
government agents in the US.

