One can argue whether the privacy provisions were weakened or not. In the case of the WikiLeaks, Twila Brase, president of the Citizens' Council for Health Freedom, got to the heart of the matter when she said, "What WikiLeaks shows you is how security information is all about the integrity of individuals." The bottom line is that someone in the State Dept. leaked the documents. No iron-clad privacy provision in the world can protect against a person leaking information - whether it's paper based or computerized. Brase went on to say, "Once you get information on any kind of electronic format, it is very easy to take it, to access it, to share it, to download it."

The silver lining in the WikiLeaks scandal is that it puts a laser focus on privacy and security issues, which are things we need to keep working on to make it right.

The dispute cuts to the core of the question of whether WikiLeaks allies are part of a criminal conspiracy or a political discussion

The U.S. is investigating whether WikiLeaks should be held responsible for leaking classified information, even though it was not the original leaker.

"The First Amendment guarantees their right to speak up and freely associate with even unpopular people and cause," attorneys wrote.

While we are obligated by to protect our sources, it is clear that the information comes from an organization which has been intercepting and archiving US national telecommunications since prior to 9/11.

The question he didn't even know to ask is, "What are safe and secure computing and online practices?"

how to think about adversaries online, what is ssl, what it means, what are phishing, viruses, botnets, and state-sponsored malware. By the end of the 4th hour, he understood how tor is different than a simple vpn or proxy server, and when to use tor and when it isn't needed. 3.5h of that discussion was basic operational, computer, and online security and safe practices.