Someone inscribed the War Logs of Wikileaks into BTC

[Aanuoluwatofunmi]

Now someone is inscribing all of those war logs (which are the top secret of the US and removed by them ) in the BTC blockchain. I mean, whether they are doing the right thing or not I will not get into this discussion. But overall we might see some hot things against BTC as the documents which are already on the BTC blockchain now, cannot be deleted or altered.

Bitcoin is meant for everyone the same way blockchain works perfectly for the security and privacy of those who think using that is of high benefit to them, we are less concerned about the content on these inscribed NFTs than the effective utilization that this has brought about the wider use case of the bitcoin block space for ordinals, as far as am concerned, there's nothing to prove that these inscriptions are war logs, or wikileaks sensitive contents, but if so it was, then i think bitcoin and blockchain are both getting more exposure by the people to unravel more opportunities in them and their uses.

[DooMAD]

I think to deal with this, we need an upgrade that would filter out the sensitive data and allow the validators to reject those entries.

You'd only delay the inevitable.  People would just get creative and just start obfuscating the data so no one would notice.  Or get around it by encrypting the sensitive data they sent to the next block, so no one could tell what it is.  And then publishing a key to decode it in a subsequent block.  It's just more cat'n'mouse / whack-a-mole / etc.

Plus, you're still reliant on asking miners to reject stuff simply because you don't like it.  Perhaps they might not want to do that.  Have you tried asking their opinion?

[o48o]

-cut-
Do you think BTC is being used for good purposes or not?
-cut-

It's like asking are rocks used for good or evil. They can be tools or weapons, and they are going to be used in every way humans can think of. Same goes with bitcoin.
I don't have an opinion if this specific thing was good or bad. That doesn't really matter to me, it just proves that every people will use it any way they see fit and no one really can stop them. If someone thought this was bad there will be worst and better use cases. I guarantee you that.

Bitcoin is a P2P protocol. It's a tool and it's always going to be used for good and evil purposes and purposes beyond them. Just like every tool out there.

[Smartvirus]

Now someone is inscribing all of those war logs (which are the top secret of the US and removed by them ) in the BTC blockchain. I mean, whether they are doing the right thing or not I will not get into this discussion. But overall we might see some hot things against BTC as the documents which are already on the BTC blockchain now, cannot be deleted or altered.

I cannot say anything that what those authorities would do but one thing I will say for sure is, that BTC has not provided us the financial freedom only but provided the freedom of speech too. And now I have started to think that BTC is legendary and really has exceeded the expectations of Satoshi (answer to those OPs who ask mostly --> either BTC exceeds Satoshi's expectations or not?)

Well, the group who have taken responsibility is known as Project Spa-rta-cus's and they have initialized a website to inscribe the logs on the BTC blockchain. Well, now from the technical point of view, we might see a surge in the transaction fee because if someone has decided to inscribe all of the 92,000 documents then we might see some congestion on the market. So, be prepared for it.

In truth, there has been more and more discoveries and development in recent times. It’s only a matter of time for certain innovations yo be associated with several other use cases. With the ordinals loophole, it becomes a very good revenue to ensure proper data collection and safety over the years. Though this was done on the Bitcoin Blockchain, this is only a utilization of the opportunities available on the blockchain network and nothing more.

If this could lead to attacks on the Bitcoin Blockchain network in order to override what’s been done, I think that is possible but, I doubt there would be any success on it as I like to believe it’s been attempted already in other to discredit the system.

The world is changing and the people who live in it has to know well enough on how to handle the changes of the time we exist.

[panganib999]

I think this is a way for them to usher in a new age of information gathering, wikileaks as it is have been taken down multiple times only to resurface again, so losing it for one last time forever is definitely a massive possibility. Inscribing information into the blockchain to make it immutable, permanent and unalterable is one good move to make sure no organization can take it down even if they wanted to. So while some may think that this is an attack against bitcoin, I see this as a way for them to introduce bitcoin to a new age of information, and possibly even push for Web3.0

Anywho, I might just be spitfalling here but I definitely see this as a bold move for the people in Wikileaks.

[pooya87]

If someone is acting within the rules and you try to change the rules, then "fixing it" suddenly carries very different connotations.  You are working from the perspective that your definition of valid use is correct and that theirs is incorrect, but I don't see anywhere that this has been established and agreed to by a significant portion of users.

Beyond that, attempting to resist this type of usage means making both yourself, along with any developers that joined in with the change, self-declared arbiters of what is or isn't an "acceptable" transaction and then taking away the freedoms of others to make those types of transactions.  That was always going to be fighting a losing battle when you've got little to back it up.

Path of least resistance wins again.

Saying bitcoin's utility is as a payment system and NOT a cloud storage is neither my definition nor is it an arbitrary one. It is the definition of Bitcoin that has always been accepted by all bitcoiners and it is the definition the inventor of Bitcoin has used to define it and it is also the definition used in the Bitcoin whitepaper.

Not to mention that "using bitcoin blockchain as a cloud storage" has been the attack that we have always strived to prevent. From the day OP_RETURN was introduced and using outputs to inject arbitrary size data was "softly" banned by standard rules and then the limits placed on OP_RETURN.

[DooMAD]

Not to mention that "using bitcoin blockchain as a cloud storage" has been the attack that we have always strived to prevent. From the day OP_RETURN was introduced and using outputs to inject arbitrary size data was "softly" banned by standard rules and then the limits placed on OP_RETURN.

That part seems to be news to devs.  Last I checked some of them were discussing removing the limits on OP_RETURN.  Either way, it's something you'll have to have to take up with them.


//EDIT:  I see fascist1 is taking more pot-shots that clearly don't warrant a new post to respond to:

Either way, it's something you'll have to have to take up with them.

quoting for posterity. doomad yet again pretending one thing but saying another. doomad hates anyone "taking it up" with the devs.. doomad doesnt want anyone telling devs things.(unless its a sponsoring corporation)

Engaging in a reasonable discussion with developers is perfectly acceptable.  But you have proven time and again that you are incapable of reasonable behaviour.  You demand shit like a petulant, spoiled child.  You treat developers as though they were your own personal slaves.  Get REKT plz.

[pooya87]

That part seems to be news to devs.  Last I checked some of them were discussing removing the limits on OP_RETURN.  Either way, it's something you'll have to have to take up with them.

Discussions are always happening in the development scene, for example once some devs were discussing the possibility of reducing the block size to smaller sizes while some others about hard fork to increase it.

[franky1]

Either way, it's something you'll have to have to take up with them.

quoting for posterity. doomad yet again pretending one thing but saying another. doomad hates anyone "taking it up" with the devs.. doomad doesnt want anyone telling devs things.(unless its a sponsoring corporation)

doomad wants more bloat but less transactional data. doomad hates bitcoin being a payment system. doomad loves the idea of junk data being on the blockchain

[Faisal2202]

Bitcoin is meant for everyone the same way blockchain works perfectly for the security and privacy of those who think using that is of high benefit to them, we are less concerned about the content on these inscribed NFTs than the effective utilization that this has brought about the wider use case of the bitcoin block space for ordinals, as far as am concerned, there's nothing to prove that these inscriptions are war logs, or wikileaks sensitive contents, but if so it was, then i think bitcoin and blockchain are both getting more exposure by the people to unravel more opportunities in them and their uses.

They really are inscribing those logs on the BTC blockchain and you are right, people really are getting creative with these ordinals, and as I said in the post BTC did not provide us financial freedom but freedom of speech too. But what I am afraid of is, this technology might be used for bad purposes. For like, last time someone uploaded a video of terrorists attacking people in Mosques on FB and later deleted it. Well, if they upload such sensitive data on the BTC blockchain or upload the CP or Rap videos on the BTC blockchain.

Or anything against authorities take strict actions, If uploaded on the BTC blockchain then there is no way for authorities to track them, and what if those inscribers would use the mixer technology to inscribe such content on the BTC blockchain to obfuscate their transactions to avoid from getting caught.

I hope this will not come true and BTC will be used for what it is made.

[Husires]

They do put the actual data, converted to SVG from the raw data of the logs.

https://ordinals.com/inscription/f00d8740c4f291b0fec63565e0c7f40e2fc4fbf6c594fa7fb75a14e475efaed6i0
https://ordinals.com/inscription/72c7b9fe516e959cd079db3e47cfdc9e3e0ca69ce114ac1dd75ac3a734533ca1i0

How much data or images can they upload, I mean the block space is limited and uploading thousands of records would be very expensive.
Such news will be exploited in future legislation, but this is not new. For many years, notices of links to illegal things have been posted on the Bitcoin blockchain, and if it were not for newspaper articles, no one except the miners would have known about them.
If newspapers and articles stop promoting this news, most likely no one will know about it.

[yhiaali3]

Really exciting news, basically there was a lot of talk and objection to Ordinals and the problems it might cause to the Bitcoin network due to congestion and so on.

Now we come to a new type of problem. Documenting WikiLeaks documents on the Bitcoin blockchain will be an annoying matter for the US government, which already hates Bitcoin. Now this hatred will increase and the United States has an additional reason to attack Bitcoin.

Of course, everyone is free to use Bitcoin and Blockchain in the way that suits them, but I do not know where this will lead us. I do not know whether the results will be positive or negative in the long term.

[vv181]

I'm afraid this won't benefit Julian. This might instead cause a backlash and the UK might end up favoring the US' extradition request.

Public advocacy for Jullian Assange has been long-running for him. So, I don't see how this would not benefit the cause and rather make a backlash.

The cause is different from Julian. This might benefit the cause, yes, but Julian is already in the hands of the government. He is in jail. If the fate of Julian is not as important as the cause, he can rot there, for all we care. But if people care for Julian, perhaps they won't stoke what's considered to be a dead war.  

My views are rather because they care for Assange, they reshare and resound these things again which is indirectly intended to support rejecting Assange's detention and, especially in this case, the extradition request. Not specifically waging a dead war.

The government, after all, is not anymore hiding from all kinds of crimes that were committed in Afghanistan. That the military was actually a cruel pack of wild animals in that foreign country isn't something new I guess.

Leaked materials are far better than useless ape jpegs. Nobody would join a movement broadcasting transactions involving poor artworks. Many might, though, if it involves information of war crimes committed by no less than the government.

Still, I do not see the government would be willing to initiate this project. Not to mention this is limited (max 76,911 inscription), so random jpegs would last longer if their goals were to clog the networks.

Those are third parties. Don't trust, verify doesn't exempt them. When I tried doing the steps to help publish the logs, at a certain point an address is asked where the information will be sent. I don't know how to verify those information myself. Also, I'm asked to pay first.

I show that reference specifically to support the authenticity of the leaks.

Regarding the project's inscribed information itself, see:

Can I choose which War Logs to inscribe?

No, it's a blind inscription process of random order, but you can see the exact file size you're agreeing to inscribe alongside the related fee. Refreshing the website also refreshes the inscription queue.

How much data or images can they upload, I mean the block space is limited and uploading thousands of records would be very expensive.

The are 76,911 available data to be inscribed. Users can publish a maximum of 300 logs per transaction.

You can play around on the site, to see the calculation of how much block spaces it consumes per log.
https://projectspartacus.org/Publish