Slimvirgin gets slashdotted, No place to hide... Options

[JohnA]

Link to slashdot[

"International Humanitarian Law professor Ludwig Braeckeleer thinks so. In an article published yesterday in the Korean newspaper OhMyNews, he reveals a discovery he made while researching a story on the bombing of Pan Am Flight 103 over Scotland. It turns out that a Wikipedia administrator named SlimVirgin is actually Linda Mack, a woman who as a young graduate in the 1980s was hired by investigative reporter Pierre Salinger of ABC News to help with the investigation. Salinger later came to believe that Mack was actually working for Britain's MI5 on a mission to investigate the bombing and to infiltrate and monitor the news agency. Shortly after her Wikipedia identity was uncovered, many of her edits to articles related to the bombing were permanently removed from the database in an attempt to conceal her identity. This discovery comes only months after another Wikipedia admin was caught lying about his credentials to the press. What can Wikipedia do about those who would use it for their own purposes?"

Bring popcorn. This one could get interesting.

[blissyu2]

Well, if it is Wikipedia Review's fault, then surely they'll link to us when describing it in their article about it?

We did put out an awful lot of information which assisted people to find out about this. Its just that Wikipedia was able to keep a lid on Wikipedia Review. Sadly, when it got to more mainstream press, the lid came off.

Actually, there is a law in many countries that the true names of secret agents can never be uncovered. I don't know what the laws are in USA, if its the same, or if this case is one where its okay to uncover their identities. So on that basis, perhaps that's why they are going to lengths to protect her? After all, SlimVirgin is doing her bit for her country. Or for a country at least.

[Daniel Brandt]

Actually, there is a law in many countries that the true names of secret agents can never be uncovered. I don't know what the laws are in USA, if its the same, or if this case is one where its okay to uncover their identities. So on that basis, perhaps that's why they are going to lengths to protect her? After all, SlimVirgin is doing her bit for her country. Or for a country at least.

The Intelligence Identities Protection Act of 1982 is the law that applies in the U.S., and therefore is relevant to U.S.-based Wikimedia Foundation.

It protects CIA officers and agents to some extent, but the provisions are fairly narrow. If you don't have access to classified information, the chances of violating this law are rather slim. A journalist, for example, does not normally have access to classified information. No journalist has ever been prosecuted under this law.

The Valerie Plame case was different. Those who exposed her were connected with the White House and presumably had access (i.e., security clearances) to this information. The penalties are more severe in this case, and the law is broader.

The shoe is probably on the other foot. If, for example, Wikimedia Foundation is aware that SlimVirgin is an agent of a foreign power (yes, Canada and Britain are foreign), then one could make the case that Wikimedia Foundation is obligated to register as a foreign agent under the Foreign Agents Registration Act of 1938. This is a fairly simple disclosure statute. I haven't researched the issue, but as far as I know the Foundation is most likely under no obligation to pursue the issue with SlimVirgin to determine if registration is required. Even if the Foundation was fully aware that Slim was an agent for Britain or Canada or Israel, and tried to cover it up, I doubt that any U.S. prosecutor would get very excited about the issue. If she was an agent for Al-Qaeda the situation might be different.

We're in vague territory here, particularly when you add the transnational nature of cyberspace into the equation. But I think we're very far from a situation where an investigative effort to uncover Slim would run afoul of any U.S. laws.