Quantity has quality of its own. So does efficiency. When you make a process much more efficient you after a tipping point convert it to something else entirely - like the surveillance that. Technology is amplifier.
Of course getting 10 more years just because he used wget instead of bash scripts that loop with nc is absurd.
But the fact that he used simple automation to do the job should be taken into consideration. So should be the fact that solitary confinement is torture.
But the whole trial seemed like Kangaroo court to me anyway ...
Edit: Also technically he was authorized to use wget - he had permissions to download it from wherever or to install the package and had permissions to set the executive bit to true.
Not trying to justify Bradley's treatment in any way, but to put the other side...
Is it not possible that wget was not authorized specifically because if would make copying lots of file easier and quicker? I mean, if I were in charge of sensitive data like that, it would be the sort of thing I want to consider. If legit use is no say a file by file basis, then only a select few would need some sort of batching tool. So, why make it easier? That fact that you can do it other ways, I see no reason to then just allow anything. We all still have locks on our doors, despite knowing a determined thief will defeat or circumvent them.
If batch downloading is de facto fraud then the military should have been monitoring their HTTP logs for this suspiciously fraudulent signature and immediately stepped in to prevent the leak. That they had a mandate to secure sensitive data and failed in that task does not make Manning's actions fraudulent.
Is security important to US military or not? Both having lax security at the time of breach and then severely punishing a leaker for using trivial tools does not inspire confidence in the competence of our military security.
I see where you're going with this, but you're fixing that problem on the wrong end. If they want to rate limit with exceptions, they should rate limit with exceptions. Not insist all the clients limit themselves, with exceptions.
Following your analogy, we all have locks on our doors, despite telling thieves not to steal our cars.
Also technically he was authorized to use wget - he had permissions to download it from wherever or to install the package and had permissions to set the executive bit to true.
Do we know this to be true? Was Manning himself even responsible for the installation of wget on the systems he used?
Of course getting 10 more years just because he used wget instead of bash scripts that loop with nc is absurd.
But the fact that he used simple automation to do the job should be taken into consideration. So should be the fact that solitary confinement is torture.
But the whole trial seemed like Kangaroo court to me anyway ...
Edit: Also technically he was authorized to use wget - he had permissions to download it from wherever or to install the package and had permissions to set the executive bit to true.