Quote "Wikileaks as you knew it, was compromised, but NOT how you think it was and certainly not how many of you STILL seem to think it is, even today, almost a year after I initially told you exactly what happened.
Yes, there were contractors who were tasked with taking out Wikileaks, confiscating their hardware, disabling their backbone and infrastructure, penetrating their servers and ultimately securing Assange.
There were OTHER CONTRACTORS, however, who had been tasked to ensure this DID NOT, I REPEAT, DID NOT HAPPEN. As this played out, a mix of the two is what actually happened. Those tasked with penetrating the network, obtainingand recovering hardware, taking the network offline, etc. were fairly successful. Those tasked with recovering/securing Assange safely, from the embassy were successful as well. Additionally, since those seeking to destroy the Wikileaks infrastructure/network were working off of some pretty old intel, they were unaware of the extensive provisions, back-ups and platform changes Wikileaks had designed, implemented and made on the network. So basically, though they retained a lot of on-premis physical equipment, hardwareand hard copied docs, in addition to logins/passwords, when they raided the HQ, they did not have the ability to successfully access and penetrate what they'd intended, as provisions to specifically limit the impacts for a networking/infrastructure breach, had an unexpected raid like this ever happened, which had become more of a heightened probability in mid 2015.