Wikileaks dodges closure with mirrors

Wikileaks has set up a network of mirror sites in an effort to stay online, while its latest batch of leaked documents say the Chinese leadership directed attacks on Google.
Facing constant denial of service (DOS) attacks and legal threats from the US, French and Australian governments, Wikileaks now uses a mass mirror set up by supporters worldwide.
“If you have a Unix-based server which is hosting a website on the Internet and you want to give Wikileaks some of your hosting resources, you can help!” Wikileaks said in a call to arms.
The website went off-air for seven hours on Friday after US DNS provider canceled its domain name, claiming the sites breached its fair use policy.
While the take-down highlighted a weakness in the openness of the net, whereby a handful of registrars have the ability to take a domain name offline, Wikileaks switched to a Swiss hosting firm, and issued the invitation to set up mirrors using a /wikileaks directory tag, such as
Meanwhile, in the latest batch of leaked documents, US officials say that China’s Politburo Standing Committee – the highest Communist Party organ - directed attacks on Google after a senior member found a critical article while Googling his name.
The New York Times named the politician as propaganda chief Li Changchun although this does not appear in the Wikileaks cable.
A “well-placed contact” told the US Beijing embassy that operations against Google were “100% political.” Another source believed that a senior figure was working closely with Google’s rival Baidu.
The heavy attacks led Google to announce its departure from the mainland China market early this year.
Google believed it was being harassed by the Chinese government for still allowing a link from to the uncensored, citing a series of incidents in which its sites were blocked.
The search firm had also turned down a Chinese government request to adjust the resolution on Google Earth satellite images, which authorities had claimed presented a security threat.
Meanwhile, PayPal said it would not support payments to because it had violated its acceptable use policy, Bloomberg reported.
The policy did not allow “activities that encourage, promote, facilitate or instruct others to engage in illegal activity,” PayPal said.