Do not try to handle two whistleblowers at once on the same phone or email account
Do not try to handle two whistleblowers at once on the same phone or email account
It is not possible to tell if what seems to be a low level, low risk whistleblower or journalistic contact, might not develop into a high risk one in the future, once they trust you. The only professional and ethical way to conduct yourself is to to treat all of them with maximum "Moscow Rules" precautions, all of the time.
Most people would probably never contemplate setting up a physical face to face meeting, to discuss confidential matters, with all of their confidential whistleblower contacts at the same place, at the same time.
However, it is surprising how many journalists or bloggers etc., in contact with several confidential sources or whistleblowers at once, risk comprising the security and anonymity of all of them, by sharing a phone or email address with more than one of them i.e. if one of them gets identified (or eventually goes public), this could betray all of the others they are dealing with at the same time.
It may be acceptable to take the risk of using a shared phone number or email address for initial contacts, but do not continue to do so for more detailed contacts or for setting up physical meetings - they deserve a separate, confidential phone number or email address each.
Therefore keep a spare "whistleblowers only" mobile phone and set up some email accounts (and PGP Encryption Keys) beforehand, so that you do not arouse suspicions by suddenly obtaining these just after a whistleblower has initially contacted you.
Remember that some pre-paid mobile phone SIM cards are de-activated if they are not used after, say 6 months, and that, free Hushmail accounts need to be used at least once every 3 weeks.
If you are a whistleblower contacting a journalist etc. (or a political activist contacting a political group organiser) , then ask them if the phone number or email address that they have given you is unique to you, or if it is shared with other confidential sources, who may be currently under more investigative scrutiny than you are at present.
This works the other way for whistleblowers. They should assume that some or all of the journalists ore bloggers or elected politicians or regulatory authorities who they are initially sounding out to see if they may be interested in taking on their whistleblower story and evidence, are under various degrees of surveillance.
This may be for purposes other than that of a specific "mole hunt" or leak inquiry regarding the whistleblower's area of concern or activity.
The Communications Data Traffic Analysis which say, a leading investigative journalist will be subjected to, will reveal a list of mobile and landline phone calls (or SMS messages etc) that he receives. The next level of automated analysis will chase up each of these to see who they have been in contact with.
If your phone number or email address has been in contact with several investigative journalists etc., this will indicate suspected whistleblowing / breaches of the Official Secrets Act or commercial confidentiality etc., even if each of those contacts has not contained any incriminating details.
Therefore whistleblowers should also use individual email addresses and / or mobile phone numbers etc. for contacting each media organisation / elected politician / independent regulatory authority etc so as not to tip off their employers or other snoopers that someone is about to "blow the whistle" on something.
There is no hard and fast rule about whether to contact several potential whistleblower assistance contacts at once, or whether to try them sequentially one at a time.
Part of the problem from a whistleblower's point of view is getting anyone to listen and then getting anyone to believe their story, let alone protect their identity in the meantime, before any arrangements have been made for publication or for the secure submission of evidence.
.