How online sleuths made other Epstein files

Since the US government began releasing files on Jeffrey Epstein on Friday, Democratic lawmakers, Epstein’s victims and their lawyers have complained about the amount of turnover. Among the thousands of documents, most of their parts or entire pages are black.

But now, some Internet experts have found ways to reveal some of that information. Indeed, some sleuths have taken to social media to provide step-by-step instructions on how to do it.

“You won’t believe how much I changed this switch,” wrote social media analyst Ed Krassenstein on X (formerly Twitter). Krassenstein, along with his twin, Brian, is a regular critic of the Trump administration.

“I simply highlighted the text, copied it, and pasted it into the document.”

Later he added, “How many other files were actually not fixed?”

It doesn’t work for all modified files, but the method involves a common “copy-paste” error found in some PDF documents, Josh Quittner, CEO and founder of tech-focused website Decrypt, wrote in a recent article.

“This type of faulty reprogramming is a known digital security flaw occurred in previous cases, allowing information to be easily retrieved,” he wrote.

Phone programming features used to become obsolete

A second method of immobilization involves taking a screenshot of the rescanned images and using standard filters to edit the phone’s images, Quittner writes.

Using those functions, such as increasing exposure and brightness while lowering contrast, users say they can “see” the visible ink to clarify the text underneath, Quittner wrote.

So far, however, it appears that the failed prosecution has not provided any further information about any relationship between Epstein and US President Donald Trump, the New York Times reported.

But some of the documents that users can unzip show more examples of how Epstein carried out his abuse and hid his money through financial structures and companies, the Times reported.

Among the rescheduled users were able to view the show iin a civil case in the Virgin Islands against Darren Indyke and Richard Kahn, who were executors of Epstein’s estate, the Guardian reported.

It contains allegations of how Epstein and his colleagues carried out the sexual abuse of children, the Guardian reported.

But, as Decrypt’s Quittner noted, some observers are urging caution about these unrepentant revelations.

“Although faulty repair methods are a proven technical fact, certain claims circulating in viral videos have not been independently verified by news organizations,” he wrote. “There is a risk that some content may be false, exaggerated for viewing purposes, or unverified rumors presented as true.”

The issue of people going deep into the files without the proper context or knowledge base about the case is an issue that has been raised even before the original document was dropped.

In its Five Rules for Reading the Epstein Files Story, Politico warned that it is important, when looking at documents, to “understand your authentic sources, their biases and their limitations.”

“That’s very important depending on the type of document you’re reviewing.”

For example, a file that is currently circulating on social media is a demonstration of the trial between Virginia Giuffre – who had accused Epstein of sexually harassing her – against Ghislaine Maxwell. Maxwell is accused of helping to recruit teenage girls to Epstein.

But that file is not part of the newly released documents; instead, it was included in many Epstein-related papers opened in 2024. The document is gaining attention because it contains the allegations of a woman who says there are sex tapes involving high-profile people. But the woman later said she was the one who invented those claims.

It’s dangerous to ‘leak information’

“It’s dangerous business to glean information — even something as simple as an email communication — from a large body of material and think you can understand it completely,” Politico wrote.

That’s why the media may be reluctant to focus on the Epstein emails. In a recent interview with The Atlantic, Miami Herald journalist Julie K. Brown, who has covered the Epstein case for years, said she was asked why the mainstream media was not reporting on a single email from Epstein.

The email involved Trump and former US president Bill Clinton and had already been released before the recent disposal of the file by the Department of Justice.

Brown said the media wasn’t reporting on it because of healthy skepticism about Epstein’s other emails.

“Because, let’s face it: He was lying. He wasn’t telling the truth all the time,” Brown said.