I don't know...
... I just don't know.
On the one hand, it is utterly impossible for the "Snowden camp" to prove that nobody has been harmed by his actions. Proving a negative is difficult under the best of circumstances, and a primary function of intelligence agencies is to be opague.
On the other hand... the story against him seems to evolve continuously. As more facts become clear that could happen, but we're two years down the road now.... how long does it take to work out what he got and who is at risk from that?
Had an intelligence asset been compromised enough to be withdrawn, then they're bust. You can't send them anywhere else in the world. Surely one asset could be made available for interview by a proper journalist under condition of anonymity?
Certainly I would hope that once the pool of potentially exposed agents became known to the intelligence community, they would ave acted on the assumption that the journos would get compromised by Russia or China. Lets face it, when the Groans science editor is asking to be used as El Regs mouthpiece, you can safely ascribe a similar level of capability across their domain. All intelligence operatives should have been safe within a few days/weeks/months, right?
I'm leaning towards "This is BS", but absent any evidence either way, I just don't know.