https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/22267193/govuscourtsflsd6178541021.pdf
Redactions are substantial. Attachments are included. Those attachments which are included are unredacted.
Paragraphs 80 - 84 appear to be boiler plate. The FBI - DOJ imposes two teams. One is investigatory and potentially leads to prosecution. Another in those paragraphs is mentioned to do a review re attorney-client privilege, and is empowered to deny the other team access to privileged material or to seek a judicial determination where the privileges team is uncertain.
Attorney actions deemed coconspiratorial to commission of a crime would not be privileged, and it is likely if any question in such a direction arises among the privileges team members, that would be taken to a judge. Presumably the magistrate who issued the warrant might retain jurisdiction under the arrangement.
It appears that only already known information remains unredacted.
Note: It seems a cut/paste web search of a link given in affidavit paragraph 25 might fail, for the item which is online at this link:
https://www.archives.gov/files/foia/ferriero-response-to-02.09.2022-maloney-letter.02.18.2022.pdf
FURTHER: A six-page explanatory document is online
https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/LSB/LSB10810
At p.5-6 of that item the contention of Trumpian immaculate declassification is analyzed.
The attachments to the Affidavit include a Trump lawyer's letter making the assertion of existence of an immaculate declassification authority via reliance on dicta in a divided-court Supreme Court decision involving civil service law and a security clearance denial for a worker wanting to work at a Trident military installation, i.e., inapposite to the factual and legal posture of the present question; Department of Navy v. Egan, 484 US 518 (1988).
In order to fully inform the court on the immaculate declassification contention when applying for the warrant, the affiant even goes so far as, at paragraph 53, referencing an item Breitbart posted online (where, again, cut/paste from the online pdf copy of the affidavit might fail):
BOTTOM LINE: What's release of the redacted affidavit worth as to any additional insight into the search?
Have a look and decide for yourself.
_________UPDATE_________
Empty Wheel has posted interesting thoughts and analysis re Trump/documents and related matters; and in one item links to this Rolling Stone online item.
In a different item, Rolling Stone sees the affidavit, as redacted as it is, as having more gravitas than Crabgrass sees. Readers can reach their own views, while we all wait for how many other shoes are to drop.
__________FURTHER UPDATE_________
AP coverage of the redacted affidavit, carried by Strib.