U.S. Commerce Department Hacked Again

evil agent writes "The Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS), a branch of the Commerce Department, has sustained several successful attacks. Chinese hackers were able to gain access to its computers and install rootkits and other malware." From the article: "This is the second major attack originating in China that's been acknowledged by the federal government since July. Then, the State Department said that Chinese attackers had broken into its systems overseas and in Washington. And last year, Britain's National Infrastructure Security Co-ordination Center (NISCC) claimed that Chinese hackers had attacked more than 300 government agencies and private companies in the U.K."

Comments

Chinese Hackers?

[IlliniECE]

Chinese hackers installing root kits? Are you sure they weren't Japanese (aka Sony)?

Re:Chinese Hackers?

[Jesus_666]

Chinese hackers installing root kits? Are you sure they weren't Japanese (aka Sony)?

They were clearly $sys$not Chinese.

Meanwhile, at a government workstation...

[CompMD]

Hm...so this here purple panda bear says he wants to be my buddy and help me out on the intarweb. Sounds good to me! (click) Gosh I wonder why my workstation is so slow, almost as if its sending all its files to ch!@$!$JGOJ!THIS POST 0WNZ0R3D BY CHINESE HAXORS

Re:Meanwhile, at a government workstation...

[the_last_rites]

i like (0/\/\PR0/\/\153D better. 0\/\/|\|Z0r3D just doesnt sound 1337 anymore. So much so that even Myspace and Facebook fanbois are in on that

I don't buy it.

[pair-a-noyd]

They say they can't clean the systems. Bullshit, they just want to blow more of OUR tax dollars on new toys.

Also, what's the OS? No mention of that in TFA. Why are they using an OS that allows this sort of thing to happen. Shall we take a guess as to the OS?

If they were serious about security they WOULD put a stop to this crap.
It's easy to batten down the hatches.

Re:I don't buy it.

[Shadyman]

You mean you're going to ask the Department, "Does it run Linux"?

Re:I don't buy it.

[anagama]

Just out of curriosity -- how many exploits for linux are there in which your machine can be rooted simply by viewing a website? How many such exploits have there been for windows? I honestly don't know the true answer but I'm betting there is a large difference between the frequency of this type of exploit with windows having the "high score" by a large margin. Please correct me if I'm wrong (with actual examples, not opinions).

Re:I don't buy it.

[Anonymous Coward]

Don't assume it's Windows. The government is the largest Sun customer out there, and for the time being they are running Solaris and Linux on the hardware. I can't find a good link to this paper, but if you want to read about rootkits on Solaris that probably 99% of all SA's and huge numbers of Security Officers couldnt detect, search for 'SUN - Bloody Daft Solaris Mechanisms "B.D.S.M. The Solaris 10 Way"'

Re:I don't buy it.

[AaronLawrence]

I think that, while they have inherited some of the good security practices from *nix, they also seem to be making beginner mistakes in favour of making users lives easy - just like Microsoft did 10 years ago.
Fortunately for them, they can afford to be lax as long as the deployment is small - if they started to get 10-20% of market share, things might be different.

I think I read that wrong

[ndogg]

Bureau of Industry and Insecurity? Why would successful Chinese cracks be a surprise to them?

Nothing real will happen

[frinkster]

The Chinese have been trying for years to lose that pesky Most-Favored-Nation status, and this administration is not going to give in.

It makes even less sense in TFA.

[khasim]

An August e-mail from acting Undersecretary of Commerce Mark Foulon quoted by the Washington Post said that BIS "had identified several successful attempts to attack unattended BIS workstations during the overnight hours." Last month, reported the Post, Foulon wrote: "It has become clear that Internet access in itself is a vulnerability that we cannot mitigate. We have tried incremental steps and they have proven insufficient."

What the fuck? Aren't they even behind a firewall?

Wouldn't a simple firewall "mitigate" that "vulnerability"?

Re:It makes even less sense in TFA.

[AuMatar]

No, it wouldn't. Firewalls themselves can be hacked. An internal network with no access to the internet is more secure than one with. The question is if access to the internet adds enough value to be worth the risk. The answer depends on what you're doing. Military plans- probably not. Joe Blow working for some small buisness- probably yes. In this case, no idea.

Re:It makes even less sense in TFA.

[pipingguy]

Perhaps it is politically useful to announce that you've been hacked when, in fact, you havent. Or if you *have*, in fact been hacked, it might be useful to "leak" to the press that you've been hacked, but you secretly know that the hacking occurred at a non-vulnerable point. Or, if you haven't been hacked by hackers, it could be hacky if the hackees hacked the hackiest hack node and then made it appear that hackers had [writer's brain explodes, end of post]

Re:It makes even less sense in TFA.

[sumdumass]

Actualy, this is a good point. Knowing that china is one of the ones holding the UN security counsel from making and definate actions on IRAN and thier nuke program. North korea is a concern too and many experts seem to think china can stop NK at any time. This might lead a little leverage over them. Simularly, the tarrif on shoes from china gives the EU some position of power over china too. So politicly, letting them know it might have worked could be a setup to allow threat of force and forgivness to manipular china into our corner. Or, it might be enough to allow another country belive China can and has found plans of attack stratigies and whatnot.

On the chance that chinese hackers actualy did hack the government computers, it might be likley they hacked into a honeypot. Letting people know they got in and we are trying to do something about it lets these hackers know another challenge is comming. We sit back and monitor were the attacks are comming from, block a few IPs logging the route to determine how easy they can change locations, and set the stage for blocking an entire portion of thier network if ever need be.

This would be akin to the movie plots (called a trap) were something of value is publicly known to be at a certain place at a certain time with laxed security so if someone is wanting to steal it, it would likey happen there. Then when a criminal takes them up, they find it isn't the real deal, they just stole a worthless item, allowing the real one to safely pass.

Don't think of it as security thru obscurity rather a security and real time response audit.

Re:It makes even less sense in TFA.

[pipingguy]

International politics is convoluted and mysterious and the post cold war era hasn't really changed much. It's still a game of favours, inside deals, secrecy and private agreements.

If NK tests, you can be sure that something else is happening in the background. We might find out what /really/ happened in 2030.

Re:It makes even less sense in TFA.

[bitgusher]

No, it wouldn't. Hopefully you are not a security consultant.

How sure?

[fredistheking]

How can they be so sure that the attacks originated from China? Sure there may have been Chinese IP addresses involved but the attackers could have been anywhere. The chinese systems could have simply been compromised and used to cover the attackers tracks.

Re:How sure?

[sumdumass]

There are some tell tale signs besides the ip addresses. Technique used, programs inserted (read root kits), codepage of files droped onto the hacked computers are just a few. Watching the actual routing tables and ip packets plus maybe sniffing a router on/in the area to look for other packets destined for those computers. Of course it would really help out if you actualy caught them in the act of doing it.

Then again, a spy working for a friendly nation or even the US could have told us that it was going on and we found that to be true. Or we could have suspected it to be china from any of the above, planted a few pieces of evidence and waited for them to acknowledge knowing of it. We could have also used "HP's bugged email" that phones home and droped the message with a subject line of "plan to nuke china if they object to invasion if iran" and see who opens it or forwards it. That migth explain congressional hearings into HP and all the government interest in HP after thier email bug and entrapment ordeal was publicly known.

Re:How sure?

[whathappenedtomonday]

How can they be so sure that the attacks originated from China?

They wouldn't say this if it wasn't true - just like they wouldn't put their systems online unless they are secure...

Re:How sure?

[finity]

That might also make the whole situation worse. It is important to get all the facts before pointing fingers, and unfortunately, with this kind of thing, it's very difficult to get all the facts.

Re:How sure?

[Tim C]

Technique used, programs inserted (read root kits), codepage of files droped onto the hacked computers are just a few.

None of which can be faked or copied by others, of course.

Watching the actual routing tables and ip packets plus maybe sniffing a router on/in the area to look for other packets destined for those computers.

So the hakc originated in China - it's still a leap of supposition to go from "hackers located in CHina" to "Chinese hackers".

Re:How sure?

[FhnuZoag]

Maybe I've been watching TV too much, but surely an obvious alternative is that another nation/private body did the hack, and dropped evidence to implicate China? Given that the government has been hacked once, all kinds of places would be on alert that security is weak, and would give it a go themselves. Plenty of motive and opportunity in place. What China has to gain from this hacking pales relative to what a competitor would have to gain from the increase of mistrust between two trading allies.

Re:How sure?

[sumdumass]

I'm not going to pretend our current government or even the last administration got foreign policy right or has it as a strong point. Making things worse to benefit in the short run seems to be an occuring theme of the last 50 or so years. Go figure/.

Re:How sure?

[sumdumass]

"Just a few" should let you know there are more ways to figure it out. BTW, I don't think any one tell is going to be used to determine who done it. It would take a few if not more.

Think of it like criminal investigation, lacking a witness, they look at the clues. Sometimes the clues tell them exactly who done it while some other times it tells them where to look for who done it. Then combined with other tools and techniques, the possible suspect could be narrowed down untill you have the most likley person(s). But even this could be wrong, It is just the most likley person that the evidence points to after all things considered.

So the hakc originated in China - it's still a leap of supposition to go from "hackers located in CHina" to "Chinese hackers".

Sure it is. And i bet the majority of people (like me) were not making the distinction between "chinese government sponsored/employed hackers" and hackers in china.

But we do know that China has been employing hackers for quite some time. We have watched them attempt to hack into business computers and others systems. We have intercepted details of thier successes or lack thereof. We have first hand knowledge of thier plans to shut foreign comerce down by attacking the internet and internet enabled applications if ever in a war. We also know that China got quite a bit of information from us back when our spy-plane colided with one of thier jets and was forced to land in china. Some reports described the comunications and computer equiptment was installed in incorect places suggesting they were removed, inspected and god knows what else. This shows us the plane was dismantled for more reasons then flying it home inside a russian plane.

Re:How sure?

[sumdumass]

I'm sure all things considered were considered before someone actualy made the acusations. Unless it is some diplomatic stranglehold type thing that is.

But they aren't (at least I hope not) going to place the blame on a breakin without having some creditible evidence pointing in that direction. Just like they won't pick up random people off the streets and start asking them about unsolved crimes from two years ago. You can about bet that if they are asking you about them, then there is a reason they think you might have been involved or have information of some sort. Simularly, making these claim has either some evidence backing it or some political posturing to benefit from (or both).

Re:How sure?

[sumdumass]

Who blew the plane up? Maybe that plane they blew up was only on jag.

this one had a different ending. In piece too but from another means.

Re:How sure?

[sgt_doom]

I hope I don't lose anyone by getting too technical - but another tell-tale sign is the presence of those nifty fortune cookie fortunes at the bottom of all their hax.

Re:How sure?

[b0r1s]

They may have been able to do a post-infection audit to discover the programming techniques / callsigns (if the strings in the program are all in chinese, there's a good chance it's not a romanian hacker).

Of course, there were other security issues in the very recent past that have much more impact on the average American, say, the discovery that the medicare system was wide open without even basic audit logs.

Be Nice

[tonyr1988]

Come on...don't be mean to the folks over at the Commerce Department. They were just in the process of transferring some money from a Chinese-Nigerian bank account to help out a buddy. Lay off of 'em.

Ipv6

[growse]

Don't forget kids, all these problems will be solved when the US govt goes to ipv6. Since no-one else will be using it, it will confound and confuse anyone trying to hack in!

and?

[khasim]

An internal network with no access to the internet is more secure than one with.

Since you've opted for pedantic, no, it is not. It is only more "secure" from Internet-based attacks. There is still physical security to be considered.

The most "secure" system is one that has been turned off, encased in cement and dropped into the deepest part of the ocean.

Now, can we possibly get back to a discussion of this specific situation instead of displaying our pedantic generalizations to the world?

Yes, a firewall can be cracked. But because it is a single point of access, it is far easier to monitor/secure than if all the workstations are directly connected to the Internet. Therefore, having a firewall would "mitigate" that "vulnerability".

Re:and?

[AuMatar]

Since you've opted for pedantic, no, it is not. It is only more "secure" from Internet-based attacks. There is still physical security to be considered.

Hence more secure, and not "totally secure".

Yes, a firewall can be cracked. But because it is a single point of access, it is far easier to monitor/secure than if all the workstations are directly connected to the Internet. Therefore, having a firewall would "mitigate" that "vulnerability".

Yes, it would mitigate the risk. For many government computers, thats still an unacceptable level of risk. If a buisness/government computer doesn't have good reason for internet access, it shouldn't have it. A better solution is to give those people 2 computers, one on the internet and not the internal network, the other reversed.

Its not about who did it

[in2mind]

Its not about whether the chinese or japanese did it. Its about whether the commerce dept knows enough to protect itself or not.

Re:Its not about who did it

[ScentCone]

Its not about whether the chinese or japanese did it. Its about whether the commerce dept knows enough to protect itself or not.

It's not really an either/or thing. Yes, that bureau at Commerce needs to get its act together, of course. But it's actually very helpful to understand which spots around the world seem to be the largest sources of invasive nastiness, especially as it relates to economic/industry targets. Totally unscientific: of the many machines and networks I see administratively, the number that seem to be getting extra special Chinese h@x0r attention these days has gone way, way up. And it's getting a lot more sophisticated than it used to be.

Re:The Army Got Smart

[rabbit994]

Nice job linking to extremely old article. Before you go spouting off facts, you could check netcraft.

http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/graph?site=goarmy.co m

http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/graph?site=www.us.ar my.mil

Been running on Solaris for years. I'm sure your buddy Steve is happy your still drinking the kool-aid.

fight back

[ExploiT1001]

If they say it's most likely state sponsored hack attacks, why not fight back with state sponsored hack attacks, i doubt government agencies have people hacking away at china, and if they do, they arent doing it very well...why not supply the hacker community with what to attack and offer incentives for any help?

Re:fight back

[Ignis Flatus]

If you really want to fight back, then the best thing to do is actually let them think they're getting in. Leave a few insecure holes here and there and plant some misinformation. If you're clever enough, then you can even use that misinformation to gain an advantage against them.

You don't understand "security", do you?

[khasim]

Hence more secure, and not "totally secure".

By that "logic", a house with a 10' hole next to the open front door is "less" "secure" than the same house with the front door closed and locked.

No, it is not.

Yes, it would mitigate the risk.

Which is what I said that you had previously taken exception to.

For many government computers, thats still an unacceptable level of risk.

And for others it is an acceptable risk. What is it with you and the pedantic generalizations?

If a buisness/government computer doesn't have good reason for internet access, it shouldn't have it.

Again with the pedantic generalization. Do you have ANY evidence that these workstations are not used to access legitimate web-based resources?

A better solution is to give those people 2 computers, one on the internet and not the internal network, the other reversed.

You even get your pedantic generalizations wrong.

Back in the old days, when computers weren't networked, we still had a virus problem that was spread from computer to computer via floppy disks. Having 2 computers available means "sneaker-net" would be easy. Not to mention that it depends upon ALWAYS getting the cables correct.

Why not just put those extra $$DOLLARS$$ into locking down the desktops, setting up the firewall and monitoring the traffic?

It's not like we don't have all those technologies TODAY. Look up "snort" and SELinux for starters.

Re:You don't understand "security", do you?

[cbiltcliffe]

By that "logic", a house with a 10' hole next to the open front door is "less" "secure" than the same house with the front door closed and locked.

No, it is not.

If, in your piss-poor analogy here, you mean that the front door is the firewall, and the 10' hole is the physical security issues, then you don't understand computer security in the least.

Physical access is an issue, yes, but physical access can only be accomplished by something in the same physical location. (You're saying duuh, but think about it.)

The front door can be opened by anyone, anywhere in the world, without you even necessarily knowing they were there. So, locking the front door would prevent 99.9% of people from breaking in, because it would stop everybody who didn't have physical access to your equipment. The only people you have to worry about are people who can get into the building. In the case of government buildings, they're usually at least somewhat secure.

Another fake news?

[zitintheass]

There is no source cited etc. no example shown, no logs etc. only that "new york post" said that. If true, is that department admiting idiocy? Even simple rule on the router that restricts whole **ina IP block to only certaing data resources could do the job. Keeping us scary they want. Fear agenda again?

Re:Another fake news?

[SRA8]

Keep in mind that the New York Post is half tabloid.

"secure" does not mean "inaccessible"

[Vainglorious Coward]

Since you've opted for pedantic...The most "secure" system is one that has been turned off, encased in cement and dropped into the deepest part of the ocean

Congratulations on choosing the pedantic option. Commiserations on your failed definition. The system you describe would not be appropriatelyavailable, which is a fundamental quality of a "secure" system

DON'T BE RIDICULOUS

[Anonymous Coward]

ARE YOU CRAZY OR SOMETHING? let's not let obvious facts such as these get in the way of a good xenophobic rant and/or nationalistic orgy

Re:DON'T BE RIDICULOUS

[sgt_doom]

What the hell's wrong with a Xeno orgy (or was her name Xena????)?

Re:DON'T BE RIDICULOUS

[Jesus_666]

XenoPHOBIC. You know how "hydrophobic" means that something can't mix with water? How good would a Xena party that can't even mix with Xena be?

Sheesh, some people really can't see the obvious.

I'm curious.

[fuego451]

A bit off topic but I wonder how many of you /.ers get port scans from China based computers on a regular basis, as I do. The scans are alway for port 88, presumably looking for kerberos keys, and always from computers behind the same IP servers in Beijing. I've never sent the IP a complaint, even though they list an abuse email address, because I'm sure nothing would be done.

Re:I'm curious.

[CompMD]

I constantly get scanned and have break-in attempts on port 22. However I beefed up my security and don't get as many people trying. I sort of miss those "the following host has been blocked" emails my IDS would give me.

Re:I'm curious.

[Teppic_52]

90% of my port 22 brute force attempts are from Chinese IPs too, I thought they might be just trying to tunnel through to read the BBC news website, but that iptables TARPIT patch is too cool to not use.

Re:I'm curious.

[ScrewMaster]

I get scans from China, and a lot from India. Also, I get continual attempts to get in on my FTP server. I had one guy from an Indian IP address that spent days trying to guess a password. I finally set up a dummy account with a simple password and let him guess it. He came in, looked around for a while, saw a bunch of Gutenberg Project text files that I left him, and went away again. Hasn't been back since. Weird.

HELLO!

[linefeed0]

Welcome to http://www.worm.com !

Hacked by Chinese!

oops

[fuego451]

I said IP when I ment ISP. Also, my router ignores these requests but logs the pertinent information, of course.

I don't believe this because..

[c0d3r]

There is no reason for these databases to be physically connected to the outside world, or even allow physical installation of untrusted software or hardware. Its probably just a sand box instance that they allowed them to pierce for intelligence reasons, with a nice feed of propaganda. If it is accessable in this manner, they deserve the intrusion.

Why not use most secure operating system?

[zymano]

openbsd ?

This whole thing is fishy.

Re:Why not use most secure operating system?

[commodoresloat]

This whole thing is fishy.

A reference to the mascot perhaps?

Re:Why not use most secure operating system?

[eklitzke]

OpenBSD is the most secure operating system? Definitely not. OpenBSD would probably merit no more than a C2 Rating. In reality, most highly secure government computers are running Trusted Solaris.

I've banned China's netblocks outright

[Sycraft-fu]

Well ok I should be more clear, I've banned the blocks allocated to an ISP which I'm told is the Chinese state ISP. The reason is that I get no legit traffic, tons and tons of hack attempts, and they just ignore abuse e-mails, including those translated to Chinese.

That's the real answer to this problem. If particular ISPs refuse to behave, just start banning them. I mean sure, all ISPs will have people who act bad, but if you contact them and get no response and if the bad/good ratio is vastly (or completely) slanted to bad just ban them. Eventually they'll have access to little enough of the Internet that they'll really have no choice but to reform, or it won't matter because for all intents and purposes they won't be a part anyhow.

It's really not asking too much for ISPs to respond to abuse complaints. I remember one time I found my net connection off. Called the ISP, apparently I had a computer spewing worm traffic. Questioned my roommates and the system was located (unpatched Win 2000 will do that). Got it cleaned, they let me back on. That's how it should work. You get an e-mail saying there's abuse, you check you logs, if there is you shut off access. We have to do it at work from time to time. Usually an infected laptop but sometimes someone being malicious.

For ISPs/companies that won't, fuck it, ban them.

Re:I've banned China's netblocks outright

[sumdumass]

I lost an account because of a chinese ip addressed hack attempt once. Well kind of.

It was at a small law firm with 4 workstations, A windows server, and a linux file server. The network would slow way down at times. Finaly I installed SNORT and saw someone was able to bypass the Dlink router used to distribute the cable internet and act like a firewall, take control of the microsoft server wich just did email and had a blackberry type program that could page, forward email to a cell phone and send automated appointment warnings.

I think the dlink needed a firmware upgrade or needed replace with one that could be upgraded. It was an old one and I couldn't get permision to spend money on it. I thought they got in on the three internet facing ports forwarded from the windows server but someone ended up placing the linux server and the windows server in a DMZ type situation. After the second or third time of changing everything to were only specific ports were forwarded and investigating slow network performance issues to find it switched back, I was told they were buying new Dells and Dell was going to set everything up. I wouldn't be needed anymore.

About a month or so later, A guy was refered to me to rebuild a linux server that all the sudden wouldn't boot. After agreeing to help him, he started talking about some asshole who he weasled a job from because he was only opening ports for some windows box the network would slow down so he would put it in a DMZ zone and every thing was ok. He said they called him first because he was closer and called the other guy afterwards. He said the other guy just couldn't do anything right.

Well, when he delivered the box, I noticed it loked familier, sure enough it was the one from the law firm, and all the trash talking this guy just did was about me. The server was down because the /tmp partition was full with snort logs after cron failed to run. I ran the logs over to a friend who suggested installing it and he says the situation went like this. Several chinese assigned ip adresses tryed to get access to the router, after about an hour or so, the router was opened exposing the two servers, the addresses increased several fold and eventualy access to both servers were evident. Then the number of IP addresses would drop to a couple and steady access was logged to both servers over a period of a month or so. I explain to this kid what was going on and before I remebered to tell him who i was, he imeadietly started blaming it on the old IT guy (me)

I was asked to replace this new guy. Actualy, I think I was expected to work along side him, he was related to one of the partners. Of course i refused and added that I felt he was slandering my good name for the reasoning. I also stated that if that didn't stop, I would take action against them and him. I still have all the evidence of what had happened and managed to record this asshat blaming it all on me.

Re:The Army Got Smart

[NineNine]

Uuum... who cares? It's a web server. Unless you're Amazon.com or Google.com, a web server isn't a praticularly important piece of anybody's infrastructure.

Personal or Gov't?

[Tablizer]

I doubt there is any way to be sure, but let's not forget that it could be individuals responsibile instead of the Chinese gov't.

Re:Personal or Gov't?

[enharmonix]

I doubt there is any way to be sure, but let's not forget that it could be individuals responsibile instead of the Chinese gov't.

Unfortunately, that rarely tends to be the case in communist regimes...

Re:The Army Got Smart

[Danga]

Does it suprise you he posted something like that when his handle is Macdaffy and he has a link to the website (and probably his business or where he works) called coffeemac.com.

Mac fanboys are the worst of all the fanboys IMO, they will always bring up how "superior" Mac's are no matter what, even if bringing it up is not relevant such as this case. The one area Mac's truly are superior at is graphic/video editing/authoring, other than that you can get much more functionality at a much lower price with an ordinary PC running Windows and/or Linux. Mac's are only "cool" to people who have them, the rest of us just sit back and laugh at the people getting ripped off by Apple (although Apple is getting better about prices) when all they need is a machine that can render some webpages and do some word processing.

Oh and before some Mac fanboy replies saying OSX is sooo secure and they never get malware I hope they realize that someone running Linux can get just as much security and even a Windows box is relatively easy to keep secure and malware free. Another reason Mac's are "more secure" is because almost nobody cares to target them (or Linux) since attacking Windows machines yields better results just by the sheer volume of users (although bad security on the users end helps the attackers too).

Why the Chinese will win

[Tablizer]

Their population is more than 3-times that of the US's. In an all-out hacker war, the nation with the biggest population would most likely win.

Re:Why the Chinese will win

[Darkman, Walkin Dude]

Their population is more than 3-times that of the US's. In an all-out hacker war, the nation with the biggest population would most likely win.

In a world where a lone hacker can compromise tens of thousands of machines and turn them into a bot net, I beg to differ.

Re:Why the Chinese will win

[sgt_doom]

They've had a considerably larger population than anyone else for most of the past 15 centuries -- so you've decided it will finally have some sort of benefit, have you? Your logic is somewhat weak.....

Re:The Army Got Smart

[MacDaffy]

First of all, I was working at Apple when the Army made its change to Webstar. Since I retired from the company in 2001, a) EXCUUUUSE MEEE for being a little behind on current news and b) I got your "fanboy" swinging right here. I'm part of the original equipment, bitch, and whether you like it or not, Macs have NEVER been as susceptible to hacking as PC's are. I adopted the Mac platform in December of 1987 and from that day to this one I have not spent ONE CENT on measures to keep me safe from viruses, malware, spyware, trojans, bots, or any of the crap the average PC user has to guard against. I plug my Mac directly into my cable modem and I don't worry about it. If you use Windows, you shouldn't do that. Ever. If you say otherwise, you expose yourself as a wet-behind-the-ears, I've-got-a-pantload ID10T.

The point is that the Army made the change. The point is that they're not using Windows any more.

That "fanboy" term is a bitter acknowledgement that we're busy surfing wherever we please while you're either de-fleaing your system or begging for drivers and software that you don't get to have. Wallow in it. Revel in it. You are coolness personified.

I'll go back to my utopia now.

Microsoft should be charged

[toby]

Another WINDOWS story, but no mention in headline. If you want this to stop, go after the enabling technology. Take them to court, lock them up, or at least change to a secure alternative.

Re:Microsoft should be charged

[TrancePhreak]

I think you're off target. Take the person responsible for the machine and put them at fault. Any machine can be comprimised if you don't put proper security measures in place.

In Soviet Russa

[c0d3r]

Soviet Russia Joke someone please.

Re:In Soviet Russa

[Kingrames]

In Soviet Russa, Joke misspell you!

Re:In Soviet Russa

[sgt_doom]

In Communist China, the State hacks into you.

This is why....

[NubKnacker]

...we don't use computers for commerce in third world countries.

Honeypots?

[CodeBuster]

Perhaps some not too obvious honeypots should be left lying around next time so that we can get a better look at their attack methods when they come back and they will be back. Then we can catch them with their red hands stuck in the fortune cookie jar.

That's more true than you think

[Travoltus]

In the US, globalist free trade advocates would rather trade with people that are attacking us, than take the necessary steps to sanction them and defend our country from them.

They start throwing out off topic words like "protectionism" and "nativism", which when you ask them what it all means, alarmingly resembles "concern for national security" and "patriotism".

Ah, patriotism, that evil word. The notion that, just as caring for your family is more important than caring for someone else's, so is taking care of your country first.

Globalism. Another word for "screw national sovereignty, screw your own citizens, let's transfer all our wealth elsewhere". See: the national deficit and the national debt.

Re:That's more true than you think

[Darkman, Walkin Dude]

Globalism. Another word for "screw national sovereignty, screw your own citizens, let's transfer all our wealth elsewhere". See: the national deficit and the national debt.

Okay so, lets take a hypothetical situation. Lets say the US government applies a new law to state that all foreign workers must receive US-equivalent wages and benefits. The net result is that it makes no sense for companies to offshore anymore, except in cases where specific resources can't be found locally and it costs too much to transport them.

However, now you have companies moving to Europe and Australia, where these new laws don't apply, and reselling their goods for cheaper in America than American companies can make them. So what's a benevolent government to do? Apply tariffs to these goods, or simply ban their sale entirely? So then, these companies go elsewhere, and they do. Meanwhile, US companies can't sell their goods abroad, because they cost too much. Thus, non-US companies have a massive competitive advantage.

It doesn't take a genius to see that this situation would utterly ruin the US economy. Ban all imports and have effectively no exports, while the rest of the world surges ahead? You may as well accept globalism and work within it. Its a fact thats not going to go away until the third world catches up fully with the first world. That process is accelerating largely due to globalism, happily.

On the other hand, don't be too concerned about China. Globalism is a double edged sword. They have one single advantage, and that is cheap labour. If and when they get too uppity or expensive, corporations will shift to places like the Philipines and Cambodia.

Re:That's more true than you think

[Travoltus]

1) If we continue to accept globalism, the US economy is ruined anyway. The global race for the bottom must eventually hit the rocks, because there is only so far wages can drop before the unrelenting cost of living becomes unbearable.

2) US companies already can't sell their goods abroad - or, more specifically, we're running a global trade deficit large enough to have its own gravitational field. Exactly what do we have to lose here?

3) US laws that tariff all goods made in sweatshop / undemocratic nations don't have that effect. If that law is put in place consistently, you can't undercut US companies in the US - not if you're Chinese, not if you're German, or British. Your rebuttal makes no sense - if Nike and its sweatshop operations moves to Singapore, they still have to deal with the tariff. If a Chinese Nike tries to undercut them, they too have to deal with the tariff. And if China decides not to buy any US goods... so what? We're in a deficit with them already! I propose that you don't even come into the US market unless you are an ethical player. Who's then going to undercut ethical companies in the US?

Oh, wait, offshoring to Europe won't hurt us as much because a) they also offshore heavily to us; and b) they have excellent worker protections and they're democratic.

4) Free trade with sweatshop nations / undemocratic regimes is going to ruin us any way. They're owning all our debt and they can also embargo us. (Oh yes, I know you think that despotic foreign nations can't embargo us. The 1970s and the oil embargo was all a lie. Sillyme.) Furthermore, we're transferring gobs of wealth to these monsters, impoverishing America and giving the world's most powerful enemies of freedom our cutting edge industrial capacity to boot. Germany should have sold us cheap shoes made of Jew labor, they would have won World War II with the help of the "surrender to globalism" agenda: there is nothing in your rhetoric that would provide for stopping them.

5) Free trade with nations that are attacking the United States will also lead to our annihilation. They can strike with impugnity, and others will follow.

Your theory is that fighting globalism leads to ruin. The facts say that giving into globalism leads to ruin anyway. I say die fighting; you say die in supplication.

Re:That's more true than you think

[Darkman, Walkin Dude]

The global race for the bottom must eventually hit the rocks, because there is only so far wages can drop before the unrelenting cost of living becomes unbearable.

No, the mark that globalism leaves behind it is higher wages for the previously third world countries. Its already extant in India. So instead of lowering wages in first world countries, its increasing wages in poorer countries. Might take a while, but it gets there.

US companies already can't sell their goods abroad - or, more specifically, we're running a global trade deficit large enough to have its own gravitational field. Exactly what do we have to lose here?

About 25% of the economy of my own country, Ireland, is composed of American multinationals, like Dell, Microsoft, Medtronic, Boston Scientific and so on, exporting to the half billion citizens of the EU. I'd say you have quite a lot to lose. I know we do.

Your rebuttal makes no sense - if Nike and its sweatshop operations moves to Singapore, they still have to deal with the tariff.

Thats because you are seeing the US as the sole export destination. There are many other places to earn just as much money. What I am saying is that if these tariffs were in place, people would just not bother to even do business with the US. No profit in it.

Free trade with sweatshop nations / undemocratic regimes is going to ruin us any way.

Politically its not a great idea to outsource everything, naturally. However you need to realise that a strong economy leads to the growth of a middle class, which is the downfall of dictators everywhere. You'll note that not many countries are dealing with places in Africa, where the cash won't go to the workers, but to the fuhrer du jour.

They're owning all our debt

Have you ever heard the saying, if you owe the bank a thousand dollars, its your problem, but if you owe the bank a hundred million, that's the banks problem? After a certain point, ownership of debt becomes an interdependant realtionship; they need to see the US economy succeed, or they will never get their money back. And the more money they lend, the more dependant they are.

5) Free trade with nations that are attacking the United States will also lead to our annihilation. They can strike with impugnity, and others will follow.

No, you won't be annihilated. Maybe equalised. Although I do believe that these nations should be slapped hard on the wrists for their activities; I'm no fan of the Chinese government, thats for sure.

I say die fighting; you say die in supplication.

Oh grow up. The world may be what we make it, but we have to live in it too. You want my advice, open a software house in Bangalore.

Re:That's more true than you think

[DavidTC]

No, the mark that globalism leaves behind it is higher wages for the previously third world countries. Its already extant in India. So instead of lowering wages in first world countries, its increasing wages in poorer countries. Might take a while, but it gets there.

That works in free and democratic countries like India, where workers are free to do whatever they want. If we required the same safety standards and whatnot (1), and actually taxed companies there providing services here, just like they should tax companies here providing services there, there would be no problem. There are already huge areas that you can't tell apart from other first world countries, which means that manufacturers move to poorer areas, which raises them up, etc, etc... It's working fine, and in fifty years or so we'll have a fairly serious competitor in the world economy. We just need to make sure politicans don't operate India at the expense of the Indian people for American businesses, but considering we can't seem to stop them from operating the US that way, we're probably going to have to deal with that problem locally first.

However, that doesn't apply to China and other communist countries. What happened with Russia proves we shouldn't just ignore them, and trading and openness can be good, but if you think that enough money from the US gets passed to workers in China to raise their standard of living you have another think coming.

Workers in non-open countries are essentially, slave laborers. Your logic is like attempting to free pre-Civil War slaves by buying a lot of cotton from slave-owners, thus the slave's standard of living will go up and they will eventually be able to afford a better life. That doesn't make a lot of sense.

And, yes, we are not the only country in the world, and others could, indeed, trade with them. Pre-Stupid-War, we had some influence on the global community, but we can still offer other countries incentives,and a lot of places already don't want to trade with China or have such small economies it doesn't matter. Instead, we offer China incentives for...I have no idea.

1) Bhopalm India, was the site of the most horrific industrial accident ever, caused by an American company, United Carbine, due to cutting corners on their almost non-existent safety systems. And we've still refused to extradite the people responsible to India, and India is so deep in their pockets they aren't pressing the matter of 15,000 charges of manslaughter! If they'd killed Americans, the entire company would have been sued to the ground.

Re:That's more true than you think

[Darkman, Walkin Dude]

It's working fine, and in fifty years or so we'll have a fairly serious competitor in the world economy.

Why do you see them as a competitor? Sounds to me like Disneyland for American businesses. A billion new people with plenty of money to spend?

However, that doesn't apply to China and other communist countries... but if you think that enough money from the US gets passed to workers in China to raise their standard of living you have another think coming.

This is flat out wrong. Not only do I think that, I know that for a fact. Thats why they are having to keep their currency artificially low to keep their goods low. If the yuan were to be valued at its actual value, the price of Chinese goods would rise 30-40%. What you described as happening in India is exactly whats happening in China. China is not a communist country, its a capitalist fascist dictatorship with trimmings of communist propaganda.

Your logic is like attempting to free pre-Civil War slaves by buying a lot of cotton from slave-owners, thus the slave's standard of living will go up and they will eventually be able to afford a better life.

Um, no, the slaves got 0.0% of price increases because they weren't paid. Wages are rising in the outsourced-to countries. There is no parallel whatsoever.

Instead, we offer China incentives for...I have no idea.

On a purely economic level, they can produce lots of things cheaply, so its a good idea to keep them sweet. On a moral level, you're building that middle class back up.

1) Bhopalm India, was the site of the most horrific industrial accident ever, caused by an American company, United Carbine, due to cutting corners on their almost non-existent safety systems.

Eh I offer no reasons or excuses for that. I do hope however that the laws were adjusted to ensure it never happened again.

Re:That's more true than you think

[sgt_doom]

However, now you have companies moving to Europe and Australia...

Your point completely escapes any logical premise? Why haven't they already moved, Einstein? Obviously, there are very sound economical reasons for their companies to be based in America (far too many to list here, but read up on the history of US foreign incursions and the positive effects felt by particular US industries). Once your basic premise is found invalid, there's no reason to proceed further......

Re:That's more true than you think

[sgt_doom]

Ahhh, outstanding points all, but you forgot one thing, the utter craftiness of the Chinese, combined with the soullessness of present-day Americans:

As an example, the Bodies Exhibition, where cretinized Americans pay the Chinese government to view the preserved remains of murdered Chinese dissidents! So those wily Chinese can make money off of practically anything, as long as there exists some halfwitted Americanskis.....

Re:That's more true than you think

[Darkman, Walkin Dude]

English muthfucka!! Do you read it!?

Why haven't they already moved, Einstein?

There are no tarriffs like that in place. Hypothetical situation. You might want to look that up.

Re:That's more true than you think

[Travoltus]

No, the mark that globalism leaves behind it is higher wages for the previously third world countries. Its already extant in India. So instead of lowering wages in first world countries, its increasing wages in poorer countries. Might take a while, but it gets there.

And lower wages for us. So we're still transferring our wealth to other nations. We get nothing out of this. Do you always settle for deals that perpetually take from you to give to others, with no benefit? Oh wait, don't answer that... Philip J Morris proved people can be convinced to do that.

About 25% of the economy of my own country, Ireland, is composed of American multinationals, like Dell, Microsoft, Medtronic, Boston Scientific and so on, exporting to the half billion citizens of the EU. I'd say you have quite a lot to lose. I know we do.

But I'm not against offshoring to the EU.

Thats because you are seeing the US as the sole export destination. There are many other places to earn just as much money. What I am saying is that if these tariffs were in place, people would just not bother to even do business with the US. No profit in it.

Good. We'll make our own products and sell to ourselves.

What do we lose?
*gasp*
a multi hundred billion dollar deficit!
Oh my, that means less national debt! We're so d00maz0r3d!!!

Politically its not a great idea to outsource everything, naturally. However you need to realise that a strong economy leads to the growth of a middle class, which is the downfall of dictators everywhere. You'll note that not many countries are dealing with places in Africa, where the cash won't go to the workers, but to the fuhrer du jour.

You failed to address my point. Offshoring to the current batch of despotic, worker-unfriendly sweatshop hell holes that we offshore to now, is gaining those people nothing.

China has a middle class but so what? They now have prisoners being harvested for organ donations against their will, the great firewall, and even greater crackdowns on democracy than ever. Plus they have the most polluted cities in the world and their pollution is coming here. Life is getting harder for them politically, not easier.

No country that we've ever outsourced to has gotten better - a few people over there got rich, but Singapore still has factories falling apart and killing people, and China still has no democracy.

Let's put aside your speculations and theory and stick with reality:

Demonstrated Fact: globalism bolsters despotic regimes (not African dust bowls but rather nuclear-armed dictatorships that harvest prisoners for organs), globalism does not weaken them.

Demonstrated Fact: a growing middle class means nothing without democracy.

Have you ever heard the saying, if you owe the bank a thousand dollars, its your problem, but if you owe the bank a hundred million, that's the banks problem? After a certain point, ownership of debt becomes an interdependant realtionship; they need to see the US economy succeed, or they will never get their money back. And the more money they lend, the more dependant they are.

Reality: China does not need us to succeed. If we fall apart and die today, they can just steal all our IP and go their own merry way. They've got the factories to support themselves, no thanks to globalism.

No, you won't be annihilated. Maybe equalised. Although I do believe that these nations should be slapped hard on the wrists for their activities; I'm no fan of the Chinese government, thats for sure.

Not annihilated. Subjugated. They start jerking our strings and making us dance for them.

Oh grow up. The world may be what we make it, but we have to live in it too. You want my advice, open a software house in Bangalore.

Go ahead. And when they

Re:That's more true than you think

[Travoltus]

This is flat out wrong. Not only do I think that, I know that for a fact. Thats why they are having to keep their currency artificially low to keep their goods low. If the yuan were to be valued at its actual value, the price of Chinese goods would rise 30-40%. What you described as happening in India is exactly whats happening in China. China is not a communist country, its a capitalist fascist dictatorship with trimmings of communist propaganda.

Actually, you're missing the point by a mile and a half.

It doesn't matter how rich the workers are, in a dictatorship, they can still be executed at a moment's notice and all their money confiscated.

It's done all the time in China.

Eh I offer no reasons or excuses for that. I do hope however that the laws were adjusted to ensure it never happened again.

That's the problem with your line of reasoning - you hope the laws will be changed; but if they aren't, who cares? Our bottle of Mr. Clean is cheaper because the chemicals came from India, who cares if a few thousand of them die in a chemical explosion/leak? That's the reality of globalism for you.

Re:That's more true than you think

[sgt_doom]

No companies were named - none can be named - that's the point, lowbrow....(I'd prefer them all to move)

Re:That's more true than you think

[Darkman, Walkin Dude]

It doesn't matter how rich the workers are, in a dictatorship, they can still be executed at a moment's notice and all their money confiscated.

Which leaves you with... a billion angry workers. I don't know about you, but I don't see much of a future for that political system.

That's the problem with your line of reasoning - you hope the laws will be changed; but if they aren't, who cares?

If you'd wipe the froth off your chin for a moment and not accuse me of blithely dismissing the death of thousands, like a good lad... Globalism puts money where there was none before, generally into the hands of the poor, creating a middle class. Its up to them to resolve their problems, not anyone else. Or are you now advocating the "white man's burden" approach? The poor ignorant little brown people need the guiding hand of the ubermensch to even begin to join the civilised world, is that it? The 19th century called, it wants its rhetoric back...

Re:That's more true than you think

[Darkman, Walkin Dude]

And lower wages for us. So we're still transferring our wealth to other nations. We get nothing out of this.

Immigrant workers depress local wages, not outsourcing. And as for what you get out of this, lets start with the computer you are typing on. Or did you whittle it yourself out of mom's apple tree?

Good. We'll make our own products and sell to ourselves. What do we lose?

As profound economic theories go, Adam Smith's zombified corpse has risen from the tomb and is hunting your ass. If you seal up America economically (not possible in any case with a vast, porous border like that), the US stagnates. If you want the fastest route to becoming a third world country, congratulations, you've found it!

China has a middle class but so what? ... No country that we've ever outsourced to has gotten better - a few people over there got rich, but Singapore still has factories falling apart and killing people, and China still has no democracy.

No China doesn't have a middle class. It has the nascent beginnings of one. When it has a fully fledged middle class, you won't be long seeing democracy rearing. And India is at least one example of a country that has benefitted immensely from globalism, leaving it a better place.

Reality: China does not need us to succeed. If we fall apart and die today, they can just steal all our IP and go their own merry way. They've got the factories to support themselves, no thanks to globalism.

Maybe in your universe. They haven't got the knowledge or experience to match the technology of the west, and aren't going to have it until they become a meritocracy.

Not annihilated. Subjugated. They start jerking our strings and making us dance for them.

Okay this is just thinly veiled nationalistic racism here. Kindly refrain from conversing with me ever again.

Re:That's more true than you think

[Travoltus]

Immigrant workers depress local wages, not outsourcing. And as for what you get out of this, lets start with the computer you are typing on. Or did you whittle it yourself out of mom's apple tree?

Why can't computers be made in the USA or Europe?

As profound economic theories go, Adam Smith's zombified corpse has risen from the tomb and is hunting your ass. If you seal up America economically (not possible in any case with a vast, porous border like that), the US stagnates. If you want the fastest route to becoming a third world country, congratulations, you've found it!

Why should we stagnate? We'd still trade with Japan and Europe. We didn't stagnate when we embargoed off Nazi Germany, did we?

How is it that stopping trade with China means the end of America? Is China that important?

No China doesn't have a middle class. It has the nascent beginnings of one. When it has a fully fledged middle class, you won't be long seeing democracy rearing. And India is at least one example of a country that has benefitted immensely from globalism, leaving it a better place.

I don't care how big the middle class is, when your wealth can be confiscated and you can be executed on the spot, how much money you have is meaningless.

India was a democracy before they were prosperous. And their worker rights are hell. Look at the Union Carbide situation; and their sweat shops are horrendous. Then there's also Singapore, and their sweat shops.

And you know what, you can take your pathetic charges of racism and cram them. America does not benefit from this because we're losing jobs. If you want India or China to benefit from globalism, let them do things the way we did it: make their own industries, just like we did.

Maybe in your universe. They haven't got the knowledge or experience to match the technology of the west, and aren't going to have it until they become a meritocracy.

They already have matched us. They export all the high tech stuff we have to us. How much more matching do they need to do?

Okay this is just thinly veiled nationalistic racism here. Kindly refrain from conversing with me ever again.

I'm responding, and you're going to either respond, or let your racism against Americans stand refuted and in disrepute. You are bigoted against the United States and you're hell bent upon benefitting the rest of the world at our expense.

I'm going to continue to expose your falsehoods and if you're so cowardly that you have to play the racism card while showing your racism against America, then so be it.

Don't come playing again because I'm going to follow you and refute you.

Re:That's more true than you think

[Travoltus]

Which leaves you with... a billion angry workers. I don't know about you, but I don't see much of a future for that political system.

And in China, that means a billion dead angry workers. China has purged 50 million people. What makes you think they won't nuke the dissidents to shut up a large uprising? What on EARTH makes you think they won't do that?

If you'd wipe the froth off your chin for a moment and not accuse me of blithely dismissing the death of thousands, like a good lad...

But you are dismissing it. In fact, you're dodging it. You don't even address that issue in your response below. Why? Because your spoon fed talking points Cliff's Notes don't have a reference to it in the ol' appendix.

Globalism puts money where there was none before, generally into the hands of the poor, creating a middle class.

And you forgot the second half of that: ... by taking money from an existing middle class and reducing them to the poor class.

My, how you leave so much information out of your spoon fed talking points.

Its up to them to resolve their problems, not anyone else. Or are you now advocating the "white man's burden" approach?

Good point. Let them resolve their own problem by creating their own industry! Thank you for making my point for me!

BTW: I'm not White. Thank you very much.

The poor ignorant little brown people need the guiding hand of the ubermensch to even begin to join the civilised world, is that it? The 19th century called, it wants its rhetoric back...

Well said. According to your wildly off course reasoning, they should be left to develop their own solutions and their own problems.

I'm all for putting an end to US interference in other cultures. Oh wait, now that your argument has short circuited itself, you're going to go back to spoon fed talking point #1964: throw up the racism card while showing such blatant disregard for America's workers.

Ever notice how your theory completely disregards the employment prospects of American workers?

Oh wait, this is where you take your thoroughly refuted opinions and abandon the discussion. LOL.

So What

[tacocat]

With China being the point of growth on this ball of dirt, no one is going to dare piss them off. Even Microsoft has decided to let them steal software in China but in the USA you're doing 10-20 in the Pound You in the Ass Federal Prison.

I would not be surprised if the response from our government is to send the Chinese government a list of the root passwords to all our computers with a note attached, "So sorry for the inconvenience."

Re:So What

[sgt_doom]

It's the American corporations' fault. They need to offshore more American jobs to China. As long as there's one last job left in America - it should be offshored. (Please support the US-Brunei Freak Trade Agreement - even oil-rich people deserve American jobs....)

looks like BIS workstations ..

[rs232]

"doesn't mean the hacked server wasn't using Windows, but there's also a good chance it was running Linux", xswl0931

It's not a server but hundreds of workstations. What OS do you think they are running on the desktop.

"Hundreds of computers must be replaced to cleanse the agency of malicious code, including rootkits and spyware."

"had identified several successful attempts to attack unattended BIS workstations during the overnight hours."

"The official also confirmed that BIS has limited Internet access to stand-alone workstations that are not connected to the bureau's internal network."

http://www.bis.doc.gov/ was running Microsoft-IIS on Windows 2000 when last queried at 7-Oct-2006 02:01:33 GMT

was Re:What OS? Looks like Linux

Re:looks like BIS workstations ..

[wes33]

Mod parent up! The original was little more than a troll. The idea that the commerce department has 100s of linux workstations is, while a beautiful dream, just a dream.

root kits = windoze!

[ro1]

But..are they running Linux? If they got crap installed...guess not.. Another reason our gov. Sucks.

Thanks Ted!

[bblboy54]

Apparently the the head of commerce has found a way to unclog the tubes. Now when chineese haxors put their message into the internet it won't be delayed.

another sample of distraction fud ..

[rs232]

"There is no source cited etc", zitintheass

I don't know if we've read the same text. The article clearly quotes at least two named sources in the Commerce department. It never mentions Windows or Linux. Yet we have the above and other commments coming out with: It's a fake news item, it must be Linux that got hacked, it wasn't Windows etc. We also have such posts getting modded up as 'interesting', more mod trolling.

"An August e-mail from acting Undersecretary of Commerce Mark Foulon quoted by the Washington Post said .."

Has Foulon ever denied sending the e-mails. Do you have a citation.

"Through established security procedures, BIS discovered a targeted effort to gain access to BIS user accounts," said Commerce Department spokesman Richard Mills. "We have no evidence that BIS data has been lost or compromised."

Has Mills ever denied saying this. Do you have a citation.

was Re:Another fake news?

Re:another sample of distraction fud ..

[Jesus_666]

We also have such posts getting modded up as 'interesting', more mod trolling.

Well, the idea is interesting. Not the "OMG MIXRO$OFT IS FUDING TEH INTARNEWS" ones but those thinking about how this might be fake news plantd by the government in order to make people all xenophoic. Maybe it's not realistic but interesting nonetheless, especially to those who tend to liken recent political decisions (not only within the USA) to a certain book by George Orwell.

more than cheap labor

[zogger]

For the past several years china has been using their surplus cash to buy up resources around the planet, long term heavy deals in you-name-it, oil, natgas, various minerals and metals, etc. Manufacturing takes labor and energy and raw resources combined with an infrastructure that can combine those three things into manufactured goods then you need a shipping industry to move stuff in and out. You might be able to shift just the labor part in theory easily, but without the actual factory built and without the raw stock to feed it, it just sits there. To use an IT term, china has the whole stack. while everyplace else has been concerned with next quarter's profits, they have been working towards the next generation's profits. And they used a ton of free western resources and investments to accomploish this.

They got to be seriously laughing about it over there, how naieve and shortsighted the west has been to purposely kill off wealth producing for some relatively short term gains. That's what we have been primarily exporting to them, the ability to keep producing wealth.

Re:more than cheap labor

[Darkman, Walkin Dude]

To use an IT term, china has the whole stack.

How long did it take for China's economy to turn around? Five years? Six at the outside? Thats exactly how long it would take to move the lot somewhere else. Probably even less, since the ships don't have to be rebuilt. When their wages begin to rise, watch and see what happens. Even now. they need to artificially keep their currency low in order to remain competitive.

while everyplace else has been concerned with next quarter's profits, they have been working towards the next generation's profits.

Err, is this meant to be a comment on Chinese business sense, or the culture and educated middle class that chairman mao successfully wiped out?

They got to be seriously laughing about it over there, how naieve and shortsighted the west has been to purposely kill off wealth producing for some relatively short term gains.

Yes, I bet they are laughing through the fog of toxic smoke that the west's industrial requirements produce. Other than that, your comment makes no sense. They try, and fail, to reproduce advanced technology, even when they stole the entire blueprints from the original. Yes, they make shoes and cars cheaply, but its a far, far cry from that to being technologically equal to the west. They have the grunt work, the cheap labour. They don't have a great deal more.

Re:more than cheap labor

[zogger]

Well, it took them better than 20 years to do this, and it represents some hundreds of billions in infrastructure costs in terms of money and no telling how many man years labor to get to where they are now. This isn't chump change, and this is not easily reproduced. The investment guys who have dropped their cash there want a return,. they are getting it now, so I don't see them just deciding to abandon all of that real soon after spending all this time and cash getting it set-up.

  And back to my other point, they-china- have been *buying up the access to the raw materials*, all over the planet, in locked-in long-term contracts. You could move the labor, rebuild the infrastructure over to east elbownia someplace at huge costs and with a lot of time, then try to get the raw materials to go to work, and run up against them already owning that stuff for most practical purposes. And they aren't in the raw material export businesss much, they use that stuff, both for export and to build up their own internal economy now, a billion and a half people is a huge market all by itself and takes just huge amounts of resources.

As to how good their tech is or isn't, they are only the third nation to get a human into actual orbiting space. Japan hasn't done it, France hasn't done it, UK hasn't done it, Germany hasn't done it, India hasn't, Brazil hasn't, Indonesia hasn't, and etc. hasn't. They can do "good enough" work when they want to. They manufacture airplanes, huge ships of every description (they now have the largest total amount of ships if you combine civil with military), and every sort of electronic or mecahnical gadget from cheap and flimsy to sold all over the world because it is at least "good enough". I doubt there is anyone here at slashdot who doesn't own and use chinese tech daily in some form or another. It's "good enough" at a minimum.

I wouldn't underestimate them. I am not *over* estimating them,either, just looking at the facts on the ground now and calling it like it is, just the data we have to go by. The word commonly used is "powerhouse" because it fits. If they choose to keep their currency where it is-I certainly don't see any western nations doing anything about it besides bitching about it, they are still importing everything they make and trading their hard currency for it, and we are stil seeing western concerns move factories over there, most of the big names have a presence, you can go down the list. That is the western tech being used. It's being bascially given away.

In short, they aren't going away anytime soon and will continue to dominate manufacturing and start to dominate most global trade, pulling it from the west primarily and to some extent from the other asian tigers and japan. If it gets to the point that the west slows down imports from there, it *won't matter* to the chinese because they still have that huge internal market and will be selling to places that have the raw materials they need, and customers in africa, the middle east and south america (and canada and russia) where the raw materials come from. that's more than a large enough market. What is going to happen is the west is being made un-important in the very long range, and the globalists are the ones who are pushing this, because they apparently don't care about the next generation and onwards.

Short term tactically, sure, it has made a ton of money for a lot of western people and got consumers just a plethora of cheaper products in the west, but longer term strategically-and this is a prediction so there's no proof one way or the other-it will be seen as a colossal strategic blunder.

Re:more than cheap labor

[Darkman, Walkin Dude]

The investment guys who have dropped their cash there want a return,. they are getting it now, so I don't see them just deciding to abandon all of that real soon after spending all this time and cash getting it set-up.

Which investment guys? If you mean the Chinese government (which accounts for a lot of Chinese businesses), there are similar people in every government in the world, who care not a whit that China has invested in infrastructure. Except as a blueprint on how to do it themselves.

And back to my other point, they-china- have been *buying up the access to the raw materials*, all over the planet, in locked-in long-term contracts.

Sorry now, this is the first time I've heard of this. They have negotiated a number of favourable trade deals with Venezuela, African nations, Canada, and Iran, but there aren't any "fixed long term contracts". If someone else wants to buy the resources, you may be assured that these countries will be more than happy to sell. Alternately, they might use the profits from the sales to organise their own industry.

As to how good their tech is or isn't, they are only the third nation to get a human into actual orbiting space.

Next on the list, indoor plumbing for the majority of the population. The space race is just a propaganda goal to them, not an indicator of a broad ranging and far reaching deep technology like the west. And comparing their achievements to individual states like Britain and Germany is disingenuous. They are as much as single state as the US, and the EU is politically very close to being a single state.

They manufacture airplanes, huge ships of every description (they now have the largest total amount of ships if you combine civil with military), and every sort of electronic or mecahnical gadget from cheap and flimsy to sold all over the world because it is at least "good enough". I doubt there is anyone here at slashdot who doesn't own and use chinese tech daily in some form or another.

Most or all of which was built from western blueprints.

The word commonly used is "powerhouse" because it fits.

It fits because they had a low starting position.

That is the western tech being used. It's being bascially given away.

That doesn't really matter since, as I have pointed out, you need more than just a blueprint to make things work.

In short, they aren't going away anytime soon and will continue to dominate manufacturing and start to dominate most global trade, pulling it from the west primarily and to some extent from the other asian tigers and japan.

China is a fascist dictatorship. Its not a meritocracy, so its scientists and engineers will not be the best. The cream that should have risen to the top is displaced by the best politicians and bootlickers.

If it gets to the point that the west slows down imports from there, it *won't matter* to the chinese

So you're telling me that they are going to find an equivalent market to west any time within the next century? I have to say, I find that unlikely.

If they choose to keep their currency where it is-I certainly don't see any western nations doing anything about it besides bitching about it

For now. However it does underscore just how fragile their growth is. Any nation could devalue their currency in a similar manner, and outside pressures will inevitably return the market to equilibrium. If the yuan was valued where it should be, Chinese goods would be 30-40% more expensive.

Short term tactically, sure, it has made a ton of money for a lot of western people and got consumers just a plethora of cheaper products in the west, but longer term strategically-and this is a prediction so there's no proof one way or the other-it will be seen as a colossal strategic blunder.

Perhaps. My feeling is that the other third world nations will follow shortly in China's footsteps, leaading to an overall improvement in global living conditions. There will be no Chinese domination.

Re:The Army Got Smart

[QuietLagoon]

Looks like Windows 2003 servers at the Department of Commerce.

Child Sex Slaves in the Soft War

[Doc Ruby]

In our ongoing "Soft War" with China, Jack Abramoff and Dennis Hastert are a double agents.

It's like a James Bond story, if Bond were a child molester posing as a religious gangster.

Were government computers purposefully targeted?

[code65536]

My network, connected to the Internet via a vanilla DSL service from Verizon, logs tons of break-in attempts on various ports. Most of them are from Chinese IP addresses. And unless the Chinese government has waaaaaaaaaaaaaay too much time on its hands (they are barely able to keep domestic order right now, so I doubt that they'd give a damn about some home computer), I think it's safe to say that the attacks against my system are blind, automated attacks by regular hackers trying to steal passwords, financial/identity info, or to pull me into a botnet for things like spam.

So, in the case of the Commerce Department, are these hackers "Chinese" in the sense that they represent the Chinese regime (and are thus hacking for national interests)? Or "Chinese" in the sense that they just happen to originate from that part of the world (and are thus hacking for petty selfish criminal interests)?
- Given the prevalence of hackers hacking for selfish crimes (vs. for national interests), I would think lean towards the latter.
- If the Chinese government really wanted to hack the US government, they could've picked a more useful department. Like Defense or State. But Commerce?!?!
- Attacks originating from Chinese IP addresses are extremely common, mostly because of software piracy. Because over 90% of the Windows installations there are illegal, it is common practice for software updates to be disabled (you can thank WGA for that), and thus, a HUGE number of computers in China are zombies out on a mission to zombify (is that a word?) other computers.

Commerce CIO changes

[Anonymous Coward]

Commerce recently picked up a new CIO, Berry West. Within a couple of months of West arriving, we've had announcements about Commerce/Census losting hundreds of laptops, and now BIS getting repeatedly hacked by a foreign government.

Former DOC CIO Tom Pyke is now at Energy. DOC has repeatly flunked security reviews by the DOC Inspector General (IG), known as C&A's. Story is Pkye had a crappy relationship with the DOC IG.

West is clearly cleaning house. West has a huge challenge... DOC bureaus like NOAA, BIS, PTO, Census and so forth have little in common and little reason to work together on anything or respect authority from DOC HQ.

It's just too bad ...

[ScrewMaster]

that the "Great Firewall" doesn't work so well in the other direction.

Re:It's just too bad ...

[Jetson]

It's just too bad that the "Great Firewall" doesn't work so well in the other direction.

The solution is simple: the U.S. government should put all their important servers on IP addresses leased from Rogers, etc.

When I was in Beijing I could surf Slashdot without any problems at all, but the firewall wouldn't allow me to connect to my home server to get my email. I'm not sure if they were blocking the 24.0.0.0/8 network because they think the home servers are more likely to contain political messages or if it was just a matter of not allowing contact with DHCP addresses because they can't IP-ban content that's moving and would have to use real-time filters.

Re:Were government computers purposefully targeted

[Anonymous Coward]

could've picked a more useful department. Like Defense or State. But Commerce?!?!

BIS systems contain all sort of useful information regarding applications for US businesses wanting to do business overseas, including technology reviews for export controls.

Of course the fucking Chinese are interested in Commerce. This is only one small piece of an over all plan to steal US technology and business secrets. Read some Bill Gertz.

This should scare the crap of the west. By something like 2020, China will have an estimated surplus of 20 million men over women. What do you do with an extra 20 million men who can't make babies after you've slowly, over the course of 30 years raped the west of it's technology advantage and destroyed it's industrial base? Bet even lame Slashdot liberals can guess!

Re:Were government computers purposefully targeted

[DigitalSorceress]

I agree - very nice summation.

Those Chinese zombies are probably not even being comprimized by Chinese attackers - it's probably just good ol' American Malware.

Anyone remember the simpler days when the worst the internet had to offer was a really nasty usenet flame war?

~sigh~

Re:The Army Got Smart

[Danga]

EXCUUUUSE MEEE for being a little behind on current news

You were at least 5 years behind the current news, 4 years from now will you still not know the President is no longer George Bush? Check your facts before making claims.

I got your "fanboy" swinging right here. I'm part of the original equipment, bitch, and whether you like it or not, Macs have NEVER been as susceptible to hacking as PC's are.

I don't care if you are part of the original equipment, you still are a fanboy which is a person (I liked Wiki's definition) "who is utterly devoted to a single fannish subject, or to a single point of view within that subject, often to the point where it is considered an obsession." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fanboy

I adopted the Mac platform in December of 1987 and from that day to this one I have not spent ONE CENT on measures to keep me safe from viruses, malware, spyware, trojans, bots, or any of the crap the average PC user has to guard against.

Hmm, thats funny, I have not spent one cent on my Linux box either protecting against those things. Virus/malware writers don't usually target the minority, they get better results going after more machines and yes Windows usually is easier to hack.

I plug my Mac directly into my cable modem and I don't worry about it. If you use Windows, you shouldn't do that. Ever. If you say otherwise, you expose yourself as a wet-behind-the-ears, I've-got-a-pantload ID10T.

This shows you haven't checked your facts on this subject lately either. At my work we have a Windows 2000 server plugged directly into the DSL modem and it has never gotten hacked in the last few years. At my home I have a Windows XP Pro machine that is plugged directly into the cable modem for almost 2 years and I have never had a problem with that either. Welcome to the new Millenium, installing and properly configuring a firewall and setting up good IP policies does wonders. Your Mac is no more secure than either my Linux boxes or my Windows machines.

That "fanboy" term is a bitter acknowledgement that we're busy surfing wherever we please while you're either de-fleaing your system or begging for drivers and software that you don't get to have. Wallow in it. Revel in it. You are coolness personified.

I'll go back to my utopia now.

You do realize you are just helping add to my case that you are an annoying Mac fanboy don't you?

By the way I have not had a problem with malware/viruses on my Windows XP box for over 4 years. As far as drivers, the last driver problem I had was 1.5 years ago when I got an ATI card and the drivers kept crashing my system. I got a nVidia 6800 something and it installed like a charm and has been working perfectly since. Driver problems are NOT a PC problem, it is a problem with some manufacturers, but as long as you stay away from them things are great.

What software does Mac have that I can't get something similar on the PC (disregarding media editing/authoring software)? There is WAY more software for the PC than the Mac, you are on crack. The biggest area I can think of is games, if you are a computer gamer then you NEED a PC or you will not be happy.

You can go back to your "Utopia" now, only you and your fellow Mac fanboys actually believe that it is a Utopia.

believe it

[r00t]

A worker needs access to some sort of database. They also need email.

That could be two computers on their desk, connected to two separate networks, with separate user accounts and so on. Besides the hardware expense, there would be no ability to do a cut-and-paste between the two. The worker would be constantly reading stuff from one computer to type into the adjacent computer. This would be horribly wasteful.

it's different now

[r00t]

Chairman Mao died. The moment he did, the Chinese began switching to a relatively free-market economy and getting back the educated middle class. It's taken some time of course, but they did it.

Re:it's different now

[Darkman, Walkin Dude]

Chairman Mao died. The moment he did, the Chinese began switching to a relatively free-market economy and getting back the educated middle class. It's taken some time of course, but they did it.

Chairman mao is still largely revered in China. They have the first glimmerings of a middle class, but they are nowhere near where they were previous to the "great leap forward". Maybe in another couple of generations, if they can maintain the growth.

Re:it's different now

[sgt_doom]

...switching to a relatively free-market economy...

Would you please get serious? Do you have any idea of the definition of the term free market? They do not have any free markets over there - Corporate Amerika is not a free market practitioner. Please get real.....

not just the blueprints

[zogger]

It's the machine tools, entire factories they have gotten from the west. Entire factories from the rust belt here have been dissasembled, crated up and shipped over. Go look at what they buy from the US, you'll see. It's the wealth producing stuff needed to keep an economy going, it's not just paper products like the collateral on our and our kids and grand kids labor, which is all T bills are.

    As to the investment guys, it's not just the chinese folks, and I am surprised you didn't know this, it's brand name western consortiums and banks and large corporations that have dropped *serious* cash over there over the last 20 years-those investors, and at least from the US side they got *tax breaks* to do this. Big names like boeing, siemens, stuff like that are over there "investing" and helping them build up their economy. As to the trade deals, I'd call buying up entire mines all over (and they aren't done shopping yet) and negotiating 20 year energy supply contracts for huge amounts from the heavy hitters pretty serious planning and lock-in efforts.

I've been following this for a long time now, this is just data that you can go look up, the data is inarguable. The trends you can argue about, but not past history and present reality. They bought up and now control both ends of the panama canal, they have the largest deep water port in the caribbean, they ownzorz long beach for most purposes with shipping, and they are building huge ports in mexico that will tie in to the globalists other pet dream, the new superhigways, the trans national "corridors", that will bring stuff in from mexico, that comes from china via these new(expanded) ports, and thereby by-pass the exensive US ports and truckers. That will be cutting out another swatch of middle class incomes, longshoreman and teamsters and the independents. They are now importing so much stuff into the US that they leave the shipping containers *here*, it's cheaper for them to build new ones then send the old ones back empty. This is called a clue.

Their take over in global trade is not a joke and shouldn't be minimized or made light of like it is some sort of neglible token effort, it's huge, simply enormous, and they have all their ducks in a row quite handily to keep expanding while other old world nations keep dropping in importance. And once they don't need to export to the west as much, when the rest of the planet hasd what they want and their infrastructure is advanced enough-they won't. the cheap goods gravy train will be over then.

Not that I am in favor of any this, no way, I have been speaking out against it for decades now, saying it would reduce the US to second world status eventually once they started, and everything I thought would happen, has happened, up to this point. I am more than satsified with my analysis to date, and why I am confident to assert what I assert.. You can just look at all the stats and then it is fairly easy to extrapolate the trends. Even our own national security establishment has quite blatantly predicted they will surpass the US within the next 15 years or so.

Re:not just the blueprints

[Darkman, Walkin Dude]

Entire factories from the rust belt here have been dissasembled, crated up and shipped over.

Yes, but they neither designed nor originally constructed those factories.

it's brand name western consortiums and banks and large corporations that have dropped *serious* cash over there over the last 20 years-those investors, and at least from the US side they got *tax breaks* to do this.

Aha, but here you are confusing infrastructure with industry. Investors certainly built factories and plants over there; they didn't build the roads or string up the phone cables. As I said, most countries that don't have an equivalent infrastructure to China could have one fairly easily. And I might point out that this infrastructure is mostly confined to the cities; the rural countryside (vast majority of China) is extremely underdeveloped.

that will bring stuff in from mexico, that comes from china via these new(expanded) ports, and thereby by-pass the exensive US ports and truckers ... They are now importing so much stuff into the US that they leave the shipping containers *here*, it's cheaper for them to build new ones then send the old ones back empty.

For a group trying to make the US obsolete, they certainly seem to be putting a lot of effort into setting up trade routes into the country...

As to the trade deals, I'd call buying up entire mines all over (and they aren't done shopping yet) and negotiating 20 year energy supply contracts for huge amounts from the heavy hitters pretty serious planning and lock-in efforts.

It is a large and concerted effort. However, it is not, categorically a monopoly on the resources of the planet, nor anywhere close. Also I recall there were similar concerns about the Japanese buying America at one stage. Needless to say, that fell through as well.

And once they don't need to export to the west as much, when the rest of the planet hasd what they want and their infrastructure is advanced enough-they won't. the cheap goods gravy train will be over then.

If not the west then where will they export to? There are a few factors that will, in my opinion, prevent China from becoming a gargantuan superpower.

1. The yuan is overvalued. When (and its a when, not an if) it is returned to its true value, it will no longer be as economically advantageous to deal with China. This will produce a diaspora of industry and demand, probably gravitating towards the ASEAN countries, and former Soviet Union.

2. China is a fascist dictatorship. Thats all well and good when you have no middle class, but when a middle class reforms (as it is in the process of doing) the educated and fairly well heeled have a noted distaste for fascism. There is political turmoil in China's future, and I would be rather surprised if it does not splinter into the numerous states it is historically composed of.

3. China is not, as previously mentioned, a meritocracy. The best do not rise to the top, which is why they are having serious difficulties copying advanced technology. I'd go so far as to say it is beyond them, and will continue to be so until they allow the (often antisocial) best to do their jobs. This leads back to point 2.

Chinese internet agency should be troubled by this

[beaverfever]

Beyond any concern for internal net security, the Chinese internet agency should be concerned about acts like this because of their effect on internet access for the average citizen.

Countries who strictly control their citizens' internet access route all national traffic through proxies, and a block of IPs are assigned to each country. When hackers from China or Saudi Arabia go around messing with sites, a typical response is for the victim to block that IP. Over time, a large number of a country's IPs can be blocked by victim sites.

An example: when I lived in Saudi Arabia, for a while I had a hard time accessing slashdot (and some other sites) because it seemed about half the Saudi IPs were blocked by /. Every time a Saudi clicks on a link, a new IP is used for each request, and so to read /. articles I had to keep reloading until I got an IP which wasn't blocked. (I made a list of the blocked IPs, wrote in to /. about the problem and they did fix it)

Anyways, in such cases, the malicious actions of a very few ultimately result in an entire nation having its internet access blocked. It would be easy to say that such actions give the Chinese or Saudis a taste of their own medicine, but if we are to claim to be on the moral high ground, then we should not be making life so difficult for the average internet user in these countries. If the Chinese authorites have any interest in their citizens being able to access the international web (even if they restrict it themselves), then they should be concerned about the fallout from hackers in their countries and cooperate in tracking them down.

well, OK then!

[zogger]

We both have our predictions. We'll check back once a year to see how things are going, deal?

less efficient

[peektwice]

TFA says that all this has made the department "less efficient for at least a month". So does that make their efficiency negative? I mean come on, it's the fucking government. It's inefficient by definition.

Re:Chinese internet agency should be troubled by t

[CompMD]

Its not just countries that are deemed "sketchy" in the United States that are problematic. I block 82.0.0.0 and 83.0.0.0 on my mail server because I get nothing but spam from those networks. Its clear the ISPs don't give a damn about their bandwidth being wasted or the security of their users. As far as Asian problems go, my IDS blocks an IP from somewhere in 211.0.0.0 every other day or so.

Agreed

[Darkman, Walkin Dude]

Agreed. Good debating with you.

Pebble bed reactors, astronauts in space

[Travoltus]

Yes, I bet they are laughing through the fog of toxic smoke that the west's industrial requirements produce. Other than that, your comment makes no sense. They try, and fail, to reproduce advanced technology, even when they stole the entire blueprints from the original. Yes, they make shoes and cars cheaply, but its a far, far cry from that to being technologically equal to the west. They have the grunt work, the cheap labour. They don't have a great deal more.

They did a good job of reverse engineering pebble bed reactors and putting men in space, did they not?

Exactly which advanced technology has China failed to reproduce?

As for the toxic smoke, well there you have it - America's clean air requirements are part of why offshoring is happening. For America to be competitive in a globalist market, we have to settle for the lowest common denominator - toxic skies, dangerous factories, and prison labor.

As I said, we lose in a globalist system.

Re:Pebble bed reactors, astronauts in space

[Darkman, Walkin Dude]

They did a good job of reverse engineering pebble bed reactors and putting men in space, did they not?

And some day soon, indoor plumbing for all! Hurray!

Exactly which advanced technology has China failed to reproduce?

Do keep up with the program, please. And that was one of the founders of the chip manufacturing industry in the country.

Re:Pebble bed reactors, astronauts in space

[Travoltus]

And some day soon, indoor plumbing for all! Hurray!

They have the technology for that. What they lack is the desire to provide it.

Do keep up with the program, please. And that was one of the founders of the chip manufacturing industry in the country.

So they stole some technology. How does that mean they've failed to reproduce something? We've been trying since methuselah to steal Russia's swivel-nozzle technology (I forgot the scientific name they use) for their fighters.

What does that have to do with the fact that, thanks to the stupidity of globalism, China practically makes for us every high tech gadget that we use? How can they fail to reproduce it if they're already making it for us?

Opportunistic hacking by Chinese?

[macraig]

So, Chinese are now hacking for fun and profit? Heh, I guess the Chinese embrace of anything-goes capitalism is fully complete now. A socialist hacker would be an oxymoron.

Re:The Army Got Smart

[MacDaffy]

What software does Mac have that I can't get something similar on the PC (disregarding media editing/authoring software)? There is WAY more software for the PC than the Mac, you are on crack. The biggest area I can think of is games, if you are a computer gamer then you NEED a PC or you will not be happy.

I'm typing this on a MacBook. I've got Parallels installed running Windows XP SP2. I can install Linux on an additional virtual machine.

You were saying?

Replacing Systems

[Monsuco]

Hundreds of computers must be replaced to cleanse the agency of malicious code, including rootkits and spyware.

They could just format, but then again, you dont get to use as much taxpayer money that way.

Re:The Army Got Smart

[Danga]

Not all software running in Parallels works 100%, ESPECIALLY games which is a LARGE majority of computer users. You could run XP using Bootcamp and then I have heard things will run better so it is not like you would have no options but that is still another hoop to jump through.

I do find it funny you said "begging for drivers and software that you don't get to have." and then you admit to running XP in parallels which proves Mac doesn't run all the software you need. I also would like an answer to my question before asking what Mac software there is that I can't find basically the same thing for linux/windows and it cannot be media editing/authoring software since I know the Mac wins in that area?

I have no problem with people who prefer one platform over another, I do have a problem with people like you who are Mac fanboys, have to include the word "Mac" in all of their screenames/handles/e-mail addresses,etc, and think they have the best of the best and have a computing "Utopia" and must tell everyone about it. Mac fanboys also seem to try and rip on other platforms whenever they can even if what they say is no longer relevant such as when you said a person would have to be an idiot to plug their XP box directly into a cable modem. Hello, ever since service pack 2 was released THREE years ago the Windows firewall is turned on by default which does a pretty decent job of protecting a PC and that PC being directly connected into the cable modem would NOT be an issue.

You paid more money for a machine that is no better than the machine I hand built myself and I could have purchased a pre-built machine for less than a Mac too. I am able to run more software easier than you are be able to (especially games) and I am able to achieve just as good security as you are able to achieve. Your Mac is not better than my PC, get over it. I don't go around preaching how great PC's are every chance I get (and if I did I would at least check my facts to make sure they are still relevant, otherwise I could rip on the one button mouse couldn't I?) and I wish Mac preachers such as yourself would shut the hell up because nobody cares except your fellow sheep.

I think it is time for you to snort another line of Mac crack before you lose your obsession.

Good day.