Chinese Military Hacked Into Pentagon

iFrated informs us of a successful penetration of US Defense Department computers by the Chinese military last June. From the article: "The Pentagon acknowledged shutting down part of a computer system serving the office of Robert Gates, defense secretary, but declined to say who it believed was behind the attack. Current and former officials have told the Financial Times an internal investigation has revealed that the incursion came from the [Chinese] People's Liberation Army. One senior US official said the Pentagon had pinpointed the exact origins of the attack. Another person familiar with the event said there was a 'very high level of confidence... trending towards total certainty' that the PLA was responsible." The PLA is also accused of breaking into German government computers, including a network in the office of the Chancellor.

Comments

Sanctions

[BWJones]

Here's the deal.... While I acknowledge that there is a potential risk of engagement (and the big Navy folks desperately want this possibility to be the case), I have a tough time thinking that China will allow the PLA to escalate this much given the financial commitments that Chinese industry is trying to maintain and expand with the West..... especially prior to the Olympics. That said, I expect more "defense" related activity in the guise of IT based attacks and probes from the PLA rather than traditional military actions in the future.

It will be interesting to see just what form the response to these sorts of attacks will take. Hard-liners will want old school military war games and confrontation, but I suspect steps like US and EU invalidation of Chinese purchased US and EU debt and economic sanctions will be far more effective.

Re:Sanctions

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't really see anything coming out of this. It sounds more like a pissing contest to me than anything else, and I'd be more concerned about their other capabilities (e.g. nuclear warheads, lasers that can shoot down satellites ala Cardinal of the Kremlin, Chinese economy) than how well they can hack into some bigwigs computer.

Additionally, there seems to be enough doubt as to provide "plausible" deniability, or it could just be attributed to "...someone's unilateral wet dream" (quoted from Enemy of the State). Seems too small to make a big deal out of, to this observer at any rate; who knows what they're not telling us...

Re:Sanctions

[heretic108]

I don't really see anything coming out of this. It sounds more like a pissing contest to me than anything else, and I'd be more concerned about their other capabilities (e.g. nuclear warheads, lasers that can shoot down satellites ala Cardinal of the Kremlin, Chinese economy) than how well they can hack into some bigwigs computer.

The problem: if the Chinese military can get enough control over Pentagon computers, then it doesn't really matter what their own hardware capabilities are, they'll be able to deploy some US military hardware for their own objectives.

Re:Sanctions

[sumdumass]

We could secure both Afghanistan or Iraq. The problem is, that to do it effectivly, we don't get the governments we want put in place. We end up with more of the same to no end. The idea behind putting a democracy into the mix is two fold. One, it lets the people have some say in how their countries go, and two, it makes it extremely obvious when a totalitarian group like th Taliban takes over and imposes a bunch of restrictions.

In the later case, it would be very likely that other countries would come to their aid if more then a minority of citizens wanted the democracy back. It creates a sense of stability even among chaos if it is present. If we chucked all that out the window and just went for securing the countries, it would be done by now.

Re:Sanctions

[vandan]

We could secure both Afghanistan or Iraq.

That's SO far from the truth that I don't know whether you're lying or incredibly deceived. The US army is at breaking point, and the situation is spiraling out of control in both occupations.

The problem is, that to do it effectivly, we don't get the governments we want put in place. We end up with more of the same to no end.

There's no such thing as a democracy under military occupation. The UN even says so.

In the later case, it would be very likely that other countries would come to their aid if more then a minority of citizens wanted the democracy back.

That statement carries the absurd assumption that some people don't want democracy. EVERYONE wants democracy, apart from the small group of people who currently have control, of course. But the majority of the population will ALWAYS support democracy AND self-determination.

If we chucked all that out the window and just went for securing the countries, it would be done by now.

You're obviously under the false impression that our aim there is to create a beautiful, blossoming democracy! It's not. It's to grab resources and set up military bases. Democracy is a word that the ruling class throw around. It's meaning in this context is, "A group of individuals of considerable power who will do our bidding". And they can't even get THAT right. But the main goal is to secure Afghanistan and Iraq, and is slipping further away from us each day.

Re:Sanctions

[fluffy99]

Exactly. China doesn't want war, but they want desperately to close the military and technology gap. Stealing the technology instead of developing it themselves is vastly cheaper, quicker and easier. The are not the only country friendly or not who engages in corporate and military espionage against the US. ANd don't think the US isn't spying on the other countries either.

Re:Sanctions

[DavidShor]

"The problem: if the Chinese military can get enough control over Pentagon computers, then it doesn't really matter what their own hardware capabilities are, they'll be able to deploy some US military hardware for their own objectives."

Bullshit, do you really think we have not done the exact same thing to their networks? Besides, this is not a movie; most military systems (and all if they felt the need) are on a private intranet. While this can be hacked into in theory, if that becomes an issue, we can simply take the stuff offline. Tanks don't need Wi-Fi uplinks to kill people.

And besides, this is moot. China does not have to resort to high-tech fantasy tricks to beat us. China has a GDP of 7 trillion dollars, while the US has one of 12 trillion. Their economy is growing at 10% per year, ours grows at 3%. Do the math, in a decade or so, even if Chinese have one 5th the per capita income of the US, they will have a larger GDP.

With a larger GDP, they will be able to outspend us militarily, without causing any strain on their economy. In the face of such a demographic certainty, the worst thing we can do is to act aggressive and provoke China into an arms race. Unlike the Soviet Union, they could actually win one.

Re:Sanctions

[delt0r]

EVERYONE wants democracy, apart from the small group of people who currently have control, of course. Can you back that up? I doubt it, because its one of the things that comes from the USA, that democracy is good and pure and everyone wants it. Like everyone wants to live in the USA.

Oh yea, just so you know, most of the 6 billion people on this earth don't want to live in USA.

Re:Sanctions

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, but we're so heavily dependent on their factories that wiping them out will probably result in an economic disaster of our own.

Re:Sanctions

[coaxial]

That statement carries the absurd assumption that some people don't want democracy. EVERYONE wants democracy, apart from the small group of people who currently have control, of course. But the majority of the population will ALWAYS support democracy AND self-determination. World history is full of dictatorships that rose to power with popular support. And I'm not even talking about bait-and-switch dictatorships (ala communism). To say a majority always wants democracy is absurd. People always want security. They always want a food and shelter. They always want "respect," whatever that means to them. That democracy isn't on the list.

Re:Sanctions

[vandan]

Would you caret to give us a proof for your statement?

Firstly, have a quick think about things. People like being in control of their life, right? No-one wants to be a slave or anything like that, do they? Show me ONE society on Earth that actually WANTS to be enslaved, as individuals. If you look at the history of imperialism, it's also the history of national liberation movements. Examples are aplenty, but a couple are: Ireland, India, even the fucking US of A. This translates naturally from the national level to the personal level. People also want to have a say in how society is run. To suggest otherwise - to suggest that people don't want a say in how the society they live in operates - is absolutely absurd. It's so clearly against human nature that I am astonished that I hear it so often - but then I remember the racist propaganda we're drowning in, and I understand a little ...

Seriously, all people want a say in how society is run. If you don't believe me, ask people. Travel and ask people. You'll be pleasantly surprised.

As for the bit about stability, it all depends on your perspective. I think people are willing to endure some turbulence in the name of achieving real democracy.

But in e.g. China and Russia, a lot of people support nondemocratic measures taken by the government when they are perceived to be for the sake of stability and prosperity of the nation.

Yes, these are different forms of capitalism: State Capitalism, and they are typically even worse than Western capitalist formations in terms of democracy. It's important to remember that in Western countries, people are falling over themselves at this very moment to support anti-democratic measures such as the Patriot Act and the rest of the 'war on terror', and all in the name of stability, prosperity, security, etc. Unfortunately, with the media being almost exclusively corporate-controlled, it's easy to get the population to rally behind some very stupid and dangerous stuff.

Re:Sanctions

[dnoyeb]

"That statement carries the absurd assumption that some people don't want democracy. EVERYONE wants democracy, apart from the small group of people who currently have control, of course. But the majority of the population will ALWAYS support democracy AND self-determination."

That is completely absurd. In the US conservatives are generally not after democracy. They want the rest of the country to live under rules they choose. That is not self-determination.

Most people's views on government is tied strongly to their beliefs and values which is tied to their religion. Democracy is not a common theme in world religions.

Re:Sanctions

[vtcodger]

***The problem: if the Chinese military can get enough control over Pentagon computers, then it doesn't really matter what their own hardware capabilities are, they'll be able to deploy some US military hardware for their own objectives.***

Not a problem. Really. Not a Problem

• First of all, this is EXACTLY what the NSA routinely does wrt to Chinese, Russian, French, Israeli etc computers. Probe the things. Look for weaknesses. Extract any accessible data. Nobody thinks that the NSA is going to take over the world. The NSA apparently can't even find Osama bin Laden.
• Nobody, not even the bumbling incompetents in the Bush administration, is going to put command and control for weapons systems onto the Internet. There ARE limits to human stupidity (At least I think there are).
• The DOD has rules about handling classified data. There may be interesting and sensitive stuff on the computers in question, but things like the Permissive Action Link codes for US nuclear weapons are not going to be anywhere where China, Isreal, or a teenager in Bulgaria can get to them.
• If you want to know what is going on in the DOD, you do not depend on hacking the computers. You get a few of your people hired as bartenders and wait staff at watering holes near the Pentagon.
• China is doing quite well with a multi-decade effort to buy the United States piecemeal. Why would they imperil that and damage both the home country and the property they are acquiring by starting a war? The US may be led by fools. China is not.

Re:Sanctions

[Anonymous Coward]

Beyond pissing off the government, you're also encouraging desperate retaliation from other groups (eg terrorism).

I believe this to be true. You'll piss off "terrorist" orgs. as well.

a fast and reliable way to incite hatred in anyone is to restrict their growth.

Technically, what you need to say here is to "repress" them. I believe there to be a difference between the two.

The popular press will tell you terrorism is an expression of "a hatred of freedom". t couldn't be farther from the truth: terrorism is so often just a desperate and sadistic act designed as a message: "We want our freedom back - leave us the fuck alone."

The problem with the 21st century and the "rise of terrorism" (so to speak) is that one man's freedom fighter is another man's terrorist. But I think the appropriate phrase here is "two wrongs do not make a right."

The Bush administration has created enough trouble for Americans and people elsewhere...

If you believe it's just the Bush administration that's created these problems, then you're the one who needs to stop believing the "popular press".

Re:Sanctions

[Anonymous Coward]

In other words, see Maslow's hierarchy of needs. People don't care about totalitarianism vs. democracy if basic needs aren't fulfilled. And they will support anyone that can provide for those needs.

Re:Sanctions

[Retric]

GDP is only one factor in a countries ability to support military spending. The real cost of feeding 1billion people > real cost of feeding 300 million people. So if GDP A = GDP B and Country A's population is 3x as large then they have less surplus capital spend on the military.

Think of it this way substance farmers increase GDP but they do little to aid military spending.

Carte Blanche

[Enderandrew]

What is the US going to do?

Nothing. Quite frankly China has tested the limits of both the US and UN for years, and neither the Clinton nor Bush administrations were willing or capable of doing anything. With problems in Iran, Syria, North Korea, oh and those two wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, the US does not have the capability to swat a fly elsewhere, let alone threaten the military might of China.

China knows they can get away with such actions, so they will. If you don't believe me, look up recent actions regarding Taiwan, Tibet and East Timor, amongst other things. China also does nothing to combat the millions of dollars in lost US revenue from stolen IP, yet we give them favored trading partner status, making our trade deficit worse.

Re:Carte Blanche

[demachina]

"Quite frankly China has tested the limits of both the US and UN for years, and neither the Clinton nor Bush administrations were willing or capable of doing anything."

What exactly do you propose the U.S. do? The Chinese are holding such huge U.S dollar reserves they could ruin the U.S. economy just by dumping them, though they would probably cause a global economic collapse and suffer as much as everyone else if they did.

The U.S. has transfered so much capital and IP to China, and we are so dependent on the steady stream of container shipping from China you pretty much have to look the other way at anything short of open warfare.

Besides which China is a Republican businessman's fantasy come true. It has a vast pool of dirt cheap labor, no labor unions, almost no business regulation, no environmental controls, and workers either keep their mouths shut or they are harshly dealt with by the state. They have one party authoritarian rule and as long as that one party is pro business, which they have been for the last couple decades, they are a Republican's wet dream. Why do you think so many big western corporations are rushing to China lock, stock and barrel. Liberal democracies sucks for business, you have to pay people more than a subsistence wage, you can't kill 4000 a year in coal mines like you can in China, you can't lock workers up if they bitch....

The new Fascist China is pure heaven for Republicans, so their is almost nothing China is going to do they are going to have a problem with including this. Most western businessman and politicians are way more fixated on kissing Chinese ass these days than they are starting some kind of confrontation with them.

Besides which when it comes to network security if you are stupid enough to put anything important on the Internet, and you can't keep it secure you kind of deserve what you get, doesn't really matter where the attack comes from.

Re:Carte Blanche

[tshetter]

But seriously, how many chineese can tell the difference between a british and an irishman?
Or a frenchman and a german?

Nationality doesnt mean much, and really it shouldnt.


But back on the topic....the US, China and every other nation has services that spy on other countries.

Im sure the US has compromised some Chineese systems but they would never reveal that.

I would also assume that the Chineese still have access to other systems, maybe in multiple other departments of the gov.

Unclassified

[ratnerstar]

DoD unclass networks aren't any more secure than your standard corporate ones. Obviously, it's not good if the Chinese (or anyone) gain unauthorized access to them. But hacking something like JWICS or even SIPRnet would be much more disturbing.

questions, assumptions

[Gothmolly]

Questions:
* were they secured computers? You know, the ones networked via fiber in concrete-filled conduits so that the physical layer can't be compromised?
* is this even a new thing?

Assumptions:
Is everyone so sure that the US hasn't ALREADY hacked the Chinese computers?

Before everyone gets their panties in an uproar, some context would be nice.

It cuts both ways

[Nazlfrag]

You know, America has tested Chinas resolve for years by sending hackers into its systems, yet China isn't willing or capable to do anything. With hundreds of American military bases around the world and a mass of troops in Japan, Taiwan and the rest of the Pacific, they do not have the capability to move an inch outside their borders, let alone threaten the military might of America.

Re:It cuts both ways

[Enderandrew]

I've seen first-hand some of the incredible technology and training we had in the military, but neither China nor the US really wants a piece of each other. That is a conflict that only ends badly pretty much for everyone.

Re:Don't worry...

[devilradish]

Lead filled though they may be.

Why?

[WindBourne]

Look, America has shifted a lot of manufacturing to China. They have a trillion dollars of ours. But so what? At this time, the chinese leadership can easily attack us, and simply bit the bullet WRT to the deficit. If they were really concerned about the deficit, they would be spending a lot of that money on cleaners for coal plants, bigger nuclear plants, equipment for cleaning up their pollution. But they are not spending 1 penny on it. Instead, they are trying to get us to GIVE them the know-how. They are not concerned with the lose of the money. It would simply be considered a minor lose, if they are able to take America (and perhaps EU) on and defeat them. If they can do it with out a war, all the better for them. BTW, you should look in at CIA.gov and check out the deficit. They take a lot of good from Japan, but not from America. My guess is that they are trying to draw Japan into being dependent on them, and separate them from us.

Re:Why?

[Sycraft-fu]

That's not as clear cut as you might think. Lots of people make the mistake of applying the kind of economics that happens on a personal scale to nations. Doesn't really work that way. What we have with China is sort of an economic MAD situation. It isn't a case of them holding the stick, it is a case of them being able to fuck up our economy, and destroying theirs in the process.

There's two problems with trying to use their cash to screw over the US. The first is that what good is money if you can't spend it? What they hold, by and large, is promissory notes and bonds from the government. If the US government wishes, it can simply refuse to honour those. Doing so would have severe consequences as currently US treasury securities are thought of as some of, if not the, most secure in the world but they have the power to do that. All of a sudden that wealth is just non-existent, unspendable, especially if the US's allies play ball.

The second, and more important, is that China's economy is totally dependant on its continued growth and that, indeed even being able to sustain where it is now, it totally dependant on the US as a customer. Screw up the US economy, people will go in to recession mode which means less spending, especially on non-essentials which is most of the Chinese market. They stop spending, your economy starts shrinking, there's big problems, possibly even civil unrest or revolution. To destabilize the economy of their biggest customer could, literally, be suicidal for their government.

As such we have a somewhat stable situation. Neither country may see eye to eye and both want to use the other for their own gain, but neither is going to fuck over the other one just to be spiteful, as it would fuck them over as well.

It is not the situation that so many people online like to portray of the Chinese being able to just sink America any time they want and have no repercussions.

Highly Armed Nincompoops

[Doc Ruby]

Is anyone else nervous that these clowns are armed to the teeth, with enough firepower to destroy the world and make the rubble bounce several times?

They're not just too incompetent to defend their systems (I'm sure the US penetrates the Chinese, too). But they're too dumb to refrain from penetrating each other, or just not get caught.

These are the kinds of "brinksmanships" that keep us all close to the edge of destroying each other ("ourselves"). The kinds of stupid, complicated slap-happiness that gets out of hand. And gets into killing.

Re:Highly Armed Nincompoops

[Dunbal]

Is anyone else nervous that these clowns are armed to the teeth, with enough firepower to destroy the world and make the rubble bounce several times?

      Yes. America makes me very nervous. Oh, isn't that what you meant?

      China has around 200 nuclear weapons, compared to the US's 5000+.

Re:Wire up the IDS

[qbwiz]

Make sure you tell the enemy first, or they won't know to avoid triggering your doomsday device.

Re:Wire up the IDS

[PhreakOfTime]

Well, if you dont see any difference, I expect to see you in the enlistment line first thing tomorrow morning. And dont make up some BS that youve 'already served' because it will be a lie. NO SINGLE PERSON who has been in war, will make the suggestion to simply to go to war over a PC break-in.

And if you STILL dont see any difference, try the following links; http://theheretik.typepad.com/the_heretik/images/c hild_of_war_life_in_death_053005.jpg http://www.videos1.informationclearinghouse.info/i mages/seven.jpg

Those that modded this 'insightful' I would expect will be in the front of that enlistment line tomorrow, right ahead of you.

Does anybody actually believe

[denissmith]

Come on....the Chinese military is capable of hacking Robert Gates' office, yet is completely incapable of obscuring their tracks? You really believe that? This is another set up situation - an insider trying to scuttle a deal, or to embarrass someone, or to effect policy in some minor way, or just to get you going. I have no doubt the office was hacked - why admit something that makes you look so incompetent, but are we really to believe that they tracked down the ACTUAL culprits? Let's ask to see the evidence, for once - they never seem to have any of that these days.

Re:Does anybody actually believe

[Dunbal]

This is another set up situation

      I agree. Yet another anti-china story, in a long list of anti-china stories over the past few weeks, ever since the chinese threatened to call in the US debt when the US demanded the chinese revaluate the Yuan. More American propaganda being fed to the people, to make sure that China is slowly moved to the "axis of evil" category.

US Military could benefit

[heretic108]

Plant a few honeypot boxen around the Pentagon network, and load them up with tasty disinformation, aiming for outcomes like:

• Making an advanced US capability seem flaky or ineffective
• Making a flaky or undeveloped US capability seem advanced and devastating
• Sending the Chinese into fruitless directions in R&D, costing them billions
• Trick the Cninese into types of action that could yield up some useful intel for the US

The opportunities are endless.

It doesn't make any sence...

[B5_geek]

Lets make a couple of assumptions..

(1) That the Pentagon doesn't have a Windows box connected to the Internet with a public IP address.
(2) That the 'hackers' are smart-enough to actually hack into the Pentagon (ergo they are not script-kiddies).

Wouldn't these hackers be smart enough to originate these attacks from some-other hacked network via an anonymous proxy? (And then delete any logs that still might point to their activities.)

At the very least I would expect a simple IP spoofing to have taken place.

This was too easy, something is up.

Re:It doesn't make any sence...

[Zero__Kelvin]

"Lets make a couple of assumptions..

(1) That the Pentagon doesn't have a Windows box connected to the Internet with a public IP address.

Why would you make such an almost certainly erroneous assumption? The U.S. Military uses Micro$hit, as do most (all?) fortune 500 companies. There are an astounding number of incompetant "sysadmins" who think that an M$ certification is an indication that they are computer gurus. There is a reason why there is a joke about Military Intelligence being an oxymoron.

Are there some super-smart people in the military? Of course. Are there incompetant ones in positions of power as well? I don't know. Let's ask the Commander in Chief ... Oh wait ... I do know ;-)

Re:It doesn't make any sence...

[thanatos_x]

I recall reading a story about attacks on one of the research labs (Los Alamos, I think). Someone noticed something was going on, the attacks were incredibly well disciplined, like a good burglar - get in, get what you can grab quickly, and get out. They didn't spend too much time on anyone thing, they just downloaded anything they could grab and got out, to repeat some other time (~2am local time)

He eventually traced their attacks to a Chinese IP, after they hopped numerous machines in the process. He turned his findings over to the CIA, and in the end got what he deserved; fired, for violating and hacking the Chinese - despite the "We'll ignore how you got this information if you just give it to us" from the CIA.

The point is I'd hope we could figure out who did it.I would hope the computer experts at the Pentagon knew a bit more about hacking/counter hacking than you, and have some idea how to trace the hacking to the root of the problem. The point is that you're assuming they didn't have to do 'work' to get the information. The article doesn't state what they did, but I imagine the Chinese and US both used methods of which the actual implementations are beyond most people on slashdot.

Of course this forgets the prime rule that most people who post on the internet have a PhD in the subject they comment on.

Re:Ummm...

[MightyMartian]

I'm agreeing with most of what you say, but why would anybody be surprised that China is using its hackers to bust in to foreign networks. Everyone, I'm confident does it, including the US trying to break into Chinese state networks.

Espionage is one of the oldest tools of civilization. Heck, even allies spy on each other. Wouldn't surprise me at all if the Brits were doing the same things to the US.

Espionage, in fact, can be a very good thing for peace. The Soviets and the Americans knew so much about each others' military capacity and arsenals that neither side dreamed of an open, direct conflict. A lack of knowledge of the opposing side's capacity would have been infinitely more dangerous.

What's the big deal?

[r_jensen11]

How many Americans are in prison for cracking in to the pentagon? The only difference here is that rather than a group of crackers with no political affiliation, this group of crackers is part of a foreign military. Who honestly believes that the US (ala CIA and NSA) isn't doing the same to some other country (e.g. Russia, North Korea, China) right now?

Re:Cut the crap

[emilper]

If they are in prison, they are not "the brightest".

Re:Unacceptable

[coaxial]

The point was apparently completely missed by you.

The line wasn't "the rich are richer," as you implied but rather "get richer" as in "increase wealth relative to the rest of society." It is well known that of the destabilizing influence large economic gaps have on societies. The creation of a permanent underclass is not conductive to democracies, nor productive economies. For instance, it's well known that the wealthy have better access to the legal system through being able to afford more and better lawyers, while the poor often have no access to legal council in civil settings, and inadequate council in criminal settings.

It's relative wealth, not absolute wealth that matters to the fabric of a society. Attempting to place emphasis on absolute wealth, while ignoring the very real effects of large relative wealth disparity is a well known trick of the wealthy to attempt distract the majority poor into supporting that are not in their economic self-interest.

You really should learn some socioeconomics.