Slashdot Mirror
Space Shuttle Secrets Stolen For China
Ponca City, We Love You writes "The Department of Justice has announced the indictment of former Boeing engineer Dongfan Chung on charges of economic espionage in the theft of company trade secrets relating to the Space Shuttle, the C-17 military transport aircraft, and the Delta IV rocket. Chung is a native of China and a naturalized US citizen. According to the indictment, Chinese aviation industry representatives began sending Chung 'tasking' letters as early as 1979. Over the years, the letters directed Chung to collect specific technological information, including data related to the Space Shuttle and various military and civilian aircraft. Chung allegedly responded in one letter indicating a desire to contribute to the 'motherland,' the DOJ said. It was not immediately clear how much, if any, damage the alleged espionage did to US national security but DOJ officials said the cases reflect the determination of the Chinese government to penetrate US intelligence and obtain vital national defense secrets. 'Today's prosecution demonstrates that foreign spying remains a serious threat in the post-Cold War world,' said Kenneth L. Wainstein, Assistant Attorney General for National Security"
Are you suggesting that the U.S. should produce all of its rockets in-house? That hasn't been the case since, like, the 1950s.
Also, what do you think should have been done differently? He apparently had "Secret" level security clearance, which according to Wikipedia involves the following: A Secret clearance, also known as Ordinary Secret, requires a few months to a year to fully investigate depending on the individual's activities. Some instances where individuals would take longer than normal to be investigated are many past residences, having residences in foreign countries, or have relatives outside the United States. Bankruptcy and unpaid bills as well as criminal charges will more than likely disqualify an applicant for approval. Poor financial history is the number one cause of rejection, and foreign activities and criminal record are also common causes for disqualification. A Secret clearance requires a National Agency Check, A Local Agency Check, Credit investigation and must be reinvestigated every 10 years.
> I would certainly hope that every worker in our national space and military industries would have to undergo background checks and periodic lie detector tests, just like they use in the CIA.
As I mentioned in another comment, Chung had Secret-level security clearance, which (if I understand correctly) requires precisely the sort of background checks you describe.
This story is peanuts compared to the Sibel Edmonds saga.
http://www.amconmag.com/2008/2008_01_28/article1.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/philip-giraldi/sibel-edmonds-must-be-hea_b_84781.html
http://www.maxineudall.com/2010/02/should-economists-be-sued-for-malpractice.html
Secret doesn't require lie detector. TS does. Various riders on Secret may require additional checking.
General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
Read my other post in this thread. I'm not blaming China for anything: they're doing what every self-serving totalitarian state since the beginning of civilization has done ... screw everyone else and profit by their loss. Why this is not obvious to more people is a cause for some concern.
So, I'm blaming us for letting it happen, but I would also hope that people would realize that China is not a friendly nation. They are out for themselves, and fundamentally don't grasp the concept of a trading partner: they use their industry and their economy as a weapon (and it's not being used against the U.S. only, Europe is a target as well.) We aren't going to take steps to protect ourselves from them until we wake up and realize what is really going on. It's obvious to me: I've been working in industrial technology for the better part of thirty years, I've seen the devastation of our manufacturing sector firsthand. I saw what was happening back in the seventies, and I'm sad to say our government did it's level best to encourage it.
It amazes me the number of different levels that the American citizen has been sold out by his government and the U.S. private sector, and how little he realizes it. Fact is, the United States is running on inertia now: we're living on our capital not our operating income. That is a recipe for economic disaster.
The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
And not then, either! America's post-war rocket technology and expertise came from Germany.
>Besides, I'd be surprised if we aren't doing the same thing to China, at least I'd hope we are.
I don't know. Our policy towards China has been very soft. Part of that may be the China lobby
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/China_lobby
it's sad but true that American politicians aren't always working for the American people. Foreign interests can spread money around pretty easily, although they have to use a few levels of indirection.
Our policy, especially our trade policy, towards China has gotten ridiculous. We offer extremely low tariffs on Chinese imports, while Chinese tariffs are high. We ask them to put some effort in stopping the pirating of US products, and they respond by banning various US movies.
Also, it's distinctly *not* in America's interest to be propping up China's communist regime by keeping China profitable. In the short term we have some economic ties to China that are hard to break. In the long term, it's almost guaranteed that there will be some military conflict with China, a country that possesses a number of thermonuclear weapons mounted on ICBM's, as long as the communist party runs the country since they depend on ultra-nationalist and anti-american rhetoric to maintain political control of the country.
Even though the communist party knows that war with America would be a bad idea, they've relied so heavily on nationalist rhetoric, that position western powers and especially America as China's enemy, that they would have no choice but to go to war with us in a number of situations. For instance, whenever Taiwan gets around to declaring independence the Chinese government will be compelled by popular mandate to enter into war to occupy the island. The Chinese don't perceive Taiwan as an independent country and formal secession would be perceived as some kind of western aggression against Chinese territory.
I think that war with China would be a very bad idea for the US as well. We have them thoroughly outclassed in terms of naval and air forces, but that isn't all that helpful while they still have ICBM's. However, we need to negotiate more strongly and less naively, and put some effort into hamstringing China's long term economic growth, probably by cutting them off from oil supplies and imposing some prohibitive tariffs. China's growth is largely what sustains the communist party, and a strong economic downturn over a few years would probably result in a change of government.
Sure, because lie detectors are foolproof, and you cannot possibly train someone how to fool one ever, that will explain how during the likes of the cold war several soviet agents infiltrating the US successfully passed a lie detector test, sometimes on multiple separate occasions.
You're right to imply there is heightened sensitivity toward Chinese offenses in the media; of course, that's for good reason. Some of the answer is human nature, and some of it is cultural.
If it's "always China" now, it is instructive to remember that it always used to be Japan. Honest Japanese Americans and all Asian Americans mistaken as vaguely Japanese struggled for decades against FUD per what their forefathers had done in World War II. In the 80s it was more about competitive concerns, but the under toe of fear was still strong. Only with the rise of China, a common rival if not opponent for Japan and the U.S., and as well with Japan's economic setbacks, did heightened reporting of Japanese espionage recede, whether governmental or IP theft. It's instructive to remember because: some of it is just about the human need for an opponent.
Much of the answer is also, really just about China or rather Chinese culture, if not Asian versus European sensitivities. When I say it's for "good reason" that the U.S. media is especially sensitive to Chinese espionage, I observe not only from ample public evidence of organized governmental and corporate infiltration, but also from personal experience. I've had too many acquaintances from Singapore, Taiwan, and Hong Kong as well as China who I knew were tasked to steal IP. It was a regular part of their experience where I studied (Cornell, Harvard) and later worked -- should they steal? Was it wrong? Often, family back in Asia were recruited to send tasking letters, putting all the more pressure on. It was almost never governmental at all in my experience, just corporate espionage such as theft of code, designs, chemical formulae and processes, kitchen sinks ...
I've heard less of it but similarly in Korean, Japanese, Filipino, and other East Asian circles. I'm born and raised American, and married to a citizen of India and working in software --> I have a lot of exposure to Indian culture --> IP theft is much less prevalent in South Asia than in the farther East. Anecdotally and from some academic reading when I majored in political science, it seems to be broadly East Asian but especially Chinese. I'm not saying the Chinese are less ethical, except from an especially American perspective; rather, it is the sense among Chinese that corporate espionage and spying in general is a fair competitive practice.
In the United States especially but all throughout the West, we have a fundamental cultural difference with the Chinese on this note. Oh sure, we do a lot of spying and stealing, but we generally think it's a moral wrong to do so. This doesn't mean we don't spy, but it means that when we do it, is always against a static coefficient of cultural friction; we are starting from a position that spying and IP theft are wrong.
In China and broadly Asia, IP is almost a misnomer -- ideas are not so much property at all, as part of the more general philosophical difference in which individual ownership and property are fundamentally weaker concepts over there. The degree to which Chinese spy is altogether different because the general assumption is that nearly everyone is doing it and to the greatest extent they can. They hide their spying of course, but not so much because they feel it is wrong, more simply because it is more effective when hidden. Because the Chinese execute against a kinetic coefficient of cultural friction, they enjoy a basic competitive advantage against Western entities.
In the U.S. therefore, we are not only afraid that the Chinese are spying. We are even more afraid that they don't think it's wrong, that they're effectively doing it every chance they get, that we have been largely ignorant of this basic cultural difference for decades, and frankly, that they are better at it than we are.
Expect it to be "always China" for a long time to come, and expect culturally American, ethnically Chinese, and good honest engineers and professionals in the U.S. to suffer the prejudicial consequences. BG
Nothing new there. Besides, I'd be amazed if e.g. India, Pakistan, Brazil, South Korea, Japan, South Africa, and Iran weren't also active (or trying to be active) in this field.
Why then do we hear often about Chinese espionage? Is it just that Chinese espionage makes good headlines?
Well ... perhaps it has something to do with the fact that there are so many (very good) ethnically Chinese engineers and scientists in the US, in all walks of life. Due to do Americans not being interested in an arduous career in Engineering or the Sciences when they can instead aim at Management, Legal services, or brokerage I'm told. Well, admittedly the Chinese government is quite organised about industrial espionage, and it's easier to get a rapport with an ethnic countryman than with some foreigner.
So ... if we assume a fixed promillage of the population open to espionage proposals, we must expect Chinese to be over-represented.
Besides which ... it's not as if the US doesn't commit industrial espionage of itself (primarily in the EU; see e.g. http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2000/mar/31/ianblack).
Lets just save our righteous indignation for a more worthy cause and simply shore up security on projects and firms that are attractive targets, shall we?
As a military employee working for the USCG, we have two types of security clearances. The first level of security is "secret", which is what I have, and you fill out a number of questions on an electronic format and then it takes between 3-6 months on average to get clearance. "Secret" clearance gives you access to semi-restricted assets, like server rooms. The second level of security is "top secret", and it's a very thorough check of your background, but by having it you gain access to buildings that have additional electronic locking mechanisms and other privileges, including a secured data network. Having a security clearance is of course very valuable, because you can basically work for more branches of the federal government if you have one. Also, websites like www.clearancejobs.com can show you additional jobs...to check on your security clearance status, you need to know, or talk to someone who deals with security (such as a Command Security Officer) clearance-related topics.
Just because you get modded "insightful" on Slashdot doesn't mean you actually are in real life.
Security Clearance investigations are expensive. Polygraph test add to the expense.
The only thing new in this world is the history that you don't know.[Harry Truman]
Excerpt:
What changed under Obama? Nothing Good
To make things even more clear the polymer was operating below it's glass transition temperature - something that EVERY engineer of every discipline should know about since it was part of introductory first year materials science everywhere. Most of the public knew of it as well because a childeren educational TV favourite trick is to soak something made of rubber in liquid nitrogen and then hit it with a hammer.
"Besides, I'd be surprised if we aren't doing the same thing to China, at least I'd hope we are. It's a bit more difficult in our case, since we don't have tens of thousands of American engineers and students flooding Chinese companies and schools."
You have two issues in this paragraph. the first is "Besides, I'd be surprised if we aren't doing the same thing to China, at least I'd hope we are."
To that I say, "no way." For one thing, it is so much easier in the US. The Chinese people are fiercely nationalistic, in the US we practically consider being called nationalistic to be an insult. Here in China, shopkeepers and schoolteachers frequently report my location and activities to the police for fear that I may be a spy.
I know men who have gone to the US in order to observe (I hesitate to use the word study only because too many people associate that word with something that is done in school) US methods and practices in various industries. That simple does not happen in China. A visa would not be granted for that purpose, it is called spying and for philosophical purposes (which the Chinese think is proof that we are stupid and weak; thus, thus deserving to become a vassal state)the US encourages others to spy on it, while the Chinese punish it severely.
The second issue that you raise is, "we don't have tens of thousands of American engineers and students flooding Chinese companies and schools."
As far as companies, the reason is twofold. First, it is nearly impossible for a foreigner to get a work permit (They are almost limited to import/export companies and education. Remember, a foreigner can not own a business in China) , remember the fiercely nationalistic part? Even if a foreigner did get a work permit, the racism within China would severely limit the foreigners job opportunities (the racism applies within groups of Chinese and severely limits the non-Han Chinese also).
The second reason is simply that westerners would not work under the Chinese system for long. I know people who have worked at Chinese import/export firms and once their contracts were up they left. While the stories often featured physical and sexual abuse, the biggest single complaint is being treated like property. Which, of course, for the term of the contract, they are.
I have sat through a Chinese business meetings, where management spoke to employees, and just observed (yes, written about somewhere in my blog) The style is simple, management gives orders and workers say, "yes sir" in unison while standing at attention (then the workers later grumble about not having the tools to follow the orders; but, no one says that to the manager). There are very good things to say about the Chinese labor system; however, there are reasons that westerners do not work for Chinese.
As far as not attracting students, the University that I work for has played with this idea; the idea of attracting western students. Not only would it add great prestige to the University; but, it woulds also aid their students in learning about western countries (not to mention that Western students would pay 5-10 times the tuition of a Chinese student).
The trouble with this is both the quality of the instruction and the conditions. I have about 150 computer science and information technology students. They are studying windows 2K. In a lecture on another subject, I pulled up a spreadsheet (open office calc) and asked them what kind of a program it was (I teach English within computer science at a university). The answer they gave me was, "Excel." There was no understanding that Excel was the name of a program, not a type of program (they understand the concept, we had already done several similar lessons).
Even the upperclassmen are hindered by school policies. A simple example is that they have to pay for computer time, even as CS majors. This means that writing and debugging is done on paper and computer time is limited to typing and running. This limits experimentation (as does the entire cul
When have China ever been aggressive? As far as I can tell, they've only been defensive.
Tibet. China invaded and conquered it in 1950. The same Chinese government that is in power today (the PRC).
While they have not yet invaded and conquered Taiwan, they will eventually.
* There are many examples of institutional incompetence in the CIA, but two I think exemplify it:
Exhibit A: failure to predict the fall of the Berlin Wall or the Soviet Union. It was a complete surprise to them.
Exhibit B: yellowcake uranium. 'nuff said.
If a job's not worth doing, it's not worth doing right.