Journalists' Yahoo E-Mail Accounts Compromised In China

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Journalists' Yahoo E-Mail Accounts Compromised In China

Posted by timothy on Wednesday March 31, 2010 @12:09AM from the perhaps-it-was-smersh dept.

andy1307 writes "According to this article in the New York Times, 'In what appears to be a coordinated assault, the e-mail accounts of at least a dozen rights activists, academics and journalists who cover China have been compromised by unknown intruders. The infiltrations, which involved Yahoo e-mail accounts, appeared to be aimed at people who write about China and Taiwan, rendering their accounts inaccessible, according to those who were affected. In the case of this reporter, hackers altered e-mail settings so that all correspondence was surreptitiously forwarded to another e-mail address. ... The victims of the most recent intrusions included a law professor in the United States, an analyst who writes about China's security apparatus and several print journalists based in Beijing and Taipei, the capital of Taiwan."

130 comments

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

move along folks... by Anonymous Coward · 2010-03-31 00:12 · Score: 0

...nothing to see here.
Damn Chinese! by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · 2010-03-31 00:17 · Score: 5, Funny

Don't you know that you should do your wiretapping directly at the ISP level, like real Americans?
1. Re:Damn Chinese! by Marcika · 2010-03-31 00:30 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  Don't you know that you should do your wiretapping directly at the ISP level, like real Americans?
  I'm sure that they know and they do. But wiretapping at the ISP level doesn't help if their victims use HTTPS or SSL IMAP/POP like pretty much all Gmail (and Yahoo?) users do. Real Americans(TM) subpoena Google or Yahoo records directly over their convenient law-enforcement interfaces -- China can't do that...
2. Re:Damn Chinese! by KiloByte · 2010-03-31 00:52 · Score: 4, Interesting
  
  https is very easy to MITM if you can inject bogus signed certificates. For that you need to control a CA. Like, for example, CNNIC whose root certificate is included in MSIE and Firefox.
  Please to vote on the bug report to remove this security hole.
  
  --
  The creatures outside looked from Alt-Right to Antifa; but already it was impossible to say which was which.
3. Re:Damn Chinese! by muckracer · 2010-03-31 01:26 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  > https is very easy to MITM if you can inject bogus signed certificates.
  agreed
  > For that you need to control a CA.
  agreed
  > for example, CNNIC whose root certificate is included in MSIE and Firefox.
  agreed
  > Bug 542689 - Please remove CNNIC CA root certificate from NSS
  agreed BUT: Why do you single out this particular CA when the valid issues you raised APPLY TO ALL OF THEM?!
4. Re:Damn Chinese! by Anonymous Coward · 2010-03-31 01:42 · Score: 0
  
  This this this.
  It isn't easy for the non-techy types, but for those fairly in-the-know...
  And trusting an encryption method that, SO FAR, hasn't been publicly cracked isn't the best way to go about things when it comes to security.
  You should always mistrust a 3rd party. (sounds pretty depressing, eh?)
  The internet is just a huge mess when it comes to security on-route. Hopefully that will be fixed soon.
  Slightly off-topic, but related to Slashdot in general. (especially this comment)
  Slashdot needs a "Popular Comments" section where a post can go greater than 5 to bump it to the top.
  This is one of those "Most Informative" comments that everyone needs to see.
  It could be attained by say, another 5-10 pluses? That should probably prevent the section being clogged up.
  If a post that got bumped up wasn't the parent, all the comments in the flow of the discussion from parent to current could be bumped up. (with link to the full discussion in the main comment flow)
  I know it doesn't matter so much on this one, but when you get in to the >500 comment articles, a lot of good, useful comments can be missed or ignored.
  Probably won't happen anyway. I'll send in the suggestions though. It would really help with those people who are on a tight schedule.
5. Re:Damn Chinese! by Asic+Eng · 2010-03-31 01:48 · Score: 1
  
  Wiretapping at the ISP level isn't so convenient when the ISP is outside your jurisdiction. Some of the people attacked were based in Taiwan and the US. Also journalists often move around, so you might have to attack many ISPs in order to gain access. In this case it just makes more sense for the Chinese to attack webmail accounts.
6. Re:Damn Chinese! by TheLink · 2010-03-31 02:08 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  The real bug is Mozilla doesn't _help_ you realize and figure out that a cert has been changed for no good reason.
  Yes the way to do it won't work 100% for the average person. But the average person will get pwned anyway.
  So in this case, Mozilla should help the ones who care about security - warning people that the server cert has been changed rather early, or worse the CA has changed, or even worse the CA has changed AND the new CA is in a different country.
  But no, the Mozilla developers still haven't lifted a finger to help. Not even after 5 years.
  See this:
  https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=286107
  And comment #5 and rest of discussion.
  Quote:
  Ian Grigg 2005-03-15 12:14:26 PST
  #4. I'd agree with that.
  The critical change is when a new cert comes in signed by a *different* CA. In
  the event that this is a bad situation, both CAs can disclaim by pointing the
  finger at each other. The bad CA just shrugs and says "I followed my
  established and audited procedures...." In practice, even a little finger
  pointing will break any semblance of CAs backing up their words.
  --
  
  Too many replies beneath your current threshold
7. Re:Damn Chinese! by Anonymous Coward · 2010-03-31 02:24 · Score: 0
  
  But wiretapping at the ISP level doesn't help if their victims use HTTPS or SSL IMAP/POP like pretty much all Gmail (and Yahoo?)
  Nope. Yahoo and hotmail don't have the option to use ssl AT ALL.
  Sniffing yahoo & hotmail credentials is trivial.
  Google mail at least offers ssl as an option, and ssl was made the default recently.
8. Re:Damn Chinese! by TheLink · 2010-03-31 02:28 · Score: 1, Informative
  
  > But wiretapping at the ISP level doesn't help if their victims use HTTPS or SSL IMAP/POP like pretty much all Gmail (and Yahoo?) users do.
  1) Yahoo mail is not encrypted. Only the login is. So it is possible to sniff the session credentials (cookies etc) and do stuff like change the passwords.
  And it's not just Yahoo. None of them (Yahoo, Hotmail, Google) allowed you to use https for the entire email session, including Gmail, until the recent Google hack incident.
  The banks I use don't even allow you to access their main pages via https. Which does make it hard to get a known trusted login page to log in to the bank.
  Yes their login forms submit stuff via https, but how does that help if you've already got a tampered login form?
  2) The browser makers put in lots of CA certs but do nothing to help you realize that the server's cert has changed[1], or the server's CA has changed, or the server CA country has changed...
  As a result doing stuff securely is hard - the service providers and browser makers aren't helping.
  [1] See the discussion here: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=286107
  --
  
  Too many replies beneath your current threshold
9. Re:Damn Chinese! by Spazztastic · 2010-03-31 02:43 · Score: 1
  
  Is there an addon that warns of cert changes? I don't know how to program, but it seems that would be a really good addon to develop. I'd donate to it.
  
  --
  Posts not to be taken literally. Almost everything is sarcasm.
10. Re:Damn Chinese! by TubeSteak · 2010-03-31 02:47 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  Don't you know that you should do your wiretapping directly at the ISP level, like real Americans?
  Why would you need to when the e-mail hosts have so thoughtfully buried an auto-forwarding function on a settings page that no one ever checks?
  "Free" e-mail has generally only improved in quality over the last decade, but that one move was incredibly boneheaded.
  Every time I log in, the first thing I should see is "Your E-Mail Is Forwarded To: [No Where/Address]".
  Anything else is just pure gold for malicious actors.
  
  --
  [Fuck Beta]
  o0t!
11. Re:Damn Chinese! by muckracer · 2010-03-31 02:49 · Score: 1
  
  Check out Perspectives: http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~perspectives/
  Of course, by removing all CA's, manually/permanently accepting the site's cert you'll also be warned if it changes (pretty much like SSH then).
12. Re:Damn Chinese! by TheLink · 2010-03-31 02:53 · Score: 1
  
  There's "Certificate Patrol" for Mozilla Firefox.
  
  But I'm not sure how trustworthy that is. You could look at the source code and the data (I'm not so sure how to check the initial database/config).
  --
  
  Too many replies beneath your current threshold
13. Re:Damn Chinese! by ObsessiveMathsFreak · 2010-03-31 02:56 · Score: 1
  
  https is very easy to MITM if you can inject bogus signed certificates.
  
  Ah yes. The Myth in the Middle. That great urban legend of cryptography.
  Out of curiosity, could someone actually provide a concrete example of a MITM attack ever being successfully carried out? Bonus points for anyone who can further provide reasons for why this means Firefox no longer likes self signed certs.
  
  --
  May the Maths Be with you!
14. Re:Damn Chinese! by tlhIngan · 2010-03-31 03:23 · Score: 2, Informative
  
  Out of curiosity, could someone actually provide a concrete example of a MITM attack ever being successfully carried out? Bonus points for anyone who can further provide reasons for why this means Firefox no longer likes self signed certs.
  Well, there's SSLSniff that was used to demonstrate faking Paypal certificates (via NULL attacks in browsers). There's also the neat SSLStrip that transforms a HTTPS transaction down to an HTTP one.
  They work by ARP spoofing right now, and if you combine with the IE WPAD (web proxy auto-discovery) mechanism, you could put together a pretty nice MITM attack unit.
  And wasn't there reports of a box sold to governments that was designed to do this MITM stuff? Like this appliance? This one's better than SSLSniff as it uses subverted CAs.
  More info - http://arstechnica.com/security/news/2010/03/govts-certificate-authorities-conspire-to-spy-on-ssl-users.ars
15. Re:Damn Chinese! by EXrider · 2010-03-31 03:31 · Score: 2, Informative
  
  And it's not just Yahoo. None of them (Yahoo, Hotmail, Google) allowed you to use https for the entire email session, including Gmail, until the recent Google hack incident.
  Gmail has offered the option to use HTTPS for your entire session for several years now, I remember discovering it back in '05 while perusing the preferences. It just wasn't the default.
  
  --
  grep -iw skynet /etc/services
16. Re:Damn Chinese! by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · 2010-03-31 03:38 · Score: 1
  
  They aren't generally considered "attacks"; because they are conducted by the owners of the hardware and the connection; but a nontrivial percentage of the sorts of proxy servers commonly sitting between a corporate/institutional LAN and the hostile wide world of the internet are at least capable of such, if not configured for it. Since the corporation owns the computers, pushing their internal CA as trusted into client browsers is a trivial matter, which allows their web proxy to preserve the client machine's ability to use SSLed web services(banking websites and the like), without compromising the proxy's ability to cache, filter, and whatever else it was put there to do.
  
  Again; because this is all going on within an institutional setting, no expectation of privacy on company boxes, etc, etc. it isn't really an "attack"; but it is by far the most obvious real-world example of the technique being used.
  
  Because attacks where you don't get to push your certs to the clients with group policies would require compromising a trusted CA, that would more fall into the realm of spook stuff; but would be technologically equivalent.
17. Re:Damn Chinese! by TheLink · 2010-03-31 04:04 · Score: 1
  
  Hmm, ok I guess my memory was bad then.
  
  I thought I recalled it redirecting me from https to http when I tried it a while back.
  --
  
  Too many replies beneath your current threshold
18. Re:Damn Chinese! by Anonymous Coward · 2010-03-31 05:39 · Score: 0
  
  They dont even need to MITM. fucking Yahoo doesn't have a persistent https connection, the only time you have https is for login then it goes back to http even when you use the https://mail.yahoo.com address first
19. Re:Damn Chinese! by nazsco · 2010-03-31 05:40 · Score: 1
  
  >They aren't generally considered "attacks"; because they are conducted by the owners of the hardware and the connection;
  Yes. The one they own and you rent. hence man in the middle.
  what's so friggin difficult to understand?
20. Re:Damn Chinese! by unix1 · 2010-03-31 06:01 · Score: 1
  
  To be fair that's an assumption of the system, not the problem with the CAs themselves. The assumption is that either your Internet traffic or CA is not compromised. The point of the CA is to act as an "authority" to confirm the authenticity of the party you are dealing with. If both your Internet traffic and CAs are compromised (especially by the same person) then you do not have any other leg to stand on - you do not have security and that person can manipulate your packets as he/she wishes.
  If you want to be more secure, use self-signed certs and physically pick it up from (or give it to) the person you are dealing with. Actually, this could be a service e-mail and other communication providers could provide for an annual fee to their users. I don't know whether the Chinese government will like it or even allow it.
Is anyone surprised? by Anonymous Coward · 2010-03-31 00:20 · Score: 5, Insightful

China is a totalitarian state. Has been since 1949. What free trade has done is to make it a rich totalitarian state instead of a poor one. I never understood the argument that capitalism would lead to anything like democracy. Democracy [usually] leads to at least some level of capitalist/free-enterprise economy, but not the other way around.
1. Re:Is anyone surprised? by dkleinsc · 2010-03-31 00:43 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  I never understood the argument that capitalism would lead to anything like democracy.
  The reason you can't understand that argument is that it's complete BS. It was created to try to convince Americans that the reason our government is making it extremely easy to trade with China is to spread democracy, not increase corporate profits at the expense of American workers' careers.
  And historically at least, the system of government best suited to corporate profits is not democracy, but fascist-leaning dictatorships. That's true whether we're talking about Mussolini, Hitler, Franco, Pinochet, or Batista.
  
  --
  I am officially gone from /. Long live http://www.soylentnews.com/
2. Re:Is anyone surprised? by u38cg · 2010-03-31 00:45 · Score: 1
  
  China is a totalitarian state. Has been since 949.
  FTFY. To an order of magnitude, anyways.
  
  --
  [FUCK BETA]
3. Re:Is anyone surprised? by Gothmolly · 2010-03-31 00:52 · Score: 1
  
  +1 Insightful to you.
  
  --
  I want to delete my account but Slashdot doesn't allow it.
4. Re:Is anyone surprised? by h00manist · 2010-03-31 01:28 · Score: 1
  
  I never understood the argument that capitalism would lead to anything like democracy.
  The reason you can't understand that argument is that it's complete BS.
  Indeed. Democracy is a form of voting, representation, social organization of people, citizens, governments. Capitalism, as well as socialism, are mostly organizing methods for distributing money, finances, and perhaps labor and goods. No actual relation to government organization. Of course money and politics are related, but I think they are still separate segments and entities. Government and finance are inter-related to health care, education, media, technology and a bunch of things too, but not inseparably. Then again, every powerful entity tries to confuse things to its benefit. Every war is for freedom, peace, happiness, prosperity, etc, on the "us" side, and the opposite, plus some evil, on the "them" side. Then everyone can kill each other with a clean conscience, rationalizing it with 'Killing them now is clearly the right thing to do'. "US good, THEM bad!". Great political message, gets lots of votes and followers, from people with violence in them, which is most people.
  
  --
  Build your own energy sources from scratch. http://otherpower.com/
5. Re:Is anyone surprised? by h00manist · 2010-03-31 01:32 · Score: 2, Funny
  
  "Socialism GOOD, capitalism BAD! Kill THEM for FREEDOM!". Umm oh wait, sorry that was on the other side, whatever, just invert it.
  
  --
  Build your own energy sources from scratch. http://otherpower.com/
6. Re:Is anyone surprised? by Midnight+Thunder · 2010-03-31 01:37 · Score: 1
  
  "Socialism GOOD, capitalism BAD! Kill THEM for FREEDOM!". Umm oh wait, sorry that was on the other side, whatever, just invert it.
  Then again, neither is necessarily bad or good. It all depends on how it is run. For me the only good spot is somewhere in the middle, accepting social needs and human motivation.
  
  --
  Jumpstart the tartan drive.
7. Re:Is anyone surprised? by Hijacked+Public · 2010-03-31 01:38 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  I don't understand it either, mainly because I think the climate in China is closer to free market capitalism than the climate in the US. In relative terms China is a capitalist utopia, particularly from a producer's perspective.
  
  --
  "Sacrifice for the good of The State" - The State
8. Re:Is anyone surprised? by corbettw · 2010-03-31 01:43 · Score: 1
  
  The argument is that capitalism would increase the general wealth of the nation. As wealth increased, living standards would increase. As living standards increased, a middle class would form. And that it would be that middle class that would lead the push for democracy and freedom.
  Of course, this ignores the fact that stable democracies have, historically, been formed by pushes from an aristocratic regime focused on ensuring property rights and liberty for as many people as possible. Athens, Rome, Iceland, the UK, the US. All had this trait in common, at least in the beginning.
  
  --
  God invented whiskey so the Irish would not rule the world.
9. Re:Is anyone surprised? by Skillet5151 · 2010-03-31 02:02 · Score: 1
  
  And historically at least, the system of government best suited to corporate profits is not democracy, but fascist-leaning dictatorships. That's true whether we're talking about Mussolini, Hitler, Franco, Pinochet, or Batista.
  Uh, what? If you mean that having a rather militarist government is good if you're a corporation in the arms industry, then yes. But why the hell would an arbitrary corporation prefer having the laws change at the pleasure of a demagogue who may or may not like them instead of having an easily "lobbied"/bribed legislature?
10. Re:Is anyone surprised? by Software+Geek · 2010-03-31 02:06 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  Perhaps you need a history course. Historically, Mussolini, Hitler, and Franco drew their countries into ruinous wars, which are very hard on corporate profits. Batista so weakened his government that it was taken over by communists who nationalized everything. Corporations hate that.
  Saying that the system of government best suited to corporate profits is a fascist-leaning dictatorship is like saying Bernie Madoff will get you the best return on your investment. It is sometimes true in the short term, but in the long term it is very, very false.
  
  --
  http://xkcd.com/756//
11. Re:Is anyone surprised? by dkleinsc · 2010-03-31 02:11 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  But why the hell would an arbitrary corporation prefer having the laws change at the pleasure of a demagogue who may or may not like them instead of having an easily "lobbied"/bribed legislature?
  Because bribing 1 despot is cheaper and easier than bribing the 300 or so congresscritters/MPs needed to get a majority. Plus you do so much work to buy off particular politicians, and then the pesky public votes for someone else and you need to start over again.
  
  --
  I am officially gone from /. Long live http://www.soylentnews.com/
12. Re:Is anyone surprised? by Skillet5151 · 2010-03-31 02:17 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  It seems unlikely that the man who dominates the entire country and can take what he likes from its tax revenues is going to do whatever you ask for a check.
13. Re:Is anyone surprised? by jav1231 · 2010-03-31 02:20 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  We should have shit-canned our trade with China when Tienanmen Square happened. Period. Everything after was hypocrisy.
14. Re:Is anyone surprised? by dkleinsc · 2010-03-31 02:20 · Score: 1
  
  In other words:
  Basil Exposition: Austin, the Cold War is over!
  Austin Powers: Finally those capitalist pigs will pay for their crimes, eh? Eh comrades? Eh?
  Basil Exposition: Austin... we won.
  Austin Powers: Oh, smashing, groovy, yay capitalism!
  
  --
  I am officially gone from /. Long live http://www.soylentnews.com/
15. Re:Is anyone surprised? by Spitfirem1 · 2010-03-31 02:28 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  Saying that the system of government best suited to corporate profits is a fascist-leaning dictatorship is like saying Bernie Madoff will get you the best return on your investment. It is sometimes true in the short term, but in the long term it is very, very false.
  That would be relevant, if only people and corporations had the foresight to pay attention to anything more than the Next Big Thing. The lack of any sort of a long view and the attitude that what is best for right now is always the right choice are both almost ubiquitous in our culture and are detrimental to society in many cases.
16. Re:Is anyone surprised? by TubeSteak · 2010-03-31 02:31 · Score: 1
  
  China has endless standards and regulations.
  They're just generally not aimed at improving health and safety.
  IIRC, a recent Time Magazine article said China releases more rule/regulation changes every year than the rest of the world combined.
  
  --
  [Fuck Beta]
  o0t!
17. Re:Is anyone surprised? by crunzh · 2010-03-31 02:38 · Score: 1
  
  China has ALLWAYS been a totalitarian state, the communist takeover in '49 was just a new regime in a long line of totalitarian regimes.
  
  --
  Visit http://www.crunzh.com/ for free software. Mac/Lin/Win
18. Re:Is anyone surprised? by blackraven14250 · 2010-03-31 02:49 · Score: 1
  
  He will, however, do whatever you ask if you're increasing the size of his country's treasury....
19. Re:Is anyone surprised? by labotux · 2010-03-31 02:49 · Score: 0
  
  The fact China is a dictatorship (one party only) doesn't mean it is a totalitarian state such as Causescu's Romania or North Korea. Chine was indeed totalitarian during cultural revolution but not anymore. Thus, the people of China, even subjected to censorship and 'official propaganda' have an opinion and can express it. There are several examples where the internet crowd probably changed some rulings. Otherwise, if i hacked your email from France, what would you say about France ? Such article and the repetition of such articles have one purpose : demonize China.
20. Re:Is anyone surprised? by guanxi · 2010-03-31 02:50 · Score: 1
  
  I never understood the argument that capitalism would lead to anything like democracy. Democracy [usually] leads to at least some level of capitalist/free-enterprise economy, but not the other way around.
  There's some evidence for it: Chile, South Korea, and Taiwan are examples of countries that went from right-wing, capitalist dictatorships to democracies. The idea is that capitalism allows individuals to build wealth and make large investments (e.g., factories). Then, they have something to lose in the political process.
  They don't want the government to appropriate their hard-earned assets. For example, who will invest millions of dollars and years of their life building a factory, if the government can take it away on a whim? Thus they want property rights, limited government, and influence over policy. They also want a stable, effective government, and the track record of democracy (all the most prosperous countries in the world) is very attractive.
  It doesn't always work out, but having a middle class helps, also because they have time, skills, and money to spend on politics.
21. Re:Is anyone surprised? by MightyMartian · 2010-03-31 02:52 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  To some degree I agree with you. I have more knowledge of Industrial England than of Rome (though there was a pretty major civil war between the Plebs and the Proles that lead to an expansion of the aristocracy there). In England, at least, the people had the good fortune of a number of historical trends lining up at the same time; labor shortages at the tail end of the Middle Ages (after the Black Death) which saw a sharp increase in demand for workers, the beginnings of a free market economy being established even before the Industrial Revolution, a stable and effective government with clear lines of authority thanks to the Glorious Revolution, and, by the 18th century a rapidly expanding population, a major overseas empire that basically kickstarted the consumer revolution (this is when China as manufacturer of cheap goods to the West really begins, thanks in large part to European, and in particular to Dutch and English merchants), and, of course, the ultimate development of a middle class in particular during the Victorian Era. I agree the aristocracy in large part was responsible for the major reform bills, but I'd say that once some of the reforms had begun, it was a snowball. The more political power the ordinary people got, the more they wanted, and the more the political class could benefit from giving it to them. That's the real story, that the landed gentry in England, already weakened by the end of any remnants of feudalism, were ultimately supplanted by the political class. That latter fact precedes the Industrial Revolution, and was born out of all things the struggles between Parliament and the Stuarts over who had the right to run the country.
  
  --
  The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
22. Re:Is anyone surprised? by Asic+Eng · 2010-03-31 03:08 · Score: 1
  
  Well the claim that Mussolini, Hitler etc were economically successful was of course put out by the propaganda of these dictatorships. However after the war Germany certainly did very well as a democracy with a market economy, going from an utterly destroyed country to being the world's biggest exporter (see Wirtschaftwunder).
23. Re:Is anyone surprised? by MightyMartian · 2010-03-31 03:55 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  It doesn't always work out, but having a middle class helps, also because they have time, skills, and money to spend on politics.
  China is the great experiment. It's been a given since the the English Civil War that a middle and mercantile classes will demand, and will ultimately take a greater share of the political system. I posit that the Chinese leadership is hoping to accomplish the creation of a thriving middle class without any great increase in political liberties. Will the experiment work? Hard to say. Damned scary if it does, that's for sure.
  
  --
  The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
24. Re:Is anyone surprised? by phantomfive · 2010-03-31 04:54 · Score: 1
  
  The reason you can't understand that argument is that it's complete BS.
  Actually it's not. The reasoning behind the argument is that it's happened in a number of other countries, for example, south Korea, Taiwan, and El Salvador. Once people hit a certain level of wealth and comfort, they seem to demand more power in their government. There has been some effort to determine what level of wealth that is exactly, but to come up with a good number, we would need to run more experiments. That isn't very practical for obvious reasons.
  
  Mussolini, Hitler, Franco, Pinochet, or Batista.
  Really? Because I can name a number of democratic states that did better with corporate profits than these guys. The problem is centralization doesn't work well: a centralized organization has trouble making all the right decisions. Individual businessmen can make better decisions (in their small area) than the centralized command, because they have better information about what people want and what is needed (in their small area).
  
  --
  Qxe4
25. Re:Is anyone surprised? by Jeremy+Erwin · 2010-03-31 05:06 · Score: 1
  
  Uh, what? If you mean that having a rather militarist government is good if you're a corporation in the arms industry, then yes.
  What's wrong with making both toy guns for boys, and real guns for men?
26. Re:Is anyone surprised? by Anonymous Coward · 2010-03-31 05:17 · Score: 0
  
  China is a totalitarian state.
  I think totalitarian state is a pretty cool guy. Eh completely ignores human rights and doesnt afraid of anything.
27. Re:Is anyone surprised? by MightyMartian · 2010-03-31 05:19 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  I'm sorry, how is that different from an insurance company saying "Your patient's policy does not cover this. Please let him die."
  You anti-health care nuts really are a greedy, and yet pathetically retarded bunch.
  
  --
  The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
28. Re:Is anyone surprised? by ciggieposeur · 2010-03-31 05:55 · Score: 1
  
  Historically, Mussolini, Hitler, and Franco drew their countries into ruinous wars, which are very hard on corporate profits.
  They were only ruinous because they lost those wars.
29. Re:Is anyone surprised? by Anonymous Coward · 2010-03-31 06:11 · Score: 0
  
  BTY Did not Bush took the US of a ruinous war and creating a similar efect??
30. Re:Is anyone surprised? by dkleinsc · 2010-03-31 08:03 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  If we're talking companies based in the countries that lose the war, then you'd be correct. But in a lot of cases (including those in the 1930's and 40's) we're talking about outside multinationals, who can move their capital quite easily from one country to another. Ergo they can and will play they short-term gain in, say, Spain, then head to Germany for a decade, then to Argentina, and so on.
  It's remarkably similar to investments in fundamentally unsound securities. The idea is to make a bundle while everything looks great, and leave someone else holding the bag when it goes sour.
  
  --
  I am officially gone from /. Long live http://www.soylentnews.com/
31. Re:Is anyone surprised? by WiiVault · 2010-03-31 08:29 · Score: 1
  
  Exactly. What the GP forgot to mention is that they expected to WIN these wars, which if they had would have been insanely profitable. Or perhaps he thinks their strategy was to lose all along?
32. Re:Is anyone surprised? by evilviper · 2010-03-31 08:49 · Score: 1
  
  China has rules and regulations, they just aren't enforced until there's a bit problem. Then you, like everyone else, are in violation of some many laws you get an automatic death penalty.
  For larger companies, who can't continue to operate under the radar, the government is ever-present. You can't really have a large company without the Chinese government owning a major share of it.
  
  --
  Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
33. Re:Is anyone surprised? by Anonymous Coward · 2010-03-31 09:59 · Score: 0
  
  blah blah blah
  What. The. Fuck?
  Doctors haven't been allowed to practice as they see fit since the invention of the Medical Board. Doctors haven't been allowed to prescribe as they see fit since the War on (Some) Drugs. Doctors haven't been allowed to bill as they see fit since the invention of the HMO.
  The bill changes none of the above.
  There are legitimate reasons to hate on it, eg forcing people to buy insurance no matter how expensive it gets, doing nothing to reduce the actual costs of medical care and more. Idiots spouting complete bullshit is hurting more than it's helping.
34. Re:Is anyone surprised? by thetoadwarrior · 2010-04-01 09:25 · Score: 1
  
  Most people don't care. They love the cheap shit China produces.
Hmm yeah by Dunbal · 2010-03-31 00:22 · Score: 2, Interesting

Reminds me of all those emails I get from the head of the International Bank of Nigeria who somehow has to use hotmail/gmail/yahoo mail. Or how the "British National Lottery" also can't afford it's own mail server.
Seriously, "journalists" can't use anything but yahoo? Or even if they were limited to yahoo - they can't encrypt their email?
I suspect these "journalists" are just some "random group of people" and that the story is just more hype.

--
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
1. Re:Hmm yeah by Bearhouse · 2010-03-31 01:21 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  A lot of freelance journalists use google and yahoo, as do many people who have professional mail accounts, but prefer to conduct private and/or personal business using a 'free' provider. Do you really want a confidential source in China to risk sending info to *@nytimes.etc?
2. Re:Hmm yeah by crunzh · 2010-03-31 02:39 · Score: 1
  
  Well, I actually think security a yahoo/google and so on is better than at most small ISP's the would otherwise host their emails.
  
  --
  Visit http://www.crunzh.com/ for free software. Mac/Lin/Win
3. Re:Hmm yeah by umghhh · 2010-03-31 04:12 · Score: 1
  
  Well it is not only content of mails that went to wrong people but contact names too - so Chinese governement has surely hands in it.
4. Re:Hmm yeah by jon3k · 2010-04-01 10:17 · Score: 1
  
  Freelance journalists would use free web based e-mail, possibly with their own domain.
This is why you don't do business with China by smooth+wombat · 2010-03-31 00:22 · Score: 5, Interesting

People roll their eyes when I tell them I don't buy products made in China. I refuse to support a government with such an abusive human rights record.
It's tough at times finding a product not made in China, but I use the free market to make my point.
Some people talk the talk when it comes to making a statement. Very few actually walk the walk.

--
We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
1. Re:This is why you don't do business with China by Anonymous Coward · 2010-03-31 00:26 · Score: 0
  
  You deserve applause.
  Everytime we buy Chinese stuff, we're supporting communism.
2. Re:This is why you don't do business with China by Anonymous Coward · 2010-03-31 00:33 · Score: 1, Insightful
  
  I bet my future wife and unborn daughter that the computer you posted from is made in china.
3. Re:This is why you don't do business with China by Noam.of.Doom · 2010-03-31 00:34 · Score: 1, Interesting
  
  Everytime we buy Chinese stuff, we're supporting communism.
  And don't forget that it makes baby Jesus cry.
  
  --
  It is the universe that makes fun of us all.
4. Re:This is why you don't do business with China by Rusty+KB · 2010-03-31 00:36 · Score: 1
  
  No, you're not... China != Communism, or communism even.
5. Re:This is why you don't do business with China by LordAzuzu · 2010-03-31 00:36 · Score: 1
  
  I dont believe that the hardware you are writing from is not made in China. They have the greatest power of all: economic power. What if, some day, China stops exporting goods? The whole economy would hang, while China will still be self sufficient. Yes, they too would be hit stopping the economy cycle, but being foreseen I'm quite sure they could handle it much better than any other country.
6. Re:This is why you don't do business with China by darku · 2010-03-31 00:40 · Score: 1
  
  I would refuse to buy products that use patented stuff if I were you. Then all of your furniture would be made out of wood by gypsies on the side of the road, right?
  
  --
  Just the Programmer P.O.V.
7. Re:This is why you don't do business with China by Anonymous Coward · 2010-03-31 00:41 · Score: 3, Funny
  
  I carved it myself, out of a solid lump of silicon.
8. Re:This is why you don't do business with China by east+coast · 2010-03-31 00:42 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  This is all the more reason to actively avoid their product; so that we can make it profitable for other countries to take up the production of items that only seem to sell at the lowest price point possible. It may cost us a little today but in the long run we won't be so attached to one provider that we have to put up with their abusive nature if we need to "cut the cord."
  
  --
  Dedicated Cthulhu Cultist since 4523 BC.
9. Re:This is why you don't do business with China by Jaysyn · 2010-03-31 00:42 · Score: 1
  
  May I ask what brand of computer you are using that has no components made in China?
  
  --
  There is a war going on for your mind.
10. Re:This is why you don't do business with China by dr-alves · 2010-03-31 00:47 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  Very true.
  
  People seem to think of China as this troublesome country that does whatever it wants and that nothing can be done about it. This is simply not true.
  
  China is actually more dependent on US and EU than the other way around. They devote most resources to the production of products that need to be mandatorily exported as the the chinese masses cannot afford them.
  
  Corporations and states seem to ignore the blatant anti-freemarket and anti-freedom-speech-policies because of the el-dorado of the 2 bilion people market. WAKE UP. Chinese policy will never allow for free market, and will always be biased towards chinese products.
  
  To add insult to injury, in EU, chinese imports SIMPLY PAY NO TAXES, sinking the local producers in the process.
  
  So what can be done? Well western states can stop acting like slaves to their chinese overlords.
11. Re:This is why you don't do business with China by u38cg · 2010-03-31 00:50 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  The quickest way to sort out the human rights situation in China is to create a population with enough of a stake in society for it to be worth standing up and be counted. Free speech means very little when you're on the breadline. Even if your boycott had any meaningful effect, it would just make government repression easier, not harder - and China is quite easily big enough to run a closed economy if it wanted to.
  
  --
  [FUCK BETA]
12. Re:This is why you don't do business with China by c-reus · 2010-03-31 00:52 · Score: 1
  
  Can you name any affordable personal computing devices that do not have any Chinese-manufactured parts in them?
13. Re:This is why you don't do business with China by DoofusOfDeath · 2010-03-31 00:53 · Score: 0
  
  People roll their eyes when I tell them I don't buy products made in China. I refuse to support a government with such an abusive human rights record.
  Oh jeeze, are you going on about this again?
14. Re:This is why you don't do business with China by cdrudge · 2010-03-31 00:58 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  May I ask what brand of [just about anything] you are using that has no components made in China?
  Fixed.
15. Re:This is why you don't do business with China by Cro+Magnon · 2010-03-31 01:23 · Score: 1
  
  Some people talk the talk when it comes to making a statement. Very few actually walk the walk.
  Unfortunately, my shoes are also made in China.
  
  --
  Slow down, cowboy! It has been 4 hours since you last posted. You must wait another few hours.
16. Re:This is why you don't do business with China by Island+Admin · 2010-03-31 01:26 · Score: 1
  
  Its more than just supporting communism. With the amount of production being sent to China, it is eroding the economies of the western world, putting our own people out of work .... and making us adherent to what ever the Chinese government demands.
17. Re:This is why you don't do business with China by muckracer · 2010-03-31 01:29 · Score: 1
  
  > > Everytime we buy Chinese stuff, we're supporting communism.
  > And don't forget that it makes baby Jesus cry.
  Please provide adequate proof for your claim. Cell phone video on Youtube will suffice. :-P
18. Re:This is why you don't do business with China by e2d2 · 2010-03-31 01:47 · Score: 1
  
  It's a Hemptronics 3000 with a bubbler CPU. I like how the glass turns colors over time.
19. Re:This is why you don't do business with China by Jaysyn · 2010-03-31 02:15 · Score: 1
  
  From the extensive 5 minutes of research I just performed it appears that the only mass market brand of shoe that is actually made in the USA are from New Balance & Wolverine.
  You can however order shoes & boots from any of the fine American companies on this page if you don't mind something a little less mass market.
  http://www.usstuff.com/shoes.htm
  
  --
  There is a war going on for your mind.
20. Re:This is why you don't do business with China by Jaysyn · 2010-03-31 02:17 · Score: 1
  
  Ok, that page hasn't been updated in a while & some of the links are dead. Oops.
  
  --
  There is a war going on for your mind.
21. Re:This is why you don't do business with China by Anonymous Coward · 2010-03-31 02:38 · Score: 0
  
  China is a communist state. Do you really think they won't use the money to fund the party?
22. Re:This is why you don't do business with China by elrous0 · 2010-03-31 02:39 · Score: 1
  
  Unfortunately, decades of corporate dominance in the western world have made an embargo of China pretty much impossible. Any country that tried this would face economic collapse (even the whole EU united probably couldn't pull it off). Very little in the way of manufactured goods is still made or exporting outside of Asia (mostly China). Boycotting them would mean having to recreate from scratch the entire manufacturing base of your country and having to completely redefine modern retail (no more Walmarts or malls), and that would take decades of economic suffering and scarcity to accomplish (though the end goal might well be worthwhile). No democratic society is going to put up with that kind of hardship for that long just to flip China off.
  
  --
  SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
23. Re:This is why you don't do business with China by Ash+Vince · 2010-03-31 02:57 · Score: 2, Informative
  
  To add insult to injury, in EU, chinese imports SIMPLY PAY NO TAXES, sinking the local producers in the process.
  What utter rubbish. Here is the site on the eu website that will allow you to calculate the duty:
  http://ec.europa.eu/taxation_customs/dds/cgi-bin/tarchap?Lang=EN
  It takes a while to figure out how it works, but I just searched for a DVD Recorder (TARIC CODE = 8521900090) and the import duty was 13.9%. Here is the result for non-magnetic tape video recording apparatus:
  http://ec.europa.eu/taxation_customs/dds/cgi-bin/tarduty?Taric=8521900090&SimDate=20100331&Action=1&ProdLine=80&Country=CN/0720&Type=0&Action=1&YesNo=1&Indent=-1&Flag=1&Test=tarduty&Periodic=0&Download=0&Lang=EN&Description=yes
  I am sure there is the odd product that is not covered by duty, but you seem to think everything imported to the EU from China pays no duty, that is plainly not true.
  
  --
  I dont read /. to RTFA, I read /. to offend people in ignorance.
24. Re:This is why you don't do business with China by camg188 · 2010-03-31 03:00 · Score: 1
  
  It's tough at times finding a product not made in China
  Indeed, but "Made in China" often actually means "Assembled in China". Our global economy often makes your decision difficult.
  For example, according to this article, What the iPod tells us about Britain's economic future, out of the $190 captured value for every iPod (made in China) sold in the US, China actually only earns $4. The rest of the captured value goes to countries where the retailer, product developer and high value component manufacturers are located, primarily the US and Japan.
25. Re:This is why you don't do business with China by shentino · 2010-03-31 03:33 · Score: 1
  
  Crying Baby Jesus *
  * MADE IN CHINA
26. Re:This is why you don't do business with China by Anonymous Coward · 2010-03-31 03:40 · Score: 0
  
  China may be large, but they are very limited when it comes to natural resources. They would have a tough time running a completely closed economy.
27. Re:This is why you don't do business with China by Anonymous Coward · 2010-03-31 04:40 · Score: 0
  
  I do the same as you whenever I can. Some articles I buy that are NOT from china are:
  foodstuffs, shoes, clothes, but otherwise everything is from china. What about you?
  I also make it a point to ask a store clerk if they have the same article that is not made in china. As expected I get the glazed eyes response, but I keep doing it anyway.
  One thing I do that has ZERO effect on political policies, or global economics but makes me feel better, is to donate a little money to a local Tibetan association whenever I am forced to buy something that is made in china. I am told that some of that money makes its way back to a Tibetan refugee center in India... ah well better in a Tibetans pocket than
  a communists.
  Recently I had to buy an electric shaver... of the 3 brands I looked ALL were made in china, where labour is 80 cents per hour, but hey where everyone is communist, equal, and shares in everything right? It cost me $60, so I donated $10.
  Now I do remember that about 5 years ago I could find one that was made in a democratic country and still cost me about $60. So how has the 80cents labour costs affected me? not much at all, things are just as or even more expensive...but did we really expect anything different?
28. Re:This is why you don't do business with China by c++0xFF · 2010-03-31 05:05 · Score: 1
  
  You mean there are products not made in China?
29. Re:This is why you don't do business with China by NeutronCowboy · 2010-03-31 05:14 · Score: 1
  
  China is as much a communist state as North Korea is a democratic Republic.
  
  --
  Those who can, do. Those who can't, sue.
30. Re:This is why you don't do business with China by Anonymous Coward · 2010-03-31 05:30 · Score: 1, Interesting
  
  Not that it likely matters much, but WHICH China? The PRC, or the ROC? The nonsense of the past 40+ years of "One China" is exactly that, and it's well past time to call BS on that fact. If simply stating the facts as they are should, God forbid, `offend` the powers that be in the PRC, too damn bad. Oh, that's right, they've already threatened to nuke Taiwan over a naming issue...y'know, in the past, that kind of tantrum would have garnered an immediate response of forming an alliance with the threatened state, and a follow up of pointing an equal number of the dreadful things (nukes) RIGHT BACK AT THE OFFENDING PARTY. Mutually Assured Destruction is not good, but it IS effective policy management when dealing with this sort of thing. I'm afraid we've sanitized the concept of war to the point that it no longer carries any meaning to the folks "in charge", perhaps a reminder of just how truly ugly, nasty, and horrible armed conflict really is should be delivered to these idiots on BOTH sides, just to wake them up for once and get some progress on the issue. Sucks to be us on the ground level, but that kind of suffering is probably inevitable at this point, further negotiations with tyrannies of this sort only prolongs the pain, and sells them the rope with which to hang ourselves. It should be fairly obvious by now, that the PRC was NEVER truly interested in resolving matters with the West in good faith, and the West was never truly able to influence the attitudes and mindset of those in power in the PRC. We are at war, and have been for a while, in spite of our best efforts to delude ourselves into thinking otherwise. Time for the charade to end.
31. Re:This is why you don't do business with China by Anonymous Coward · 2010-03-31 08:16 · Score: 0
  
  No. Do you know how many people are supportive of their current government in China? I would not be surprised that government doesn't even need to do anything like hacking, the self-imposed nationalist will do it for them. To quickest way to sort out human rights situation is through education, or kill off every nationalist.
32. Re:This is why you don't do business with China by evilviper · 2010-03-31 08:39 · Score: 1
  
  The quickest way to sort out the human rights situation in China is to create a population with enough of a stake in society for it to be worth standing up and be counted.
  Actually, the booming economy has undeniably lessened the popular unrest of the 80s, and the government sees it as necessary to ensure a continuously growing economy, to maintain their power over the people.
  Almost every example in history of government overthrow is one of peoples being repressed and suffering. Keeping them fat and happy tends to keep them from demanding more from their government, not the other way around. Bread and Circuses is a decent example.
  
  --
  Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
33. Re:This is why you don't do business with China by Skuld-Chan · 2010-03-31 08:43 · Score: 1
  
  I try the best I can to buy American made products - or failing that products made in countries that have fair treatment of their employees, but I know for a fact you typed that message on a machine that has at least one Chinese component in it.
  Even my Pegasos II (which was made in Germany) has some chips on it that were manufactured in China.
34. Re:This is why you don't do business with China by cduffy · 2010-03-31 15:20 · Score: 1
  
  Speaking of US-made shoes...
  I wear SAS (San Antonio Shoes, made here in Texas). Their style is undoubtedly old-school (I'd guesstimate that 1/3 of the fellow customers I see in there are near- or post-retirement-age, though they're trying to remedy that somewhat with new products), but they're extremely comfy and the sales staff (they have outlets here in Austin) knows their stuff.
Just helping the people by irn · 2010-03-31 00:24 · Score: 1

This was obviously just another step in ridding the China-ternet of porn.
And again. by Anonymous Coward · 2010-03-31 00:26 · Score: 0

Given Yahoo's previous history of cooperating with China, I doubt they are going to react as Google did. Unfortunatly. No, they'll just issue some statement about having improved their security and try to pretend this never happened.
A shame, as even the might of Google is as nothing compared to the Chinese government.
Another reason... by Anonymous Coward · 2010-03-31 00:29 · Score: 0

Stern Hu.
Are you sure it wasn't the Mossad? by Noam.of.Doom · 2010-03-31 00:30 · Score: 1

And I bet they would've gotten away with it, if it wasn't for those meddling journalists.

--
It is the universe that makes fun of us all.
Yahoo by Anonymous Coward · 2010-03-31 00:34 · Score: 0

Well, I'm sorry, but if you use a Yahoo, Gmail, Hotmail och any kind of crappy webmail throwaway account for anything serious, you had it coming.
1. Re:Yahoo by TheCowSaysMooNotBoo · 2010-03-31 01:05 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  Yeah, real journalists use their ISP's webmail (*cough*), their own servers (which can be confiscated) or their friends (also confiscateable). Then you have the possibility of offshore email accounts on an american friend's server (which will get blocked). At least when using webmail, the others have to either break in the servers (like they did in TFA) or subpoena them (which I don't see the Chinese govt. do tbh).
Is Yahoo going to follow Google? by Arancaytar · 2010-03-31 00:36 · Score: 1

Time for all foreign internet companies to boycott the Chinese network, in my view. If they want to wall themselves off and not play nice, let them see where it gets their economy.
So let's get this straight: by muckracer · 2010-03-31 00:40 · Score: 1, Insightful

- for 20 years now malware targets mostly DOS/Windows, yet these guys still use exactly that
- the main vector of malware coming in is via e-mail attachments, yet these guys keep clicking on them
- signed e-mails and attachments would make reception thereof fairly safe, yet these guys have no idea about it
- nevermind encryption, cause why would these guys be responsible towards their sources
- etc.pp.
So I'd say....TOLD YOU SO....but then these guys probably would feign complete ignorance and amazement over the fact, that especially the totalitarian governments of the world don't exactly work with white gloves on and...GASP...don't give a shit about your self-aggrandized ego of 'a journalist' and the hallowed freedom of press!
1. Re:So let's get this straight: by muckracer · 2010-03-31 01:34 · Score: 1
  
  Coming to think of it...does anybody have additional information on how the Tibetan's now deal with things in the aftermath of Ghostnet? WOuld love to know if they wised up/got support to use e-mail authentication/encryption and generally beefed up security....
2. Re:So let's get this straight: by Asic+Eng · 2010-03-31 03:31 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  for 20 years now malware targets mostly DOS/Windows, yet these guys still use exactly that
  Like everyone else on the planet. Not that it matters whether you access webmail via Linux or via Windows.
  the main vector of malware coming in is via e-mail attachments, yet these guys keep clicking on them
  Webmail cracked - that's almost certainly not clicking-on-attachments territory, more likely poor password choice. Access to company servers from the inside (employees collaborating with the attackers) is another possible path of attack.
  signed e-mails and attachments would make reception thereof fairly safe, yet these guys have no idea about it
  Works only on a node-to-node basis. If their contact doesn't have the tools, then they can't use it. Same applies to encryption obviously. Is PGP freely available in China? How long till the government detects that you are using PGP and takes you in for questioning solely based on that fact?
  but then these guys probably would feign complete ignorance and amazement over the fact, that especially the totalitarian governments of the world don't exactly work with white gloves
  If the Chinese government attacks western computer systems, that's news. It might require a political response, that should be in the public discussion. Regardless, it's certainly worth reporting.
  ...don't give a shit about your self-aggrandized ego of 'a journalist' and the hallowed freedom of press
  Freedom of the press is vital for my freedom and for yours. I think your disdain is completely inappropriate here.
3. Re:So let's get this straight: by evilviper · 2010-03-31 08:34 · Score: 1
  
  Is PGP freely available in China?
  PGP or at least GnuPG certain is.
  
  How long till the government detects that you are using PGP and takes you in for questioning solely based on that fact?
  That's immensely nonsensical. If the government can detect that you are using PGP, they can damn well read the full text of your e-mails, and find out the much more incriminating information therein. You might as well run around in a war-zone without a bullet-proof vest, because people shooting at you just might notice you have a bullet-proof vest on, and shoot at you some more...
  
  --
  Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
the only way to avoid the truth now.... by Anonymous Coward · 2010-03-31 00:40 · Score: 0

is to pretend that you already have it. tell 'em robbie?
Hacks yes... was Re:Hmm yeah by mjwalshe · 2010-03-31 00:47 · Score: 1

well Journalists arn't normaly that techie (even 99% of the technology ones) and for and for on the move journalist a webmail system does have a lot of advantages. And an ISP in china would probaly allow the security services to access their data where an external system like yahoo might require at least some form of due process.

You do wonder if who ever is doing thease sorts of hacks has thier own agenda certaily it would make sense for the PRC's security people to pull their horns in at the moment.
1. Re:Hacks yes... was Re:Hmm yeah by tokul · 2010-03-31 01:00 · Score: 1
  
  well Journalists arn't normaly that techie (even 99% of the technology ones) and for and for on the move journalist a webmail system does have a lot of advantages.
  
  And their journals are so poor that they can't have own webmail setup. "journalist like webmail" is not excuse for using third party email servers.
2. Re:Hacks yes... was Re:Hmm yeah by umghhh · 2010-03-31 04:14 · Score: 1
  
  well one may wonder about security services involvement - see here
3. Re:Hacks yes... was Re:Hmm yeah by mjwalshe · 2010-03-31 06:33 · Score: 1
  
  depends a lot of Journalists are freelancers or work for very small organiastions.
4. Re:Hacks yes... was Re:Hmm yeah by RockDoctor · 2010-03-31 21:20 · Score: 1
  
  well Journalists arn't normaly that techie (even 99% of the technology ones) and for and for on the move journalist a webmail system does have a lot of advantages.
  
  Neglecting the spelling and grammar which you should be ashamed of, the use of a convenient webmail system does not preclude the use of encryption outside the webmail system. Viz : on your laptop, you write your super-secret email ; you then run it through your encryption package to produce a blob of data ; you then use your webmail account to transfer the data blob to the recipient (taking whatever traffic-analysis countermeasures you want).
  I'm a mobile worker ; I routinely use webmail (both the company one, and third-parties like Ymail and Gahoo) ; I've never considered using webmail to be an adequate excuse for slackening off on the confidentiality of the client's data, and if they want me to take such risks, I'll get their instruction in writing before I do it.
  (A real-world practicality : I put the encrypted file inside a ZIP container to protect against transmission errors, and I write some uninteresting blurb in the message body. A zip file attachment with no message body is likely to attract attention.)
  
  --
  Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
5. Re:Hacks yes... was Re:Hmm yeah by mjwalshe · 2010-04-01 06:32 · Score: 1
  
  oh sorry my dyslexia kicked in and I repeated "and for" and woooo I missed a , big fucking deal. Are your reading skills that poor?
  
  Its a comment not a fucking essay.
6. Re:Hacks yes... was Re:Hmm yeah by RockDoctor · 2010-04-01 09:23 · Score: 1
  
  oh sorry my dyslexia
  
  If dyslexia is a real complaint (not proven), that's even less excuse to not use the readily available tools to assist controlling it. That is rather like someone who knows that they're short-sighted complaining about other drivers not driving closely enough to be seen.
  
  kicked in
  I've never heard anyone claiming that dyslexia is an intermittent complaint.
  
  and I repeated "and for" and woooo I missed a , big fucking deal.
  Your post still doesn't make (much) sense if parsed with that claim in mind.
  
  Are your reading skills that poor?
  No. I routinely have to deal with English used as a second (or third, or fourth) language. You grammar is the problem.
  
  Its a comment not a fucking essay.
  You post in a public forum, under what appears to be a real name, and you don't care about the impression that you give to people who might have to deal with you in real life. Of course it's a fucking essay. Every word that you write and speak with your name and/ or face attached has the potential to come back and haunt you.
  Are you one of these people who object to potential future employers checking out your online writings? Perhaps you are. Life must be a bitch.
  
  --
  Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
Yahoo, MS is poison by AHuxley · 2010-03-31 00:56 · Score: 3, Informative

With reports like "Yahoo 'helped jail China writer'" in 2005 ... would most people with any public or private interest in China stay with Yahoo's products in any form after its "complicity" over the past years?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/4221538.stm

--
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
At least this will never happen with Hotmail by Rogerborg · 2010-03-31 01:12 · Score: 1

I mean, they won't have to hack the accounts - MS will just meekly hand over the keys to "comply with local laws."

--
If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
Re:Three Strikes by Anonymous Coward · 2010-03-31 01:36 · Score: 0

China has had their three, cut the fiber cables at the international territorial limit. Make them connect with 300 baud modems over dodgy dialup connections through North Korea.
Just spread "china is for dictators" all over. by h00manist · 2010-03-31 01:37 · Score: 1

If everyone spreads messages protesting china all over the net, it will be hard for them to hide. Google should spread the message right on their homepage. They can do it now.

--
Build your own energy sources from scratch. http://otherpower.com/
Re:Protest the Chinese! by h00manist · 2010-03-31 01:44 · Score: 1

It's a great moment to protest against government espionage. Everyone in the west will agree on protesting chinese espionage, but it will indirectly call attention to western government practices too. Implementing protests in Chinese text does pose some interesting technical and language problems....

--
Build your own energy sources from scratch. http://otherpower.com/
FYI by Anonymous Coward · 2010-03-31 02:24 · Score: 0

FYI. CA - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Certificate_authority
They use webmail for confidential data? by guanxi · 2010-03-31 02:54 · Score: 2

I think I probably wrote the same thing when news of the GMail hacking allegations came out: Who is dumb enough to use a public webmail service for confidential email? Don't they have access to any good advice? Training? Or just think it through a little -- does Yahoo Mail seem like a secure place to store sensitive data?
1. Re:They use webmail for confidential data? by CanHasDIY · 2010-03-31 11:30 · Score: 1
  
  Not that I disagree, but in their defense, they are journalists... Considering that their career path is direct dissemination of information, I highly doubt any of the info was to sensitive, excepting personal and account information. Now, if we were talking about DoD contractors discussing top-secret projects on, say, Google Wave, that would be a major issue.
  
  --
  An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
funny jokes are reality jokes that are not funny by h00manist · 2010-03-31 02:59 · Score: 2, Insightful

False flag operations "False flag operations are covert operations which are designed to deceive the public in such a way that the operations appear as though they are being carried out by other entities. The name is derived from the military concept of flying false colors; that is, flying the flag of a country other than one's own. False flag operations are not limited to war and counter-insurgency operations, and have been used in peace-time; for example during Italy's strategy of tension." ...

--
Build your own energy sources from scratch. http://otherpower.com/
Its a setup by Zecheus · 2010-03-31 03:12 · Score: 1

Remember your lessons from spy school: it would be the pro-reform activists who would break into pro-reform data in order to implicate anti-reform entities.
Google is still worse! by Anonymous Coward · 2010-03-31 04:32 · Score: 0

Google uses your email to sell ads, then sells your name and address to door to door salesmen. Google is much much more evil than China.