Slashdot Mirror


China's Politburo Behind Google Cyber-Attack?

theodp writes "While Wikileaks itself is under a DoS attack, details about the US State Department cables obtained by WikiLeaks are starting to come out via the mainstream media. Among the most newsworthy, reports Techcrunch's Erick Schonfeld, is one set which deals with the massive computer attack on Google and other companies which was first revealed last January. According to the NY Times, some of the new leaked cables point directly at China's Politburo for instigating the original attacks, which should shed some more light on why the White House and State Department backed Google so vociferously at the time. Developing, as Drudge likes to say."

25 of 142 comments (clear)

  1. Re:headline? by peragrin · · Score: 5, Insightful

    So the USA suppresses information that china's government engaged in illegal hacking, and the USA is behind the DDOS attack on wikileaks. Why can't China be behind it after a US agent tells a chinese agent what is happening.

    I know because China is good and the USA is bad.

    --
    i thought once I was found, but it was only a dream.
  2. Surprised? by JakFrost · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I think that hardly anyone is surprised that China's Politburo (a group of 24 people who oversee the Communist Party of China) was behind the hacking of the Chinese Google office computers. You can see the seriousness of the issue after reading Google's response to the hacking and their threat to pull out of China all together and also after reading the Department of the State's involvement in this issue. The Department of the State, and someone as high up as Hillary Clinton, getting involved in this issue shows how important this single hacking event was, and not just because Google is everyone's the current favorite company.

    US asks China to explain Google hacking claims

    Bobbie Johnson in San Francisco
    guardian.co.uk, Wednesday 13 January 2010 08.19 GMT

    Hillary Clinton calls on Beijing to answer 'serious concerns' over internet security
    Google pulls out of China: what the bloggers are saying

    The US government is investigating allegations of a Chinese hacking attack on Google amid what Washington called "serious concerns" over internet security.

    The strike, which the company said was aimed at uncovering information linked to political dissidents in the country, led Google to announce last night that it would no longer censor its search engine in China.

    The move could result in Google being forced to pull out of China four years after it controversially announced its intention to launch a censored version of google.cn, the local version of its search engine.

    Faced with a conflict between one of America's most powerful companies and the Chinese government, the US secretary of state, Hillary Clinton, called on Beijing to discuss the situation.

  3. And a likely candidate for the current DDoS by thesandbender · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The Chinese government has proven that they'll do anything to stop distribution of negative information about them. If they're behind the DDoS the goal probably isn't blacking out WikiLeaks... just suppressing it long enough that they can configure the "Great Firewall" to block it (content filters, etc).

    It makes sense for a few reasons:

    1. The Chinese government has already proven they're not above this.
    2. As inept as the US government can be I think they know they can't stop the spread of this information.
    3. To public knowledge, the US government hasn't initiated a DDoS. Why show your hand and capabilities on something like this? It's a waste.

    There's also a good chance it's another party or that WikiLeaks is just making it up b/c the guys are complete attention wh0res (don't think for a second they're doing it for a "greater good"... the founder _loves_ the spotlight.

    1. Re:And a likely candidate for the current DDoS by unity100 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The Chinese government has proven that they'll do anything to stop distribution of negative information about them.

      the only difference in between the us government and chinese government, is how they approach the concept of 'doing anything' to stop distribution of negative information.

      one does it directly, by arresting or killing those who distribute it, the other does it through underhanded, but improvable means.

      Clashes with Europe over human rights: American officials sharply warned Germany in 2007 not to enforce arrest warrants for Central Intelligence Agency officers involved in a bungled operation in which an innocent German citizen with the same name as a suspected militant was mistakenly kidnapped and held for months in Afghanistan. A senior American diplomat told a German official “that our intention was not to threaten Germany, but rather to urge that the German government weigh carefully at every step of the way the implications for relations with the U.S.”

      http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/29/world/29cables.html?pagewanted=2&_r=1&hp

    2. Re:And a likely candidate for the current DDoS by Charliemopps · · Score: 3, Interesting

      1. No country is above this. Most of Slashdot readers have even dabbled in this as some point or another.
      2. No they don't. And they're right. It's only a matter of time before the US government figures out a way to crush wikileaks in a way that makes no one else ever try it again.
      3. Plenty 12 year olds have the capability of launching a DDoS attack. The US wouldn't be tipping any hand. And, just because they are under a DDoS attack doesn't mean that's all that's going on. This may very well be a symptom or a diversion of something else entirely.

      Yes, wikileaks is DDoSing their own site for attention. On the day they probobly got more hits than any other site on the internet they feel the need to DDoS themselves so no one can read what their publishing, so they can get more attention... even though they already have every News organization and Political party on earth staring directly at them. You're brilliant.

  4. Re:headline? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I'm very surprised Julian Assange is still alive.

    He is smart enough not to leak Russian secrets.

  5. wikileaks by omar.sahal · · Score: 4, Interesting

    For such an embarrassment these leaks do go some way to promoting the US world view, or is that just editing from the media outlets. Examples such as many middle eastern counties (Saudi, Jordan and Egypt etc) urging US to bomb Iran, as well as the links below
    Iraq document leaks show US forces found WMD after invasion - http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2010/10/wikileaks-show-wmd-hunt-continued-in-iraq-with-surprising-results/
    Wikileaked documents normalise Iraq civilian death toll at 'massive' 66,000

    1. Re:wikileaks by Lakitu · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Are you really surprised that diplomatic cables between US diplomats express a "US world view"?

  6. Re:China's Politburo Behind Google Cyber-Attack? by Tranzistors · · Score: 3, Insightful

    There is always someone who, after something is relieved, says "told you!" Well, one thing is to speculate, another is to have some [more or less] solid proof. Or are your speculations "good enough"?

  7. Re:Just because the American government says it by MoonBuggy · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If it's said in a private communication between diplomats, the chances are they believe it to be true themselves. Not to say that makes it unquestionably true, of course, but it does make it an awful lot more credible than the PR they dish out to the public. I give these documents a lot more credit than I would to public statements made by the US government, and I see no hypocrisy in that; I'd be interested to hear if you think otherwise.

  8. Re:headline? by uvajed_ekil · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I'm very surprised Julian Assange is still alive.

    The fact that he is still alive raises some questions, for me. WHY is he still alive if what he had to leak was as important as has been said? Was the information not as significant as we have been told? Is the CIA really off their game, and not capable of clandestine actions anymore?

    The US government knows what Assange knows, they say him divulging it will endanger security, yet they don't stop him? Is he a necessary demon, needed for the future of their security theater? Something about this saga just doesn't add up.

    --
    This is a hacked account, for which the owner can not be held responsible.
  9. Attention wh0re? by skywatcher2501 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Everyone seems to dislike Assange's approach to public relations. But then again, how many people know/knew Anna Politkovskaya? Assange seems to be quite the media's darling and whatever, but that might be essential for his own safety.

    1. Re:Attention wh0re? by thesandbender · · Score: 3, Funny

      I don't take issue with him being in the lime light... but he purposefully stretches it out. He doesn't just release information... he announces the release ahead of time so he can create a sensation. If they were really concerned about access to the information and not publicity the would "soft release" to trusted groups on BitTorrent a few days/weeks before they announced it. That way the data is well seeded and a DDoS would be very difficult. That's why I'm accusing them of attention wh0ring... there are very easy ways of preventing this DDoS and they are smart enough to know that.

    2. Re:Attention wh0re? by grcumb · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I don't take issue with him being in the lime light... but he purposefully stretches it out.

      I think this tactic is known as 'running cover'. Assange knows that someone has to be the focal point for the ogranisation, to make contact with media reps and various others in order to ensure the responsible dissemination of the data. Doing so allows a great many others to work quietly, undisturbed in the background. Say what you like about his motivation, he's chosen that role. I'd argue that, as someone who believes more in daylight than shadows, he's using the spotlight to keep himself out of harm's way.

      he announces the release ahead of time so he can create a sensation

      Sure. This actually is one of the largest leaks of information in modern history. It's sensational in its very essence. Given that wikileaks' reason for being is to disseminate leaked information as effectively as possible, advance press is perfectly understandable.

      If they were really concerned about access to the information and not publicity the would "soft release" to trusted groups on BitTorrent a few days/weeks before they announced it.

      Great idea. How about sharing it quietly with a number of the most reputable media organisations in the Western world? How about giving them months of prep time, so they could conduct analysis. How about -shocking, I know- even telling the affected agencies what was about to be released and offering them the opportunity to assist in the redaction process? That's exactly what they did.

      Now, there's no way a government could be seen to be negotiating with them, so this might be seen as grandstanding, but who knows what contacts might have been made behind the scenes? (Well, wikileaks, of course, but... you get what I'm saying.)

      That way the data is well seeded and a DDoS would be very difficult. That's why I'm accusing them of attention wh0ring... there are very easy ways of preventing this DDoS and they are smart enough to know that.

      Indeed they are. And indeed they have.

      You can characterise what they do as attention-whoring if you like. The fact is that their job is to get as much attention as possible on the data they're releasing. If you suffer from this process, you won't be glad about it. I can accept that.

      I have friends who were directly affected by information divulged to wikileaks some years ago. While I'm still angry at those who so cynically used wikileaks to release context-free data that wrongly created some very nasty implications, I don't blame wikileaks for releasing the information. That's just what they do.

      In fact, I'd rather see wikileaks do it than others. While they're occasionally guilty of editorialising about their data, at least they release all of it, providing others with the opportunity to draw their own conclusions. Most media organisations do not do this. They run with what they think will lead, and leave the rest by the roadside.

      I don't always like the results of what wikileaks does, but at least they are exactly what the claim to be.

      --
      Crumb's Corollary: Never bring a knife to a bun fight.
  10. Re:headline? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The US government has a known leaker who's talented at personally discrediting himself and deals primarily in proof of widely-known information that's humiliating (sometimes for our rivals rather than us, see this story!) but of low operational value. He also leaks to the public rather than foreign security services, and gives them a month or two for preemptive damage control.

    I'm sure he's not exactly in great graces, but the terrible PR of him coming down with a sudden case of the dead would quite possibly outweigh that of everything he's leaked. And then who would they watch, and how would they be able to see leaks coming just by keeping a pet reporter or two at the Times and the Guardian?

  11. Re:note chinese news' silence by hansguckindieluft · · Score: 3, Informative

    sorry, i erred. it's not on the frontpage yet but a search for wikileak gives results: http://search.news.cn/language/search.jspa?id=en&t=1&t1=0&ss=&ct=&n1=wikileak&x=0&y=0

  12. Re:headline? by harrytuttle777 · · Score: 3, Informative

    You can ask the same question of Fidel Castro.

    ---
    "Lee Harvey Oswald, a former Marine, renounced his citizenship, defected to the Soviet union, married a soviet wife, came back to the USA with state department blessing ,and shot the president all during the hight of the cold war without any assistance from any outside agency whatsoever."
    -U.S. Government publication

  13. Re:headline? by Splab · · Score: 3, Insightful

    That would be an act of war.

    Killing a citizen is just espionage and will get you in a big of hot water.

  14. Re:headline? by Dan+East · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Or is the USA not as evil as everyone likes to make it out to be? If this happened to any of several dozen other countries Assange would be dead already, and there is no doubt that he would be dead if the CIA were ordered to make it so.

    Actually, I'm surprised some other country hasn't had him killed just to place blame on the US.

    --
    Better known as 318230.
  15. Troll mods by Gary+W.+Longsine · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I suspect I might disagree with a more detailed explanation of your viewpoint, but I vehemently disagree with the anonymous use of mod points to beat you down with a Troll mod, simply because the moderator disagrees with you.

    --
    If you mod me down, I shall become more powerful than you could possibly imagine.
  16. diplomatic discussion and world views by Gary+W.+Longsine · · Score: 3, Informative

    Obviously you're not reading the discussion in which you've elected to participate, let alone source materials and fine articles. If you had, you would know that the surprises are the support for the "U.S. world view" coming from surprising sources, like other countries in the middle east, who agree that Iran's pursuit of nuclear weapons is a very serious threat to world security.

    --
    If you mod me down, I shall become more powerful than you could possibly imagine.
  17. Re:headline? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    [T]he military, hates to use encryption on their datalinks, has so poor security that a demoted enlisted man had full access to all sorts of diplomatic, and covert records. Does this group sound capable of not only creating a DDOS but doing it in such a way that it can't be tracked back to them?

    Well the managed to arrange 911 and make it look like foreign terrorists were responsible. And that's never been traced back to them, has it?

    At least that's what the dude on the train with 'TRUTH' on his tee-shirt was telling me ...

  18. Re:assassination by bsDaemon · · Score: 4, Insightful

    No, killing him would make him the message, and that would be worth something.

  19. Re:headline? by jandersen · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Or is the USA not as evil as everyone likes to make it out to be?

    Hmm, is that the peevish whine of self-pity I hear there?

    America has dispensed heavy-handed criticism out to just about everybody over the years; it is only fair that you guys get some back, I think. But it is not reasonable to say that "everybody hates America" every time a valid point of criticism is raised - in fact, I think it is the duty of a friend to tell you when you are getting things wrong. Your friends - and you have many - wish you well and expect you to do better than just scraping the bottom. In other words, have a some pride and show a bit of dignity.

  20. Perhaps by jandersen · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Was "China" (ie somebody in China) behind the attack on Google? Perhaps; all governments at some level do this kind of things.

    But I don't think this is anything like the main story to extract from this leak; which is much more about what American government and diplomats think, privately, about everybody else. Very revealing stuff, I think, which confirms what we all have had our suspicions about.

    In their defence I'll say that what you think in private is often much less refined than what you end up saying or doing, so perhaps we shouldn't judge them too harshly.