Slashdot Mirror


Best Practice: Travel Light To China

Hugh Pickens writes "What may once have sounded like the behavior of a raving paranoid is now considered standard operating procedure for officials at American government agencies, research groups and companies as the NY Times reports how businesses sending representatives to China give them a loaner laptop and cellphone that they wipe clean before they leave and wipe again when they return. 'If a company has significant intellectual property that the Chinese and Russians are interested in, and you go over there with mobile devices, your devices will get penetrated,' says Joel F. Brenner, formerly the top counterintelligence official in the office of the director of national intelligence. The scope of the problem is illustrated by an incident at the United States Chamber of Commerce in 2010 when the chamber learned that servers in China were stealing information from four of its Asia policy experts who frequently visited China. After their trips, even the office printer and a thermostat in one of the chamber's corporate offices were communicating with an internet address in China. The chamber did not disclose how hackers had infiltrated its systems, but its first step after the attack was to bar employees from taking devices with them 'to certain countries,' notably China. 'Everybody knows that if you are doing business in China, in the 21st century, you don't bring anything with you,' says Jacob Olcott, a cybersecurity expert at Good Harbor Consulting. 'That's "Business 101" — at least it should be.'"

334 comments

  1. Pot calling kettle. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Read the subject line.

    1. Re:Pot calling kettle. by Cornwallis · · Score: 0

      Exactly.

      I'm much more worried about how the U.S is allowing drones to be used by police agencies in this country to spy on us, etc., etc., etc.

    2. Re:Pot calling kettle. by jimbolauski · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Exactly.

      I'm much more worried about how the U.S is allowing drones to be used by police agencies in this country to spy on us, etc., etc., etc.

      I'm sure if you were a major stakeholder in a company with valuable IP, that had business with China you would have a different attitude. The reason you don't need to worry about either is because you don't have any IP of worth that the Chinese want and you are not doing anything illegal. I'm not saying either is OK, just that jet fuel is expensive and following your every move is not worth their time, and how exactly can a drone invade your privacy any more then a manned plane?

      --
      Knowledge = Power
      P= W/t
      t=Money
      Money = Work/Knowledge so the less you know the more you make
    3. Re:Pot calling kettle. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      I see the Chinese shills are on the job here at /. as usual. You get a cup of tea and a biscuit for being so diligent and getting at FP!

    4. Re:Pot calling kettle. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      So thinking of US of A as anything else but the land of the free and home of the brave makes me a chinese shill?

      Really?

    5. Re:Pot calling kettle. by 1s44c · · Score: 5, Funny

      pot calling kettle

      My cooking pots are stainless steel. My kettle is likewise stainless steel. Nether can talk and as far as I'm aware nether has racist tendencies.

      It's time that whole pot/kettle thing was just forgotten about.

    6. Re:Pot calling kettle. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      No, it's more the whole "err teh us is evler thn evrybdy else!!!!" drivel. Nobody does espionage like the Chinese, and you know it. Hell, it was a joke at an old job, go into china, turn your phone on, and watch it light up for a good 20 minutes while they downloaded the entire contents of your phone. Oddly enough, I've never seen that happen when I re-enter the US. The US isn't sneaky about it, they just confiscate what they want.

      Throw in stuff like how hwawei equipment is banned for deployment in the US, as well as India and several other countries, and at some point, even the biggest idiots amongst us have to start admitting that saying china gets a pass because the US does bad stuff too is sort of like saying hitler and stalin weren't so bad because Teddy Roosevelt liked to hunt.

    7. Re:Pot calling kettle. by TheEyes · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Exactly.

      I'm much more worried about how the U.S is allowing drones to be used by police agencies in this country to spy on us, etc., etc., etc.

      I'm sure if you were a major stakeholder in a company with valuable IP, that had business with China you would have a different attitude. The reason you don't need to worry about either is because you don't have any IP of worth that the Chinese want and you are not doing anything illegal. I'm not saying either is OK, just that jet fuel is expensive and following your every move is not worth their time, and hquipow exactly can a drone invade your privacy any more then a manned plane?

      Saying you don't have to worry about surveillance because you're not doing anything illegal is something like saying you don't have to worry about being shot because one of your legs is artificial. There are so many problems with being able to be put under surveillance by anyone who can flash a badge, or can fake it sufficiently to get away worn it, that concealing potentially illegal activity is almost trivial.

      We Americans need to stop this live affair we are having with arbitrary privacy invasion, both by the government and private companies; if we keep it up we might someday be as bad as China is today.

    8. Re:Pot calling kettle. by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 5, Insightful

      how exactly can a drone invade your privacy any more then a manned plane?

      Lower cost. Virtually all of your privacy(especially if you are just Joe Sixpack) isn't protected by some fancy set of 'rights' or a 'judicial system', it's protected by the fact that watching you is too expensive to be worth the likely results.

      The cheaper surveillance gets, the further down the food chain you can expect it to go, and the more frequent(and effective, unlike the grainy camera at EZ-mart that has been recording over the same grungy VHS tape since 1997...)

      Unless surveillance has some atypically wonky demand curve, which doesn't seem to be the case, lowering the price will increase the amount done.

    9. Re:Pot calling kettle. by xaxa · · Score: 1, Informative

      My cooking pots are stainless steel. My kettle is likewise stainless steel. Nether can talk and as far as I'm aware nether has racist tendencies.

      Racist? The phrase has nothing to do with racism. A cooking pot or kettle, when used over an open fire, get sooty (i.e. black).

      (Or, alternatively, the kettle is clean and shiny, as it's not put on an open fire. Then the pot's accusation is based on its own reflection in the kettle.)

    10. Re:Pot calling kettle. by jimbolauski · · Score: 2

      how exactly can a drone invade your privacy any more then a manned plane?

      Lower cost. Virtually all of your privacy(especially if you are just Joe Sixpack) isn't protected by some fancy set of 'rights' or a 'judicial system', it's protected by the fact that watching you is too expensive to be worth the likely results. The cheaper surveillance gets, the further down the food chain you can expect it to go, and the more frequent(and effective, unlike the grainy camera at EZ-mart that has been recording over the same grungy VHS tape since 1997...) Unless surveillance has some atypically wonky demand curve, which doesn't seem to be the case, lowering the price will increase the amount done.

      You failed to answer the question if a drone flies over your house and records you mowing your lawn how is that any different then a manned plane, if either is trampling your rights, then what does frequency have to do with it? My point is if it's perfectly acceptable for DEA agents to fly over corn fields to look for marijuana then how is a drone doing the exact same thing different. There is no distinction between manned and unmanned recording of private property from a plane, they are both in plain sight and as such recording of them is not protected.

      --
      Knowledge = Power
      P= W/t
      t=Money
      Money = Work/Knowledge so the less you know the more you make
    11. Re:Pot calling kettle. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Huh? There have been numerous articles on slashdot about how US customs copies all the data off traveller's laptops, etc. to "make sure there's nothing illegal on them".

      The USA needs to take a long, hard look in the mirror before complaining about anything China is doing.

    12. Re:Pot calling kettle. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      No, it's more the whole "err teh us is evler thn evrybdy else!!!!" drivel

      Nobody said that or implied that. Nobody is making excuses for China. You're bashing a strawman.

      The point is that America, especially after 9/11, has a huge problem with civil rights with regards to spying on its own citizens, skirting due process, tapping connections without warrants, and etc. The problem is that Americans, especially American officials, will say that China is evil (pointing out very legitimate cases of abuse by the Chinese) while possessing a huge blind spot to the problems we have at home, often to the point of making excuses for it instead of just denying it.

    13. Re:Pot calling kettle. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      While the US security structure is misguided, wasteful, full of theatrics and largely indifferent towards personal privacy... the goal at least is lowering the probability of terrorism at that location. Or failing that, it's about scaring the voters. Whatever.

      The Chinese goal is economic warfare on the rest of the planet. No longer content with being a model manufacturing nation for every Wall Street executive with a soft spot for despotic governments, China is looking to wholesale theft of trade secrets.

      Every nation has their own agents of corporate espionage, but this is the first time that the actual nation-state gets into the game.

      Maybe you should have read more than the subject line.

    14. Re:Pot calling kettle. by chill · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Because once the cost is driven down so much by the commoditization of the hardware that it becomes ubiquitous, they will not stop at looking for marijuana crops.

      The argument is called a slippery slope and perfectly valid. For popular media references see everything from The Simpsons to the Clint Eastwood classic Magnum Force.

      The distinction isn't manned or unmanned surveillance, it is the frequency and pervasiveness.

      [Note: The Magnum Force reference is to the slippery slope argument in general, not necessarily total surveillance in specific.]

      --
      Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
    15. Re:Pot calling kettle. by 1s44c · · Score: 1

      My cooking pots are stainless steel. My kettle is likewise stainless steel. Nether can talk and as far as I'm aware nether has racist tendencies.

      Racist? The phrase has nothing to do with racism. A cooking pot or kettle, when used over an open fire, get sooty (i.e. black).

      (Or, alternatively, the kettle is clean and shiny, as it's not put on an open fire. Then the pot's accusation is based on its own reflection in the kettle.)

      Everything that includes the word 'black' is considered racist these days, and any accusation of racism is true without proof. That's the way it works these days.

      Do you really still heat water by putting it in a metal kettle and putting that over an open fire? Don't they have electric kettle's where you live?. Don't they have gas mains or bottled gas? That phrase is so out of date in most of the world.

    16. Re:Pot calling kettle. by b4dc0d3r · · Score: 3, Informative

      Your question has been answered. There is no difference, there's just more of it.

      I'm much more worried about how the U.S is allowing drones to be used by police agencies in this country to spy on us

      I can't make a solid legal argument because it has not been tested. SCOTUS refused to rule on whether GPS tracking, as ean example of constant monitoring, is an invasion of privacy, solely because trespass was involved on placing it there. So the question of whether it is legal to record someone's movements constantly is an unresolved legal question.

      It is not a foregone conclusion, as you seem to believe, that non-stop monitoring is perfectly legal. It will be done until it is challenged. Tracking software on top of automated drones makes it possible to track individuals going about their daily lives in fairly good detail at this point, were it allowed to continue. That level of detail is excessive compared to what law enforcement needs to do its job.

      I happen to believe that the Constitution and Bill of Rights make it clear that as long as you're not bothering anyone, you're free to act unimpeded. When you start setting off enough flags that someone thinks you're doing something illegal, law enforcement will put together a warrant request and then are allowed to investigate. Constant monitoring, license plate tracking, internet interception, and all of the modern surveillance techniques are so far removed from what the Founding Fathers even considered that there is no way you can just assert it's fine without a court test.

      In other words, the question is to you, to argue that this is not an invasion of privacy. Until it is answered by the courts, who have already trampled on just about everything else using a combination of terrorism and commerce clause to steamroll whatever we have left. One side pushes for more surveillance, the other pushes back, and then it gets resolved in a court. Until then you're going to have to bring more to the table than this as a defense.

    17. Re:Pot calling kettle. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And the GPs point is that argument is orthogonal to the article. So, shut it and make your own post.

    18. Re:Pot calling kettle. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Blackadders pot is blacker than his kettle.

    19. Re:Pot calling kettle. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you haven't cooked in cast iron, you've never fried anything properly.

    20. Re:Pot calling kettle. by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I apologize if I was insufficiently clear on this aspect of the 'price' argument:

      Historical legal norms, governing what is/isn't protected, what does/doesn't require special permission, etc. are crafted in response to the situations that the lawmakers have to confront, either hypothetically, when crafting legislation, or in actuality, when a case comes before a court. In no small part, those actual and hypothetical situations are influenced by technology, what it costs and what it can do. If something is impossible or economically prohibitive in virtually all cases, there isn't any impetus for legal norms or institutional protections to grow up and prevent it.

      Consider, for example, the notion that things done in public spaces are fair game without any sort of warrant. Historically, that seems plausible enough: cops are a limited resource, and people have lousy memories, so everybody who is acting normally enough to be forgotten quickly, and isn't interesting enough to justify the expense of having one or more agents tailing them with a notebook is safe. Thus, in practice the historical standard was not'anything is fair game in public', it was 'anything notable enough for Joe Citizen to remember it later, and anyone worth the expense of tailing manually is fair game'. If, through some innovation in cameras and machine vision, say, it becomes technologically and economically viable to track everybody all the time, the formal 'in public, no problem' standard hasn't been violated; but the previous actual 'only stuff of note, and people suspected enough to spend real money on for some reason' standard is overwhelmingly weakened.

      Overflights would be a similar thing: as long as aircraft time costs some hundreds of dollars or more an hour(depending somewhat on your chosen craft and method of cost accounting), the de-facto standard for aerial observation is actually fairly high. It doesn't demand a warrant; but it demands some internal explanation good enough to move those resources. If flyovers cost $10/hour or $1/hour, that de-facto standard would vastly weaken.

      That's the real core of the argument: outside of specific, dramatic, cases(like getting evidence stricken from a trial because it was illegally obtained, where your protections are essentially purely legal, since the practical side has already happened and gone against you), the real standards that governed relations between people and the state(or one another) have always been governed to a great degree by logistics, with law stepping in in situations where logistics seemed to be providing a bad result. If you merely examine those accumulated legal fixes, without reference to the logistical situation under which they were enacted, you grossly distort the actual protection(or lack thereof, as in the stereotypical gossipy small town where everybody knows everybody) which a given legal standard implied in practice. Technological change tends not to attack specific, legally formulated, protections/nonprotections very much, it just massively changes their operational significance.

    21. Re:Pot calling kettle. by garaged · · Score: 1, Interesting

      From the Mexican point of view, you are mostly there

      --
      I'm positive, don't belive me look at my karma
    22. Re:Pot calling kettle. by networkBoy · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I am worried about the drones, yes.
      I am vastly more worried about China if I travel there for work.
      I am a not major stakeholder for a company that they would really like some intel on. We have the clean laptop, clean phone policy.
      Earlier in the thread someone said pot/kettle, but seriously I don't think that's the case. The US does it's fair share of snooping, yes, but I do not think it is directed at corporate espionage, at least not at the insane level that you see in China.
      Does this absolve the US of it's transgressions? no, not at all, but this is not a binary thing, it's not saint/evil, there is a vast grey area involved.
      -nB

      --
      whois gawk date unzip strip find touch finger mount join nice man top fsck grep eject more yes exit umount sleep dump
    23. Re:Pot calling kettle. by networkBoy · · Score: 1

      Part of the point is that the US is open about these policies. They genuinely are interested in illegal crap.
      I don't see how they have an actual right to do this, even to non US citizens, and the entire concept of a constitution free zone while on US soil almost makes we want the foreign governments to declare our embassies "no longer sovereign US soil".
      -nB

      --
      whois gawk date unzip strip find touch finger mount join nice man top fsck grep eject more yes exit umount sleep dump
    24. Re:Pot calling kettle. by anyGould · · Score: 1

      Do you really still heat water by putting it in a metal kettle and putting that over an open fire? Don't they have electric kettle's where you live?. Don't they have gas mains or bottled gas? That phrase is so out of date in most of the world.

      I've been known to do that (while camping). Hell, it wasn't too far gone when my mother heated water over the stove.

      And I have a few co-workers here today who live on acreages and use wood burning stoves over trucked-in gas for their main source of heating (and I wouldn't doubt they heat up their tea over those stoves.

      If we're looking for a retire-able phrase, look up a few posts and find "straw man" - those aren't exactly popular these days either.

    25. Re:Pot calling kettle. by tenco · · Score: 1

      You failed to answer the question if a drone flies over your house and records you mowing your lawn how is that any different then a manned plane, if either is trampling your rights, then what does frequency have to do with it?

      What's the difference between looking up the location of your cell phone once a year and every hour?

    26. Re:Pot calling kettle. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Drones can be the size of hummingbirds now, which a manned plane can't. You might notice the helicopter hovering outside of your window...

    27. Re:Pot calling kettle. by raaum · · Score: 1

      You failed to answer the question if a drone flies over your house and records you mowing your lawn how is that any different then a manned plane, if either is trampling your rights, then what does frequency have to do with it?

      What's the difference between looking up the location of your cell phone once a year and every hour?

      What's the difference between watching you go into the bathroom and watching you poop?

    28. Re:Pot calling kettle. by deadweight · · Score: 1

      I have an airplane. I can fly over your house and look at you all day every day and you can't stop me. There simply is no right to not be observe red or filmed when outside.

    29. Re:Pot calling kettle. by yurtinus · · Score: 2

      In one case, you at least have to put up with the smell.

      --
      +1 Disagree
    30. Re:Pot calling kettle. by yurtinus · · Score: 1

      Most folks use pans to fry things, not pots... That said, doesn't aluminum typically have better heat distribution than steel or iron?

      --
      +1 Disagree
    31. Re:Pot calling kettle. by Dare+nMc · · Score: 1

      >There simply is no right to not be observe red or filmed when outside.

      It really isn't a issue of don't observe me, it is more of a issue as to what you are allowed to do with that data. As computers get faster, storage cheaper, if they are allowed to log store and process it. It is really the best to say as a government you can't do this to the citizens. The reason is simple, you can't prove a negative. When we have these hit pieces on politicians, advocates, etc. It is ripe for blackmail, for example should your every action taken today be recoverable if you ever become a outspoken critic of someone in power. They will be able to pull up statistics that will prove something embarrassing, a affair, a link to a criminal (maybe one you didn't know was a criminal) or maybe even links to something not so wrong (like you gave a neighbor a ride downtown, where she got a abortion, it is implied you knew, and thus your the most likely father...) Or even simple, like your light/power use matches the light/power use of a pot house, so now we have proof, prove your innocence...
      It really is best to be able to say, yes you can blackmail someone with that, but not without admitting the data you have is illegal in it's self.

    32. Re:Pot calling kettle. by deadweight · · Score: 1

      All that is true, but there is just no legal framework to stop it.

    33. Re:Pot calling kettle. by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      It is perfectly legal today to have constant monitoring of someone, and this is upheld by the SCOTUS, as long as there is a warrant. The issue of GPS or non-GPS is moot here because the ability to constantly monitor the movements of someone existed before GPS. Sure maybe manual surveillance was prone to error but if you had a warrant with the right provisions you were allowed to follow someone around constantly and track all movement, tap their phones, etc. The whole GPS issue in the recent case revolved around using the tracking device after the warrant had expired.

    34. Re:Pot calling kettle. by xaxa · · Score: 1

      Everything that includes the word 'black' is considered racist these days, and any accusation of racism is true without proof. That's the way it works these days.

      Not in the UK, but I can understand it's different in the USA.

      Just to pick out a few: http://www.joe-ks.com/phrases/phrasesP.htm
      Paint the town red.
      Pan out.
      Pass with flying colours.
      Pig in a poke.
      Pleased as punch.
      Pot to piss in.
      Pull the wool over his eyes.
      Pull your finger out.
      Put a sock in it.

      These phrases enrich the English language, and, when used in conversation correctly, concisely convey a complex concept.

      Do you really still heat water by putting it in a metal kettle and putting that over an open fire?

      Of course not, but I'm aware of what's involved. There are plenty of people that do boil water on an open fire.

    35. Re:Pot calling kettle. by xaxa · · Score: 1

      Most folks use pans to fry things, not pots... That said, doesn't aluminum typically have better heat distribution than steel or iron?

      I think copper pots (or copper-based pans) are best. Iron holds heat very well, and doesn't distribute it much (useful in a wok), but is very heavy.

      Aluminium is light, but aluminium ions have been linked to Alzheimer's disease... only now that I've checked that, it seems they haven't. Or maybe they have, depending who you believe (see Wikipedia). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cookware_and_bakeware#Cookware_materials

    36. Re:Pot calling kettle. by Dare+nMc · · Score: 1

      true, there was IMHO, but the supreme court has degraded it to the point where we don't anymore. IE gathering evidence of a crime was once considered a "search" and as such required a warrant, or at least probable cause. IE the police could only initiate evidence gathering after a crime had occurred, then it was expanded to if evidence of another crime was detected while investigating another crime, and continually degraded to the point of, if was ever seen, it can be recoded and used.

    37. Re:Pot calling kettle. by tragedy · · Score: 1

      I think you'll find that nearly all people who make such comparisons don't actually want to defend China, they want to shame the US into trying to be better than it is. Also, enjoying hunting was hardly the worst thing Roosevelt did. His support for eugenics programs in the US was hardly admirable.

    38. Re:Pot calling kettle. by pokechop · · Score: 1

      No, cast iron is still the best, mostly due to high specific heat but also because it can be seasoned (made non-stick) by repeated heating with oil. Also, isn't there some correlation between cooking on aluminum and Alzheimer's disease?

      --
      xoviquom, ogdeuns
    39. Re:Pot calling kettle. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      stupid ajax moderation system. posting to undo the "troll" mod I did by mistake.

    40. Re:Pot calling kettle. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sure is, this is already standard procedure when travelling to the united states. Carry nothing across the boarder and dispose of anything that leaves your side.

      I buy laptops specially for the purpose of visiting the United States.

    41. Re:Pot calling kettle. by gmhowell · · Score: 1

      Nobody does espionage like the Chinese, and you know it.

      Israel. Ok, maybe they do it differently, but they are at least as effective.

      --
      Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
    42. Re:Pot calling kettle. by gmhowell · · Score: 1

      Also, isn't there some correlation between cooking on aluminum and Alzheimer's disease?

      Long story short: people with Alzheimer's tend to have higher concentrations of Al in their CSF, but it is unknown and unlikely that this is causal rather than coincidental. There is also the issue that science is unsure how ingested (or inhaled) Al would migrate to the cerebrospinal (sp?) fluid.

      --
      Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
    43. Re:Pot calling kettle. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Pullllese! Chinese have a "norm" around IP - i.e if I can steal it, it's mine. There are very long traditions behind this attitude, one of which is that until very, very recently there was no history of civil code in China. If you stole someone;s IP, it was between you and them, and the person with the most power and influence won. This is China - for better or for worse. That said, Chinese government leadership are pathetic, warmongering jerks who could give a crap about their own people. American leadership is bad enough, but these Chinese clowns take the cake. They are simple the most two-faced leadership group on the planet, period. "Chinese ethics" is an oxymoron. This may sound like China-bashing, and it is. I feel sorry that the Chinese people have to live under their completely immoral leadership. To hell with every one of them!

    44. Re:Pot calling kettle. by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      Or even simple, like your light/power use matches the light/power use of a pot house, so now we have proof, prove your innocence..

      Surely the best defence to a later rumour that you were accused of running a pot house is to say "but I was never arrested, tried or convicted of running a pot house"?

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    45. Re:Pot calling kettle. by tehcyder · · Score: 0

      Everything that includes the word 'black' is considered racist these days, and any accusation of racism is true without proof. That's the way it works these days.

      Lemme guess, you're a white male middle class Christian right winger whose life is being ruined by political correctness gone mad?

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    46. Re:Pot calling kettle. by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      Racist? The phrase has nothing to do with racism.

      I believe GP was joking.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    47. Re:Pot calling kettle. by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      The Chinese goal is economic warfare on the rest of the planet. No longer content with being a model manufacturing nation for every Wall Street executive with a soft spot for despotic governments, China is looking to wholesale theft of trade secrets.

      Copying isn't theft. Let's be consistent here, chaps.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    48. Re:Pot calling kettle. by Dare+nMc · · Score: 1

      I didn't really separate that out, I was more referring to the DEA practice of using IR cameras at one point to find and bust grow houses. IE once they found a pattern, then that was enough cause to force you to defend yourself from being arrested, (not the blackmailed later part.) The supreme court eventually ruled against this, because IR cameras were not a normal consumer item. So if the DEA found some other pattern from more consumer items, like a sony camera with IR, they might be allowed to use it again.

  2. I wonder... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ...if people traveling from Russia or China to here are told the same thing?

    1. Re:I wonder... by Lehk228 · · Score: 1

      if they are smart they are. and between russia and china too.

      these days we are all frienemies

      --
      Snowden and Manning are heroes.
    2. Re:I wonder... by vlm · · Score: 3, Interesting

      ...if people traveling from Russia or China to here are told the same thing?

      1) Our security forces focus exclusively on taking peoples shoes off, punishing them for traveling by irradiating travelers, and molest traveling women and children. Definitely the laughingstock of the world's security and customs personnel.

      2) Russia occasionally innovates something worth stealing (occasionally...) but China never innovates. Individual Chinese visit the US to go to research colleges etc and innovate, but nothing comes out of China worth stealing. Other than plots to put melamine in baby formula and lead paint on kids toys, can anyone think of anything they've done that the west wants that isn't just copying the west? Also what would we do with something we stole from them, outsource it right back to them anyway? Russia is corrupt enough that nothing happens there that isn't at least tangentially involved in organized crime, so if you stole a "whatever" from them, you can safely assume you'll and/or your family will end up dead, which is in some ways better than our IP system and in some ways worse.

      --
      "Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
    3. Re:I wonder... by Theophany · · Score: 2

      True, but they do rip off an inordinate amount of IP too.

      As much as I like my woodblock printing set, there's only so much goodwill such inventions get before I get pissy about my Ray Ban Wayfarers being Chinese fakes.

    4. Re:I wonder... by stanlyb · · Score: 0

      You have not been bare striped at the US of A airports??? Man, you missed such an excitement.....

    5. Re:I wonder... by 1s44c · · Score: 1, Interesting

      1) Our security forces focus exclusively on taking peoples shoes off, punishing them for traveling by irradiating travelers, and molest traveling women and children. Definitely the laughingstock of the world's security and customs personnel.

      Commiting minor sexual assult as a matter of routine isn't considered a laughing matter in most countries, it's considered sick.

      2) ...China never innovates...

      That's the pro-US point of view is it? Who do you think has been supporting the mighty US empire with loans for the last few decades? Who does the US now owe more to than it could ever hope to pay back?

      Off the top of my head china invented gunpower and fireworks, paper money, the use of iron, and china ( The stuff cups are made out of ).

    6. Re:I wonder... by lorenlal · · Score: 2

      Fine.

      Add "Since the Maoist revolution," to the statement and then dispute. I'm a huge fan of tea, monks who can whoop some arse, and even some of the old music... but I'm not a fan of their current operating procedure.

    7. Re:I wonder... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I'm British.

      *We* get told not to take laptops or mobiles to the US, and use loaners from the US office instead.

    8. Re:I wonder... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Off the top of my head china invented gunpower and fireworks, paper money, the use of iron, and china ( The stuff cups are made out of ).

      That's great. Keep in mind that China has a recorded history of what, something between 11,000 and 17,000 years? Now what has China invented lately - say, since the US existed to steal its brightest and best minds? Compared to a country with about 250 years of history, China's track record is pretty thin.

      Here, I'll help you. Some insulin, malaria treatment, an anti-ship ballistic missile which may or may not work well enough to be an effective weapon, and a few semi-novel inventions where someone applied existing technology to a problem that hadn't been approached that way before. Hardly anything game-changing has come out of China lately.

    9. Re:I wonder... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, they just keep coming up with new, fantastic things every week. Oh wait, those inventions were hundreds of years ago.

    10. Re:I wonder... by mbone · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I deal with Chinese companies on a regular basis, and can assure you that they are innovating like mad. China is following the same classic development arc, which goes something like copy, steal, make, innovate, that the Japanese did ~ 50 years ago.

    11. Re:I wonder... by 1s44c · · Score: 1

      I was disproving the above statement that 'China never innovates'. A single example disproves 'never'.

    12. Re:I wonder... by vlm · · Score: 1

      My apologies, by "never" I should have rephrased that as something much more restrictive like "never in the last 1000 years", because obviously that will be the decisive factor in modern corporate travel policy decisionmaking. I would imagine Chinese compass makers are very rightly at this moment quaking in their boots that we'll steal the new idea of magnetized iron needle compass intellectual property.

      --
      "Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
    13. Re:I wonder... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

      True, but they do rip off an inordinate amount of IP too.

      That's only because western cultures (specifically the handful of rich "content owners") defined IP in such a way that what China and most normal people do these days counts as a violation/infringement. They defined it as such to justify their pricing and distribution schemes (which they're free to do), and to justify government intervention and regulation (which is stupid for all but the few rich/powerful people at the top)

      By getting government involved, most of these content owners have become sluggish and unresponsive to the market (they rely on government to keep them going as opposed to adapting). As such, China and other people who see the situation for what it is, are able to take advantage of them/the situation.

      If the content owners spent time improving their business instead of lobbying governments, they would have come up with better solutions to piracy long ago. And it's not like there aren't attempts, such as DRM, DLC, and online subscription models for software (you may not like them, but you can just opt out and boycott those companies... same can't be said if government comes in and makes laws telling you what you can or cannot do)

    14. Re:I wonder... by vlm · · Score: 2

      Who do you think has been supporting the mighty US empire with loans for the last few decades? Who does the US now owe more to than it could ever hope to pay back?

      First order answer is nothing stops the mint from printing a single $100T bill, and declaring it paid off.

      Second order answer is that messes up oil import costs. Once the M.E. is drained dry, or Iran closes the straits, or "whatever", then there is no further point in maintaining the charade. China gets a couple more years of interest payments, then they get something about as valuable as a box of confederate money.

      Third order answer is we simply tell them "no". They can't even invade Taiwan... what are they realistically going to do to us, worst case scenario?

      Now if we were dumb enough to issue bonds payable in Chinese currency, that would be a problem ... We are dumb, but not that dumb.

      --
      "Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
    15. Re:I wonder... by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      You used the present tense but the AC responded as if you'd used the past perfect, so you're right and he's wrong.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    16. Re:I wonder... by mbone · · Score: 5, Informative

      Keep in mind that China has a recorded history of what, something between 11,000 and 17,000 years?

      Say what ? The Qin Shi Huang Emperor "buried the scholars and burned the books" in 213 BCE so the history of anything much before his reign is exceedingly fragmentary. The oldest extant Chinese writings are the Oracle "bones", which date from no earlier than 1500 BCE. Even Sima Qian started his history with the Yellow Emperor (~ 2600 BC), the first ruler he considered as probably historical.

      So, two thousand years ? Yes. Three, four thousand ? Maybe. Ten thousand ? No way.

    17. Re:I wonder... by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      Nope, you were disproving the statement that China never has innovated.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    18. Re:I wonder... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Chinese never innovate? I'm British, but that's utter rubbish.. The Chinese are responsible for many inventions but just take the 4 "papermaking, the compass, gunpowder, and printing (both woodblock and movable type)" and you have pretty much the basis for modern society to grow from. But yeah, they probably stole those from someone, because, you know, they're all thieves.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Chinese_inventions

      Good points, but, in the "what have you done for me lately" department, let's focus on innovations that were created by persons still living today.... hearing any crickets yet?

    19. Re:I wonder... by hitmark · · Score: 3, Insightful

      And USA did right after gaining independence.

      --
      comment first, facts later. http://chem.tufts.edu/AnswersInScience/RelativityofWrong.htm
    20. Re:I wonder... by 1s44c · · Score: 1

      Nope, you were disproving the statement that China never has innovated.

      That's not right. 'China never innovates' implies China has never innovated. You can't judge a country on future actions that no-one has any knowledge of.

      That's like me saying I 'never eat at mcdonalds' when I've eaten there 5 times in the past week but don't plan to eat there this week.

    21. Re:I wonder... by hb79 · · Score: 0

      I assume 'here' means US?

      Yeah, travelling light, with minimum amounts of personal electronics, and a clean loaner laptop from work is definitely standard procedure when going to the US. We're based in Western Europe, if that matters.

    22. Re:I wonder... by fritsd · · Score: 1

      Umm... is this some kind of advertisement for demanding euros as payment when doing business in the USA?

      --
      To be, or not to be: isn't that quite logical, Slashdot Beta?
    23. Re:I wonder... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No one cares.

    24. Re:I wonder... by anyGould · · Score: 1

      Tell what - when we start paying China royalties on those compasses and gunpowder (y'know, *their* intellectual property), then we might have some moral ground to stand on.

      Oh, and I think the British might want some cash back for all those books early America copied (and didn't pay the British authors for). And wasn't Hollywood founded waay the hell out West specifically to avoid various licenses and patents?

    25. Re:I wonder... by onepoint · · Score: 1

      I take that your comment of supporting the US empire is lacking research ....
      till the Jr. Bush administration, the US Treasury and Government was on target for a ZERO debit, in fact the issues was so alarming that countless research was done on how to handle it ( it's rather interesting thinking that Bush Senior and Clinton were on the track to reduce the federal debit ) http://www.factcheck.org/2008/02/the-budget-and-deficit-under-clinton/

      As for whom has supporting the debit as foreign powers, prior to the 90's it was Japan and Britain as the biggest investors and purchases of US debit. ( sorry don't have the data for that from 90's till 2005

      Onepoint

      --
      if you see me, smile and say hello.
    26. Re:I wonder... by makomk · · Score: 1

      Actually, US Customs is rumoured to have a history of conducting industrial espionage on behalf of big US defense contractors against their European competitors, and I'm pretty sure there are companies out there that give exactly the same advice about travelling light and using clean computers and phones with no confidential data on when travelling to the US.

    27. Re:I wonder... by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      Euros? LOL.

      The Chinese would be smart to demand payment in Yahn (or whatever they are calling their currency today).

      The dollar at least stands a chance of surviving. The Euro is burnt toast already. It's bad when one nation has printing presses. When every nation in europe has unlimited access to the same presses and is willing to go on general strike to maintain their access you know that game is very close to over.

      I'd take debt in British pounds before Euros. _That_ is how bad the euro situation is.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    28. Re:I wonder... by tnk1 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Good point, let's make that more accurate by saying that they haven't innovated since the 15th Century. That definitely changes everything.

      I mean, really, what *have* they innovated since then? And no, it's not meant to cut them down. Bear in mind, this is the *reason* that one of the most populous countries in the world, with one of the oldest civilizations could turn into a second rate country in the first place. Do you think the British and Germans and Russians and Japanese could have done squat to China if they had innovated in the last 500 years? No way.

      China is doing what the US did in the 19th Century... rip off everything they didn't invent themselves. Although, I will say that even when the US was ripping stuff off, they were actually inventing things too. China still isn't inventing anything other than better ways to censor their Internet.

    29. Re:I wonder... by Requiem18th · · Score: 1

      Not joking, yes, that's what I did last two times I visited the US.

      --
      But... the future refused to change.
    30. Re:I wonder... by tnk1 · · Score: 1

      1) Our security forces focus exclusively on taking peoples shoes off, punishing them for traveling by irradiating travelers, and molest traveling women and children. Definitely the laughingstock of the world's security and customs personnel.

      Commiting minor sexual assult as a matter of routine isn't considered a laughing matter in most countries, it's considered sick.

      Assault requires criminal intent. And most TSA people don't molest anyone. Let's get real here and cut the hyperbole. The TSA isn't a model agency, and they may not be hiring the brightest people, but it's not actually arranging sexual assault.

      2) ...China never innovates...

      That's the pro-US point of view is it? Who do you think has been supporting the mighty US empire with loans for the last few decades? Who does the US now owe more to than it could ever hope to pay back?

      Off the top of my head china invented gunpower and fireworks, paper money, the use of iron, and china ( The stuff cups are made out of ).

      Loans are not innovation. And the other stuff they invented in the Middle Ages. I'm not sure you're making your point very well, unless you are also consider the Feudal system an innovation as well.

    31. Re:I wonder... by tnk1 · · Score: 1

      +5 pedantic

    32. Re:I wonder... by tnk1 · · Score: 1

      His point is accurate. China can use its loans to the US as leverage only to a certain point. At some point, inflation may well be considered preferable to caving to China. And the US can print money and pay its loans that way.

      The US is not likely to do that, but either way, I wouldn't go considering the euro particularly safe, the Eurozone certainly isn't looking like the most stable place these days either.

    33. Re:I wonder... by deadweight · · Score: 1

      Can we stick to the last two centuries please?

    34. Re:I wonder... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, it's like me saying "I never eat at McDonalds" when I think I've been there once in the past 3 months, 2 or 3 times in the past year (and if the choice had been entirely up to me, we'd have gone to Burger King).

      If I intended to mean "I've never eaten at McDonalds", I would say that. "I never eat at McDonalds" does not imply the same thing.

    35. Re:I wonder... by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 1

      till the Jr. Bush administration, the US Treasury and Government was on target for a ZERO debit, in fact the issues was so alarming that countless research was done on how to handle it ( it's rather interesting thinking that Bush Senior and Clinton were on the track to reduce the federal debit ) http://www.factcheck.org/2008/02/the-budget-and-deficit-under-clinton/ [factcheck.org]

      It's also interesting to visit the US Treasury website, and discover that the US National Debt increased every single year of the Clinton Presidency.

      Hard to see how we're headed toward zero debt when debt is constantly increasing.

      For the record, the last time the Debt decreased was during the Eisenhower Presidency, before I was born.

      --

      "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
    36. Re:I wonder... by Darinbob · · Score: 2

      This is a patently obvious security thing to do. It has nothing to do with rampant paranoia as the summary suggests. Security on phones is next to non-existent, WiFi is swiftly crackable, and most users do not follow necessary security procedures because security and convenience do not co-exist. Modern office workers have essentially been trained to be lax with security because ignoring security is more productive.

      We get away with it for the most part because the domestic dangers tend to be trivial (viruses, malware) and because we're not specifically targeted we just need to be slightly more secure than the next person. This doesn't work so well when it comes to business though, and even within the US you may be specifically targeted. The only difference with China is that now it's widely known that devices belonging to business visitors will be actively targeted and thus there's no room left for willful naivete.

      Let's be blunt. Who are the dumbest people in the organization when it comes to computers? Sales people, who come and go at an alarming rate and who have minimal training much of the time. They're on the road constantly taking their devices into the competition's buildings. Next up on clueless meter are the executives who will be traveling around the world and schmoozing. Both of these groups will be using their own personal devices and copying work related information to them (violating IT guidelines most likely), connecting to the net via the hotel's WiFi or Starbucks, and with a smartphone they're probably automatically connecting to whatever wifi signal they see as the move around. Security nightmares even without leaving the US.

    37. Re:I wonder... by onepoint · · Score: 1

      sorry you need to validate your claim, here is the my data on the federal debit,
      http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/108xx/doc10871/HistoricalTables.pdf

      this was about a budgeting issue and having a surplus, that would in effect have a canceling out of more bonds being issued ( bonds hit maturity, paid off, no re-financing of the pre-established debit )

      as a note I see you are talking about debt ( which would cover treasury notes and bonds and all outstanding obligation if they were cashed in at once )
      then your are correct http://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/reports/pd/histdebt/histdebt_histo4.htm
      with the years of 1951 and 57 being the years of reduction.

      --
      if you see me, smile and say hello.
    38. Re:I wonder... by vlm · · Score: 1

      gold, silver, coal, Minnesota rice... Admittedly the entire US rice crop is only about 5% of China's crop, but theres no reason not to make a package deal.

      Steel/cast iron/aluminum and tungsten and copper work well too.

      Bitcoin? Not as a store of value but as a trading/transfer system?

      The euro is toast. Best case scenario is it becomes the neoDeutschmark, and thats not all that good of a case either.

      --
      "Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
    39. Re:I wonder... by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      We would tell them to pound sand of course.

      They will eventually be repaid with a nice fresh, crisp trillion dollar bill. I'm pretty sure they know it too.

      What are they going to do about it? This is economic deadlock.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    40. Re:I wonder... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Over the last few years I have been part of software teams providing demonstrations to the USA (I'm from the UK).

      When setting up a demonstration (after appropriate export licenses have been granted) the software is put on a secure VPN in an encrypted format. The support staff are sent over with no hardware (they should buy it as needed while there and destroy before they leave), if we have to send hardware it is sent over with no software on it via a registered courier. This is because the USA government is known to copy such information for economic advancement.

      You also have to look at bigger problems like ITAR or other security classifications, if I am carrying an encrypted usb disk with ITAR material on it and some TSA agent confiscates it for some reason. Then I am in breach of ITAR laws and could be fined $1 million.

      You might think where I have worked has overly pertective policies but then the travel policy for France, Germany, Australia and Canada goes: put software on laptop, keep laptop in hand luggage.

    41. Re:I wonder... by sjames · · Score: 1

      There's nothing innovative about loans. Gunpowder, fireworks, paper money and the fine dinnerware are more than a few years old. If you have to look back THAT far to find an innovation, the point stands for any practical purpose.

    42. Re:I wonder... by GumphMaster · · Score: 1

      I cannot speak for Russia or China, but I know my former Australian employer offers exactly this for people travelling to the United States.

      --
      Patent litigation: A doctrine of Mutually Assured Destruction... in which everyone seems willing to push the button
    43. Re:I wonder... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "... can anyone think of anything they've done that the west want ..."

      Eeeh, you might know that little thingy called compas ? or paper money ? or GUNPOWDER ? He? Not worth mentioning, I know.

    44. Re:I wonder... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Who does the US now owe more to than it could ever hope to pay back?

      First, Americans. According to Wikipedia, they hold 53% of all US debt. A distant second is China at $1.16t or about 1/4 of the debt held by Americans. Just below China is Japan with $910b. Yes, China holds a lot of US debt, but the notion that the percentage is somehow beyond what could ever be paid back or that China owns the US is laughable.

    45. Re:I wonder... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > I wouldn't go considering the euro particularly safe, the Eurozone certainly isn't looking like the most stable place these days either.
      Au contraire. A large part of the reason that a number of Eurozone countries are in trouble is that they can't simply inflate the debt away by printing currency because it isn't their currency to print. Some of the Eurozone economies aren't exactly booming, but the Euro itself is a perfectly stable currency.
      Also: most of it is overblown. Greece's situation is pretty dire, but the others (i.e. Italy, Spain, Portugal, Ireland) just miscalculated their finances. Shit happens, it isn't the end of the world, and most of them have seen worse in the not-so-distant past (three of the four have seen dictatorships in my lifetime).

    46. Re:I wonder... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I can always tell when I encounter an atheist historian - they're the ones who think that changing the name of their calendar changes the fact that it's based on the (supposed, incorrectly) year of the birth of Jesus Christ. It's kinda like the builders skipping 13 cause they're superstitious when they're numbering the floors in a building. 14 is now 13. All's well. Carry on!

    47. Re:I wonder... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      P.S. I especially like the ones who slip up and insert a "BC" instead of "BCE".

    48. Re:I wonder... by JohnnyBGod · · Score: 1

      There's plenty of computer vision research coming out of China, for instance.

    49. Re:I wonder... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      China's incessant ripping off of intelligence(corporate and gov.) is why they don't innovate as much. Companies aren't willing to risk investing in new technology if
      a)They think the competitor will just steal it and/or have no way to protect monopoly rights on the product.
      b)They think they can just steal it from a foreign company that operates in a market with less risk and more innovation.
      China COULD innovate but the business environment just isn't conducive to it. Chinese companies are just as likely to rip each other off as they are to foreigners. Its all about fast money as my Chinese friends put it. The Chinese diaspora(US, Canada, ect.) certainly has no issues in the innovation nor does Taiwan. Even during the industrial revolution in the US there were better patent laws so American innovated products did enjoy some level of protection. Those patents did not apply to foreign produced goods hence the ripping off of British industrial models.

    50. Re:I wonder... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Who do you think has been supporting the mighty US empire with loans for the last few decades?

      Last few decades? UK and Japan. Chinese holding was a nonfactor until less than a decade ago. What was your point again?

    51. Re:I wonder... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      First order answer is nothing stops the mint from printing a single $100T bill, and declaring it paid off.

      Except for the fact that it would destroy the value of the US dollar on the international market, which would make imports very expensive. It would also destroy the USA's credit rating.

      But I suppose they are only minor details.

  3. A good start by gtvr · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Good to see companies waking up to a very obvious threat. Next will be if they can figure out that sharing IP for a little bit of extra market share over there is NOT a good long term investment.

    1. Re:A good start by Younggeezer · · Score: 1

      ...and this sort of thing is why the company I work for has expanded in India, but has frozen headcount in China. If I were running the zoo we'd be gone from China.

    2. Re:A good start by El+Torico · · Score: 1

      I'm considering starting a business; one of its cardinal rules will be "We don't do business with China." I'll blackhole/block every prefix for that country (and several others) at our external firewall and router.

      --
      In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is usually crucified.
  4. Why not an article "Travel Light to US"? by stm2 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Since your laptop can be confiscated legally at the border.

    --
    DNA in your Linux: DNALinux
    1. Re:Why not an article "Travel Light to US"? by N1AK · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I have no intention of defending the USA's often excessive intrusions; however, as with many other issues, trying to make out that they are operating on the same level as China is misleading and counter-productive. Unless you actually have, or can provide links to a credible source showing, evidence that the US is routinely compromising the electronic devices of a vast number of foriegn visitors then you're just spreading FUD.

    2. Re:Why not an article "Travel Light to US"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Because that's the US. Do i a say, not as i do!

    3. Re:Why not an article "Travel Light to US"? by jellomizer · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Or anywhere in the world.
      General rule of thumb when traveling is to always travel light and poor. The more valuable things you bring with you the more liability that you are lugging around, which may be stolen, confiscated, or make you prime bate to be kidnapped.
      Sure you may be street smart enough in your area to see the difference between a criminal and an honest folk, but in a different culture you are green all over again, and prime bate. Even if you are going across the US. In the country and need assistance often you can get help from those guys walking down the street with large riffles in hand (as they are probably just hunting) for those who live in the country these people are not threatening they are just out having a good time. In the City you should avoid the guy walking down the street with a riffle.
      Or up in the Northeast, People usually go straight to business with less pleasantries, down south there is more talk and gentlemen behavior. For a Northern folk if someone comes up to you and starts talking all friendly like, you get warning bells that this guys is trying to distract you. If down south someone gets straight to business this guy is just being rude and hiding information so you shouldn't trust him.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    4. Re:Why not an article "Travel Light to US"? by GameboyRMH · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Yep this is a point on which it is fair to say that America is no better.

      The only safe way to take devices there is to wipe your devices clean (an uncertain and damaging act on flash storage) and carry a hard drive with a deniable hidden encrypted partition (including duress key to unlock a decoy partition) containing backups of the devices. Or store the backup online (connecting with an anti-MITM system and using proper encryption of course, that means ONLY YOU have the key and there is no "recovery" option) if you have a shit-ton of bandwidth and time.

      Even then they may take your hardware and do who-knows-what to it, as happened to Moxie Marlinspike's phone. Or you may just not get it back at all.

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    5. Re:Why not an article "Travel Light to US"? by ios+and+web+coder · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Yep this is a point on which it is fair to say that America is no better.

      I'm not sure I'd agree with that.
      This is a case of them planting trojans on your equipment in China, then exercising that, when you get back to the US.
      In the US, this can be (and I'm sure, is) done by folk like the CIA and NSA. However, folks like me don't do it. Foreigners can come to my office, exchange files and information, use my network, and even use my USB fobs with no worries that I'll plant spyware on their machines (I am quite capable of doing so, as, I'm sure, are a significant number of /. readers).
      To have it so prevalent in a nation is a serious, serious indictment. The NSA does not come to my office and demand that I arbitrarily plant trojans on our partners' and customers' machines. If they did, I would fight them fang, tooth and claw.
      What is happening in China is very dangerous. Not just for us, but also for the Chinese. They may think they have this tiger by the tail, but they will really be shocked when it turns around and bites them.

      --

      "For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong."

      -H. L. Mencken

    6. Re:Why not an article "Travel Light to US"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      s/bate/bait/g

    7. Re:Why not an article "Travel Light to US"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or up in the Northeast, People usually go straight to business with less pleasantries, down south there is more talk and gentlemen behavior. For a Northern folk if someone comes up to you and starts talking all friendly like, you get warning bells that this guys is trying to distract you.

      You've obviously only been to New York City and never Minneapolis.

    8. Re:Why not an article "Travel Light to US"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "prime bate"

      Or even worse, master bate.

    9. Re:Why not an article "Travel Light to US"? by vlm · · Score: 5, Interesting

      If down south someone gets straight to business this guy is just being rude and hiding information so you shouldn't trust him.

      I spent a year in the south in the 90s and the reason is people see themselves as instruments of tradition. Historically mobility was low in the south, so a simple business transaction well become a lifetime economic marriage, so there's lots of courting going on. Your GGGgrandpa and his GGGgrandpa probably served in the same civil war regiment, and in fact there probably is a distant genealogically tenuous connection between you two assuming you're genuine southern natives. If nothing bad happens, your kids might very well be expected to continue the business transaction. Also there exists a massive gossip network such that you can assume everyone is all into your business, so if they truly don't know you, they will be mystified as to what you're up to simply due to curiosity. I heard some hilarious jokes that probably only make sense in the rural south about old forgetful people simply relying on their gossip hound neighbors to remind them of stuff, like a human peer to peer network. In the go go go north economic transactions are more of a one night stand or fling at most, so no one cares what church if any you attend, or what military unit you or your GGGgreatgrandpa served in. Its an article of faith amongst the southerners I knew that tradition and reputation (both individual and familial) are extremely valuable, they believe in that about as much as their church, more or less.

      Northern business transactions are like a single hand of poker. Southern business transactions are like a multigenerational game of chess or Go. Before you freak out, obviously these stereotypes are only about 75% accurate.

      --
      "Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
    10. Re:Why not an article "Travel Light to US"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Because that article has already been on slashdot many times.

    11. Re:Why not an article "Travel Light to US"? by stanlyb · · Score: 0

      Facebook, twitter, google. Do you need more evidence???

    12. Re:Why not an article "Travel Light to US"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In the country and need assistance often you can get help from those guys walking down the street with large riffles in hand (as they are probably just hunting) for those who live in the country these people are not threatening they are just out having a good time. In the City you should avoid the guy walking down the street with a riffle.

      I was once bitten by a country riffle.

    13. Re:Why not an article "Travel Light to US"? by stanlyb · · Score: 1

      What was the purpose of NDAA bill again? You don't know? Don't worry, you will, soon, or maybe not, forget it, just keep dreaming, BIG.

    14. Re:Why not an article "Travel Light to US"? by CohibaVancouver · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Since your laptop can be confiscated legally at the border.

      Yes, but you know it's happened. They scan your laptop for CP and bomb plans, then hand it back. In China, your privacy is raided without you ever knowing. This is the crucial difference.

    15. Re:Why not an article "Travel Light to US"? by andydread · · Score: 1

      the NDAA (National defence authorisation act) is a United States federal law specifying the budget and expenditures of the United States Department of Defense. So do you have a better Idea how to specify the budget and expenditures of the us DOD? The NDAA has been signed every year my many presidents. So we should not pay for defence?

    16. Re:Why not an article "Travel Light to US"? by CohibaVancouver · · Score: 1

      In the country and need assistance often you can get help from those guys walking down the street with large riffles in hand (as they are probably just hunting)

      Yep. I'm Canadian - I still remember being lost while driving in rural Colorado (pre-GPS days) so I asked some guys who happened to have a bunch of guns for directions. They were very friendly and helpful

    17. Re:Why not an article "Travel Light to US"? by GameboyRMH · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The NSA does not come to my office and demand that I arbitrarily plant trojans on our partners' and customers' machines. If they did, I would fight them fang, tooth and claw.

      Consider the AT&T interception room, the people working there weren't as upstanding as you. I know it's server-side spying rather than client-side but it's not much better.

      Also consider the laws that allow the US government unfettered access to Gmail, Blackberry comms., cellular data...is that so different from the Chinese government asking Chinese companies to spy for them?

      And if the Chinese citizens think their government isn't a danger to them, they're morons. They were a danger to their own citizens long before they were a danger to any foreigners.

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    18. Re:Why not an article "Travel Light to US"? by ios+and+web+coder · · Score: 1

      What @andydread said. In THIS country (not sure which one you live in), a wholesale takeover of industry by intelligence agencies would cause...issues. Americans are funny that way. Again, speaking from my experience as a technical manager for a long time, and as someone who used to work for a defense contractor, I have never seen anything even remotely like some of the tinfoil fantasies out there. Makes for some pretty good fiction, though.

      --

      "For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong."

      -H. L. Mencken

    19. Re:Why not an article "Travel Light to US"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      diddle my riffle

    20. Re:Why not an article "Travel Light to US"? by NatasRevol · · Score: 1, Informative
      --
      There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
    21. Re:Why not an article "Travel Light to US"? by NatasRevol · · Score: 1

      You've obviously failed geography.

      Minneapolis is nowhere near the Northeast.

      --
      There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
    22. Re:Why not an article "Travel Light to US"? by b4dc0d3r · · Score: 1

      You are the FUD. The post you replied to specifically mentioned an act of which actual cases have been recorded. This was challenged in 2010, despite having been unofficially trimmed back in 2008. You inserted the "vast numbers of foreign visitors" part yourself so you would have something to attack. The articles linked contain 1 confirmed case of this happening, far less than the number of confirmed US seizures, and a suspected number which may equal the number of *confirmed* US seizures.

      http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2010/09/laptop-border-searches/

      And at no point did anyone imply the same level of operation. We have the same certainty that it is possible now, having confirmed cases on both sides, and the same certainty that caution should be exercised in both countries.

      The only reason why no have a "Travel Light to US" article is that it has essentially been covered here. And the news in this case isn't that it happened, it's that business essentially accepts it as a given that you will be spied on. As opposed to coming to America, where it is not yet a given. So no, not the same level, but that wasn't implied. "It has happened so you should plan on it happening" applies both ways.

    23. Re:Why not an article "Travel Light to US"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      dude,

      WTF is bate?

      its BAIT!

      Street Smart My Ahss...

    24. Re:Why not an article "Travel Light to US"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hacker: "Give me your laptop for 3 mins, and I'll own it forever. Well, at least until my 0day or rootkit gets outed..."

      That, plus a usb stick/toolkit to 'scan your laptop for CP and bomb plans' that also happens to deploy said 0day, equals carte blanche for taking someone's corporate/personal laptop and turning it into either a torrent of data or a Manchurian Agent -- or one toggleable between these and other states. Still ok with relenquishing control of your laptop even for a few minutes?

      After a stint doing similar work, the only reason I'm not hideously paranoid is I don't have much worth taking. Still, I worry and take precautions.

    25. Re:Why not an article "Travel Light to US"? by anyGould · · Score: 1

      Since your laptop can be confiscated legally at the border.

      Yes, but you know it's happened. They scan your laptop for CP and bomb plans, then hand it back. In China, your privacy is raided without you ever knowing. This is the crucial difference.

      Might want to re-check that - US Customs reserves the right to make a complete copy of your data before handing the machine back to you (and they can wait 90 days before giving you the machine).

      The difference between US and China is simply that China tries to be discreet - the US has no problems telling you that they're making full copies of your data to peruse at their leisure. (And I will laugh at anyone who doesn't believe that at the very least, TSA agents have the most complete collection of "seized" TV shows, movies, and music on the planet.)

    26. Re:Why not an article "Travel Light to US"? by CohibaVancouver · · Score: 1

      TSA agents have the most complete collection of "seized" TV shows, movies, and music on the planet.)

      Fer God's sake. If you're going to spread conspiracy theories, get your US Fed acronyms correct. The TSA does not view laptop hard drives at their security checkpoints. They haven't even asked me to turn one on in nearly 10 years. CBP may scan your laptop, and they only do that when you enter the country.

    27. Re:Why not an article "Travel Light to US"? by ios+and+web+coder · · Score: 1

      I'll repeat: The NSA does not come to my office and arbitrarily ask me to send bugs out
      In the US (where I live), that would cause problems.
      Apples != oranges.

      I think what you are doing is #3 and #9.
      And thanks, I am pretty upstanding. I'm not alone. There's a hell of a lot of us out here.

      --

      "For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong."

      -H. L. Mencken

    28. Re:Why not an article "Travel Light to US"? by anyGould · · Score: 1

      Apologies - as a Canadian all those three-letter agencies start to look the same.

      And hate to break it to you, but US border guards *will* mess with us on the way out as well - and even give you a beatdown for failing to sufficiently respect their authoritah

    29. Re:Why not an article "Travel Light to US"? by the+eric+conspiracy · · Score: 1

      Talk about FUD. Echelon is a code name for a system built to intercept satellite communications in the cold war era.

      From the article you linked to:

      "The role of satellites in point-to-point voice and data communications has largely been supplanted by fiber optics. As of 2006, 99% of the world's long-distance voice and data traffic was carried over optical-fiber. The proportion of international communications accounted for by satellite links is said to have decreased substantially over the past few years in Central Europe to an amount between 0.4 and 5%. Even in less-developed parts of the world, communications satellites are used largely for point-to-multipoint applications, such as video. Thus the majority of communications cannot be intercepted by earth stations, but only by tapping cables and intercepting line-of-sight microwave signals, which is possible only to a limited extent."

    30. Re:Why not an article "Travel Light to US"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...and carry a hard drive with a deniable hidden encrypted partition (including duress key to unlock a decoy partition) containing backups of the devices.

      I'm sure they are aware of that and will continue to beat you to the brink of death (or OVER IT) untill you have no more secrets to divulge EVEN AFTER YOU HAVE DONE SO!

      The BEST thing to do on these types of outings is to just take a cell phone with you THAT HAS NO RECORDING CAPABILITY ON IT and use it to communicate 'in the clear' with no 'codespeak' back to company HQ.

      If you learn anything useful on such trips like this, just try to remember the important details and return home with them in your mind between your ears....Time to start hiring people with PROVEN eidetic memory and have them take these types of trips for the company.

      DO NOT hire Ken Jennings! Surely they know about him and his 'mad tear' on JEOPARDY!... :D

    31. Re:Why not an article "Travel Light to US"? by NatasRevol · · Score: 1

      So, we're to assume that they haven't gotten better since the cold war?

      --
      There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
  5. Kind of dumb... by Lumpy · · Score: 1

    Travel with a "travel phone" it's a basic phone that does not contain anything important.... EVER.. and yes, wipe it a lot, but a wipe will not help if they flashed a new firmware with spy additions in it.

    I would never even think of bringing my daily phone overseas. Bring a disposable that you dont care about.

    --
    Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    1. Re:Kind of dumb... by acidfast7 · · Score: 1

      my daily phone is disposable. i don't need a super computer to make/receive phone calls. in addition, i enjoy being detached from the office at times.

    2. Re:Kind of dumb... by pseudofrog · · Score: 2

      Okay. Erm...good for you? Would you like a cookie?

    3. Re:Kind of dumb... by Colourspace · · Score: 1

      Good for you. Well done.

    4. Re:Kind of dumb... by gstoddart · · Score: 3, Funny

      Okay. Erm...good for you? Would you like a cookie?

      His phone probably doesn't accept cookies. ;-)

      --
      Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    5. Re:Kind of dumb... by mini+me · · Score: 1

      I don't need a phone. All important communication happens over IP. Unfortunately, that means having an expensive mobile device.

    6. Re:Kind of dumb... by Lumpy · · Score: 1

      News Flash: my cheap travel phone has it's voice channel travel over IP.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    7. Re:Kind of dumb... by mini+me · · Score: 1

      Not much of a newsflash, and also obviously not what I was referring to. Thanks for trying though.

  6. Why do you think companies hate user's devices? by msobkow · · Score: 4, Insightful

    When there are risks of company devices being hacked and used to spy on corporate data, is it any wonder that many companies still refuse to allow personal devices to be connected to the company networks?

    Still, you have to wonder how much of these issues are due to poor maintenance and management of the corporate infrastructure enabling the penetrations and attacks.

    I've heard of ONE incident where a penetration was actually a zero-day exploit and did not happen because someone didn't upgrade a server or change passwords after employees left the company. 25 years. A quarter century. And only ONE incident that wasn't someone's failure to perform due diligence of maintenance?

    That doesn't say much for North America's corporate security policies, does it?

    --
    I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.
    1. Re:Why do you think companies hate user's devices? by Lonewolf666 · · Score: 1

      True enough, and not only in North America. At my current place of work (in Germany), there are still some XP SP2 machines around. This despite SP2 being out of support. That is trouble waiting to happen ;-)

      --
      C - the footgun of programming languages
  7. Good practice anywhere by million_monkeys · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This has been standard practice in many places for years. And not just when travelling to China. Even if you're not working with high value information, there's usually not any justification for taking equipment full of company information abroad.

    1. Re:Good practice anywhere by jimbolauski · · Score: 2

      This has been standard practice in many places for years. And not just when travelling to China. Even if you're not working with high value information, there's usually not any justification for taking equipment full of company information abroad.

      Wiping your HD after a trip to remove almost all types of malware so you don't bring anything back to the company is new, using a throw away phone so your phone can't be compromised is something new, having a thumb-drive with all your passwords on it so a key logger can't get them is something new. Not taking sensitive data overseas has been a policy for a long time but these new measures are something totally different. This is just the next evolutionary step in the battle to steal IP vs protect IP.

      --
      Knowledge = Power
      P= W/t
      t=Money
      Money = Work/Knowledge so the less you know the more you make
  8. Hang on,,. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    My T510 Came from china in the first place...

  9. A thermostat? by SJHillman · · Score: 1

    I can see how compromising a printer could be useful if you sent back documents of everything sent to it. But a thermostat? Unless the thermostat was also bugged, I don't see what good infiltrating a thermostat would do. Or why a thermostat would be Internet accessible.

    1. Re:A thermostat? by Captain+Hook · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I read it as... laptop taken to China, infected with something which then wormed it's way into all the systems it could when reconnected to the corporate network, which happened to include some network controllable thermostats.

      i.e. the Chinese aren't after the thermostat, it was just part of a system which got compromised.

      --
      These comments are my personal opinions and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the other voices in my head.
    2. Re:A thermostat? by Lehk228 · · Score: 2

      a fancy thermostat and a printer would both have a web interface panel, if the firewall did not isolate those devices from outside http requests both could have been being accessed from china without compromising anything, for that matter it could have been one of their own people tried to print something while they were in china, and that put the printers address in memory with the great firewall, and chinas security guys were following up (probably automated but sometimes china will do things manually that really need not be) to check if that address was some kind of proxy system.

      --
      Snowden and Manning are heroes.
    3. Re:A thermostat? by vlm · · Score: 2

      Not only just another windows box, but a windows box that cannot be upgraded without violating the extremely expensive software support contract.
      Seen this happen with numerically controlled machine tools, PBXs, some internet accessible "software as a service" type of apps, some weird embedded stuff I don't think I can talk about ... the stereotype is if there is an expensive support contract, that machine is gonna get owned.

      --
      "Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
    4. Re:A thermostat? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How can you a) read and post to slashdot, and b) not have any interesting ideas about why you would legitimately want your thermostat connected to your network? Or what bad guys could do if they penetrated it?

    5. Re:A thermostat? by andydread · · Score: 1

      Or why a thermostat would be Internet accessible.

      Want to know why a thermostat would be Internet accessible? see here

      Want to know why a garage door opener would be Internet accessible? see here

      More and more things are becoming that way. like it or not.

    6. Re:A thermostat? by pz · · Score: 1

      Exactly. Consider the thermostat to be collateral damage.

      (Now why the thermostat was running Windows and not a stripped-down application-specific program without even an OS is undoubtedly due to sloth on the part of the thermostat manufacturer. It's a frelling thermostat after all, even if it is remotely controllable over an ethernet connection.)

      --

      Put my fist through my alarm clock with its ding-dong death inside my ear. - The Blackjacks.
    7. Re:A thermostat? by SJHillman · · Score: 1

      Ok, that's an example of what is Internet accessible, but not why. In a business or government network, thermostats and other such devices should be limited to local communication only... basic firewall rules should prevent it from communicating with the outside world. Home users might be a little different because they care more about convenience than security.

    8. Re:A thermostat? by Captain+Hook · · Score: 1

      thermostat might have just been shorthand for a more complete environment monitoring system measuring temperature, humidity, lighting etc

      Although I still can't quite work out why they don't just control the system with dedicated hardware/firmware.

      Just guessing but maybe a system which ties into the SNMP reporting system might want to use a generic OS to make rule processing easily upgradeable.

      You could also use a more generic OS based system to be able to be a lot more predictive of environmental needs. for example, looking at a calendar of Public Holidays and reducing temperatures to weekend levels for a Monday when there wouldn't be any staff in

      --
      These comments are my personal opinions and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the other voices in my head.
    9. Re:A thermostat? by anyGould · · Score: 1

      thermostat might have just been shorthand for a more complete environment monitoring system measuring temperature, humidity, lighting etc

      Even if it's just the thermostat, that's still useful information. Think about it - if you know both the presets for the temperature (when the heat comes on/off) and the current temperature, you can make some decent inferences about how many people work there during various shifts.

      If you have *control* over the 'stat, then you're in "mess with them" territory. If it's an interactive display with a keypad, bet you could do some decent phishing...

    10. Re:A thermostat? by phorm · · Score: 1

      Well, that an...
      you might think to check all the servers/laptops/desktops when looking for an intrusion vector, but would you suspect the thermostat? If not, then it's a good way for an infection to sneak back in after being "cleaned"

  10. Is this news? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Since North American Telecom use Chinese made equipment from the likes of Hua Wei does this bode well at all?

  11. Done all over the place by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    This is done in every totalitarian country. For example, when David Smick was in Singapore, he called home and made a comment about being dissatisfied with the hotel room provided to him. When he was picked up the next day, the person "escorting" him apologized for his hotel room not being good.

    Here in the States, we're monitored under the auspices of the "War on Drugs" or Terrorism or Child Porn or what have you. When folks say we live in a free country, I have to ask, "Is being monitored being Free?" The fact that I have to show id to buy suphedrine because a couple of addicts burnt their houses down is freedom? (As an aside, I live in white trash America and there has been maybe one meth lab in my area that has been raided in the last decade. One. But yet people and the police act like there's one on every block.)

    In this day and age, the tin foil hat brigade are usually right

    1. Re:Done all over the place by DigiShaman · · Score: 1

      I could see that going either way. Perhaps his phone was bugged. But think of this scenario. Imagine him never making a phone call mentioning anything about his hotel. Would it have been out of line for that same person to apologize about his room not being properly made? Perhaps one of the maids ratted out her fellow co-worker in order to earn brownie points (backstabbing is notorious in China I've been told). It could also have been SOP at a major star hotel too. As an American, one thing I've learned about China is that they are extremely kind and courteous to westerners. It's a cultural thing if theirs to treat their guests with the upmost respect. Right up until you violate their laws.

      Word of advice for those traveling abroad. Keep your nose clean and you should be fine. Don't bitch or start a fight. You are a foreigner in a foreign land. Remember that!

      --
      Life is not for the lazy.
    2. Re:Done all over the place by jimbolauski · · Score: 1

      Please tell me how you have been monitored, have your phone conversations been recorded? Has you computer been seized? All these things require a warrant so their must be probable cause. Your only example of you rights being trampled is you have to show identification to get cold medicine, this is your battle cry? There has been a trend with the Supreme Court to rule in favor of individual rights protected in the constitution in the past few years, GPS tracking is the most recent, Justice Sonia Sotomayor even said that the 3rd party rule should be looked at for being repealed. There is a trend in the US from both conservatives and liberals (not many of the elected officials) to start moving away from an authoritarian government hopefully this trend will replace the entrenched representatives that seek power from the government.

      --
      Knowledge = Power
      P= W/t
      t=Money
      Money = Work/Knowledge so the less you know the more you make
    3. Re:Done all over the place by greg1104 · · Score: 1

      If you think needing to show an ID is bad, you still live in one of the lucky states for pseudoephedrine. In Oregon and Mississippi, you need a prescription to buy it.

    4. Re:Done all over the place by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Every call overseas is probably recorded by the NSA.
      Every IP packet sent on your PC - including VoIP ones - may be stored for later review - without a warrant. No warrant is needed.

      Every email you send or receive can be looked at, screened.

      Sure, tapping a phone conversation between two phones inside the USA requires a warrant, but tapping every IP packet does not. There are ZERO protections of your data communications in the USA.

    5. Re:Done all over the place by darkmeridian · · Score: 1

      I read similar stories when US Apollos astronauts went to Star City for a PR tour. Everyone knew their rooms were bugged so they would intentionally complain about stuff so they would get better rooms and beer and stuff. Interestingly, and as an aside, the Russian astronauts believed Houston was a fake city. "Where is this place, filled with so many important people that everyone has a car?" "Uh, everyone in America has a car." "So why the buses?" "Sometimes we're too lazy to drive so we take the bus." "Bullshit."

      --
      A NYC lawyer blogs. http://www.chuangblog.com/
    6. Re:Done all over the place by AnonyMouseCowWard · · Score: 2

      I haven't been, but how about a real-life example of how one of my friend has been "monitored".

      She's American-born, holds an American passport, but is not white and studies in Canada. On a drive home (note, drive, not even flying) from Canada, she gets stopped at the border, her car gets searched, is detained for hours, has her cellphone messages checked, and is asked to unlock her computer, and they look at every single document and personal picture on her computer. Then they proceed to question her and ask her if she knows why she got stopped.

      Why, you ask? Well, apparently being brown qualifies you as a terrorist threat despite having lived all your life in the US and studying in the crime nest that is Canada.

      No, no IP was stolen. It was just "war on terror". The actions that result from it, though, are uncannily similar.

      Conclusion: travel light. Period.

    7. Re:Done all over the place by Pope · · Score: 1

      Sounds like we're going to need to "travel white" at this point. The racial profiling at the border is insane at times.

      --
      It doesn't mean much now, it's built for the future.
    8. Re:Done all over the place by jmcvetta · · Score: 1

      All these things require a warrant so their must be probable cause.

      Hahahaha... good one!

    9. Re:Done all over the place by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't know OP AC but it doesn't matter who he is. His communication is being monitored. Everyone's is. It doesn't matter if it's illegal or does in theory require a warrant. Again and again law enforcement all over "western" countries got caught violating laws and nothing ever happens to them.

      As somebody whose computer has actually been seized (and returned after 7 months because they realised they are incompetent tools and there was no wrong-doing in the first place), I can tell you warrents are worth jack shit. Judges have absolutely zero technological knowledge and often don't even understand the "probable cause" they are signing off.

      It's really scary once you get caught in their dragnets and you get to see behind the curtain of "the valiant defenders of justice". It's a sad and horrifying joke.

  12. CHICOMs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Bill Clinton's BFF!

  13. Chromium OS by should_be_linear · · Score: 3, Insightful

    For this purpose notebook with ChromeOS (or ChromiumOS) seems like good solution.

    --
    839*929
    1. Re:Chromium OS by idji · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Where Google has full access to all your data

    2. Re:Chromium OS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why?

    3. Re:Chromium OS by stiggle · · Score: 1

      And all your network traffic is compromised via a Man-in-the-Middle attack.

      Why do you think Certificate Authorities keep getting compromised?

    4. Re:Chromium OS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And all your network traffic is compromised via a Man-in-the-Middle attack.

      Who cares? The point of the exercise is to not travel with/have access to damaging information and infrastructure. If you take a Chromium netbook that has no damaging information, it does not matter if there's a MITM snooping on your non-damaging information. The point is to have as disposable a portable working environment as possible. If that's Chromium, then go with that.

    5. Re:Chromium OS by hobarrera · · Score: 2

      The point in question was to avoid the Chinese Government taking his information, so he switched to an alternative organization to do this.

    6. Re:Chromium OS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But remember, your typical linux basement dweller trusts google, a company that earns billions almost solely by selling you to advertisers.

    7. Re:Chromium OS by inputdev · · Score: 1

      I don't think ChromeOS would work in China - I couldn't access google docs using Chrome.

    8. Re:Chromium OS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      TrueCrypt is your friend.

    9. Re:Chromium OS by toddestan · · Score: 1

      If Google wants your data and they made the OS I can't see how TrueCrypt is going to help you.

  14. They Do Catch Criminals That Way by eldavojohn · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Since your laptop can be confiscated legally at the border.

    I'm not saying it's right for them to be able to do that but they do catch individuals engaged with corporate and even economic espionage that way. The key difference here is that it's intended to be an open action against you by US Customs whereas in China the intent is for you to never know anything happened and the key logger or stolen information being covertly used without your knowledge of who did it or even what's going on. I think one is much worse than the other but I guess that's just my opinion.

    --
    My work here is dung.
    1. Re:They Do Catch Criminals That Way by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      What's the point? They would also catch individuals engaged with corporate and economic espionage at the border if they were allowed to torture anyone as they like.

    2. Re:They Do Catch Criminals That Way by Moskit · · Score: 2, Insightful

      How do you know that USA does not do similar "covert" operations"?

      Echelon is just one example of a covert industrial espionage mechanism established and run by Americans. I would not think US does not do the same things as China, Russia, France or other countries. China is just so convenient to be a scapegoat. If you believe this is just to "catch criminals", you've been convinced by the dark side ;-)

      In any case this article is a valuable reminder that nothing is "private" these days, that every electronic device is susceptible to be used against you.

    3. Re:They Do Catch Criminals That Way by Hentes · · Score: 2

      I'm not saying it's right for them to be able to do that but they do catch individuals engaged with corporate and even economic espionage that way.

      Bullshit. Why would anyone try to smuggle data physically through the border instead of sending it on wire?

    4. Re:They Do Catch Criminals That Way by jackhererUK · · Score: 3, Insightful

      They only catch the moronic ones that way. If you want to move data from country x to country y there is this new fangled thing called "the internet" that allows you to move data from one place to another without having to pass through customs. If you are dumb enough to try and smuggle illicit data from one country to another by carrying a laptop across the border containing said illicit data then you deserve to get caught because you are a moron.

    5. Re:They Do Catch Criminals That Way by Hatta · · Score: 1

      I'm not saying it's right for them to be able to do that but they do catch individuals engaged with corporate and even economic espionage that way.

      The headline you won't see is that the US itself engages in corporate and economic espionage that way.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    6. Re:They Do Catch Criminals That Way by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      Echelon is an end run around constitutions by the spy services of the USA, Britain and Australia.

      All are prevented from spying on their own citizens, so they spy on each others citizens and report to their partners.

      But it's basic old fashioned nation state espionage, not so much industrial espionage.

      I'd like to add a ''we're all rooting for you' to the Aussie spook reading this.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    7. Re:They Do Catch Criminals That Way by tnk1 · · Score: 1

      Echelon is signals intelligence. Sure, you can get trade secrets that way, but honestly, it's not going to rip things out of cell phones and laptops unless they are transmitted over the wire or over the air.

      Of course, whatever the program is actually called, the US probably has industrial espionage elements, but if it does, they do a lot less of it than China or it is a lot less obvious. Still, also realize that the US still has a lot more research and development than China does, and that's a fact. I'm sure there's some stuff worth stealing from Western Europe, or Russia in some isolated cases, but its hardly the same situation as when you walk into China.

      The US is more likely to use it's intelligence for doing things like making sure that its companies get business overseas. One example of that is when Airbus people were using bribes to get airplane contracts in Saudi (I think) and the US let it be known that it had discovered this and caused Airbus to lose the contract. Admittedly, I am sure the ops aren't necessarily always as "white hat" as that.

    8. Re:They Do Catch Criminals That Way by Moskit · · Score: 1

      Yes, it's hard to put quantity or quality on each country's industrial espionage, but it is fairly universal around the world. I suspect USA has the most resources and media devoted to uncovering "the others" as bad guys and hiding their own dealings there. Airbus example, and this China scare are examples of that.

      BTW: China's Huawei is currently the "most innovative company", with about 50 thousands of patents applied for. They (Chinese companies) are going to improve their research over the coming years, even if initially this is "embrace&enhance" of Western ideas.
      Agreed, number of patents is not the best measure for R&D, but still - it makes you think.

    9. Re:They Do Catch Criminals That Way by the+eric+conspiracy · · Score: 1

      Don't be an idiot about this.

      Every significant industrialized nation engages in government aided industrial espionage.

      Heck the French were bugging the first class section of the Concorde and planting agents among the flight staff to collect this sort of stuff.

      http://www.ctcintl.com/0795.shtml

    10. Re:They Do Catch Criminals That Way by muckracer · · Score: 1

      > there is this new fangled thing called "the internet"

      Is this true?? Has Netcraft confirmed?

    11. Re:They Do Catch Criminals That Way by thejynxed · · Score: 1

      I wouldn't count Huawei - they are directly owned, staffed, and funded by the CCP. For all intents and purposes, it would be like if the US Patent Office owned and operated IBM.

      Also, there's been several cases of Huawei's patents being issued for known "plagiarized" work, or the CCP outright waited for a foreign company to apply for a patent first, then granted the patent in question to Huawei instead while denying it to the foreign company.

      --
      @Mindless Drivel: 100% of Twitter posts ever Tweeted.
  15. this is old news by mbone · · Score: 4, Interesting

    If you travel to China, this is old news.

    Yes, some businesses are beginning to require wiped travel laptops for entering the US. I have to say that I do not know anyone personally who has had laptop issues at the US border (although I know that there are some people who are on some sort of list and have them frequently). The assumption is, if you go to China, you will probably be hacked, and it's not going to happen at Customs.

    By the way, in my experience Chinese firms are incredibly paranoid about this, much more so than US firms. I suspect that paranoia has some justification.

    1. Re:this is old news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      With the number of bootleg software installs on home computers there and the associated trojan problems they'd be crazy not to act paranoid.

  16. sign by CohibaVancouver · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Sigh.

    Cue all the "BUT THE US IS WORSE THAN CHINA!" posts. You should log off WoW and read a little on Amnesty International about China. Could the USA do much better? Absofreakinglutely - But I can tell you as a Canadian business traveller that the USA is orders of magnitude less intrusive when it comes to visitors to their country. The next time you're in China go try to surf Tibet videos on Youtube and let me know how that goes for you.

    1. Re:sign by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, but the big difference is, that you can scream and plead all you want in China and nothing will change, in the US things can be changed.

      Americans CAN change their country, but they don't want to. Chinese can't change their country even if they wanted to. Without some serious political maneuvering to make the regime fall, or a lot of bloodshed, that country won't change any time soon.

    2. Re:sign by X.25 · · Score: 1

      But I can tell you as a Canadian business traveller that the USA is orders of magnitude less intrusive when it comes to visitors to their country. The next time you're in China go try to surf Tibet videos on Youtube and let me know how that goes for you.

      I can tell you that Chinese did not require my fingerprints and were very polite to me. Guess who was exactly the opposite?

      I also don't care about watching Tibet videos on YouTube when visiting China, I don't watch them at home either.

      Have fun watching Al Qaeda videos while killing time in your US hotel.

    3. Re:sign by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You will have ZERO problems watching Al Qaeda or other terrorist propaganda films while in the US

    4. Re:sign by CohibaVancouver · · Score: 1

      I also don't care about watching Tibet videos on YouTube when visiting China, I don't watch them at home either. Have fun watching Al Qaeda videos while killing time in your US hotel.

      My point was that in China you can't watch Youtube AT ALL. The whole site is censored away.... Tibet and cat videos. All gone. And yes, you can watch Al Qaeda videos in a US hotel room with zero consequences.

    5. Re:sign by CohibaVancouver · · Score: 1

      I can tell you that as a Canadian business traveller...I don't travel to the US anymore. Just not worth it.

      While I agree that as a Canadian, travelling to the USA on business is a PITA, it still represents a huge market with a common language and similar contract law. Doing business in Germany or China or Brazil or any other place (other than, perhaps the UK) doesn't have the same ROI or is risky & difficult.

    6. Re:sign by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Have fun watching Al Qaeda videos while killing time in your US hotel.

      Just don't type that phrase into google, or you'll be getting some special visitors knocking on your door.

    7. Re:sign by gmhowell · · Score: 2

      I can tell you that Chinese did not require my fingerprints and were very polite to me. Guess who was exactly the opposite?

      Oh, for shit's sake, America was rude to you?! Is everyone from your home country a little pantywaist, or is your dipshittery unique?

      I like the implications later on:

      I also don't care about watching Tibet videos on YouTube when visiting China, I don't watch them at home either.

      IOW, 'fuck Tibet, but Americans were rude to me, so let me start my Intarweb jihad against them.'

      Boy, talk about first world problems.

      --
      Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
  17. Here's a better idea- by IWantMoreSpamPlease · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Stop doing businees in and with China, entirely.
    Bring manufacturing and jobs back to your home country/state and improve your own damn economy. /radical concept I know.

    --
    So rise up, all ye lost ones, as one, we'll claw the clouds.
    1. Re:Here's a better idea- by siddesu · · Score: 2

      Too bad the captains of the industry already decided it cannot work. To paraphrase the best one of them, workers in your home country/state are no longer flexible enough, smart enough and diligent enough to contribute enough to your shareholders' returns.

      Also, you're not a common radical, you're a delusional and dangerous communist.

    2. Re:Here's a better idea- by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      His position has nothing to do with Communism. It's more protectionist and a position I whole-heartedly support.

    3. Re:Here's a better idea- by jimbolauski · · Score: 1

      Stop doing businees in and with China, entirely. Bring manufacturing and jobs back to your home country/state and improve your own damn economy. /radical concept I know.

      And go out of business because your competitors did not and Labor costs here 20x's higher ($0.60/hr vs $12/hr). It is quite radical and the only way it won't be is if US labor costs go down and tarrifs/Made in the US tax exemptions are used to make the US manufacturing industry globally competitive at least in the US markets.

      --
      Knowledge = Power
      P= W/t
      t=Money
      Money = Work/Knowledge so the less you know the more you make
    4. Re:Here's a better idea- by Chas · · Score: 1

      Too bad the captains of the industry already decided it cannot work. To paraphrase the best one of them, workers in your home country/state are no longer flexible enough, smart enough and diligent enough to contribute enough to your shareholders' returns.

      Also, you're not a common radical, you're a delusional and dangerous communist.

      Translation: They won't work for something that makes poverty wages look generous and lock themselves into a Company Store setup on top of that...

      --


      Chas - The one, the only.
      THANK GOD!!!
    5. Re:Here's a better idea- by O('_')O_Bush · · Score: 1

      That's based on the premise (that economists disagree with, btw) that bringing back manufacturing jobs *will* improve the economy.

      Yes, in the past manufacturing employed a large section of the population, but during that time (50's/60's), there really wasn't such a thing as disposable incoome for the middle class. You had your tiny ranch house, your station wagon, and single TV, and scraped up what was left over for food and future hand-me-down clothes.

      Nowadays we are all more affluent thanks to cheaper manufacturing overseas, and the end of that would not only make our standard of living lower, but thanks to robotics and automation (and environmental regulations), there isn't any gauruntee that anyone would be better off.

      That is, it wasn't the solution 10 years ago when our economy was fine... I don't see why you think it is now.

      --
      while(1) attack(People.Sandy);
    6. Re:Here's a better idea- by siddesu · · Score: 3, Insightful

      His position is obviously against maximizing corporate profits. As such, it is undeniably dangerous, abhorrent, anti-capitalist and utterly unjustifiable, as I already explained. It is also very bad for you, although you probably cannot realize it now. By supporting this position, it looks like you may benefit, but this is most assuredly a delusion. And here's why.

      You are a man who thinks in terms of nations and peoples. There are no nations. There are no peoples. There are no Russians. There are no Arabs. There are no Third Worlds. There is no West. There is only one holistic system of systems. One vast and immane, interwoven, interacting, multi-varied, multi-national dominion of dollars. Petro-dollars, electro-dollars, multi-dollars, reichmarks, rands, rubles, pounds and shekels.

      It is the international system of currency which determines the totality of life on this planet. That is the natural order of things today. That is the atomic, and sub-atomic and galactic structure of things today.

      You get up here on Slashdot howl about America and democracy. There is no America. There is no democracy. There is only IBM and ITT and AT&T, and DuPont, Dow, Google and Apple. Those are the nations of the world today.

      We no longer live in a world of nations and ideologies, Mr AC. The world is a college of corporations, inexorably determined by the immutable bye-laws of of business. The world is a business, Mr AC. It has been since man crawled out of the slime.

      And our children will live, Mr AC, to see that perfect world, in which there is no war nor famine, oppression or brutality. One vast and ecumenical holding company for whom all men will work to serve a common profit. In which all men will hold a share of stock.

    7. Re:Here's a better idea- by couchslug · · Score: 1

      The US exports, among other things, BMWs to China.

      When Americans choose to compete, they can. Automation is the counter to "Asian hordes of cheap labor", which is why companies like Stihl can produce in the US at close to Chinese costs.

      "Buy American and subsidise inefficiency" doesn't help US _GLOBAL_ competitiveness.

      --
      "This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
    8. Re:Here's a better idea- by iggymanz · · Score: 1

      News for you, pal, our standard of living is dropping and now over half of the USA is lower income or in poverty. In the 50s/60s, one man with one job could have the house, car, extra income for vacations. I know, I was there.

      Plenty of economists believe real wealth creation, rather than paper pyramid scams, are the key to national prosperity. Just because you choose to believe the ones that shill for the banking cartel and stock/derivatives market doesn't mean the wiser points of view don't exist.

    9. Re:Here's a better idea- by Ltap · · Score: 1

      I feel privileged to be one of the few people who recognized the (paraphrasing of that) quote. Well done, sir. And if more people saw Network, we might be better-off.

      --
      Yet Another Tech Blog
      (but so much more, including game and movie reviews)
      http://yanteb.peasantoid.org
    10. Re:Here's a better idea- by CohibaVancouver · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Stop doing businees in and with China, entirely. Bring manufacturing and jobs back to your home country/state and improve your own damn economy. /radical concept I know.

      You do realize many of these business travellers (like the ones from my company) are selling stuff *to* China, right? So we're actually generating jobs here....

    11. Re:Here's a better idea- by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wanna talk about perceptions of quality? I was quite disappointed my Stihl chainsaw was made in the US and not Germany. (I live in neither country).

    12. Re:Here's a better idea- by Shajenko42 · · Score: 1

      I'm as mad as hell, and I'm not going to take this anymore!

    13. Re:Here's a better idea- by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I doubt this is a good idea. Trade is very necessary for the world not to descend into war again. If the only real way to get a resources is to own it, it is pretty obvious what will happen. And that includes also largely immaterial resources, such as specialty equipment and information on how to produce a certain thing, such as -for example- an intel/amd microprocessor. The Chinese will still want to buy these, and obviously this has to be reciprocal - you won't give them the desired quantity for free, will you?

      What really makes a change is forcing through legislation that will enable worker's conditions to be more similar. Quasi-slaves working in environments as hazardous as is optimal for manufacturing are cheap like our people never can be, cost of transport will be a really insignificant factor as compared to that. Remedy that situation by regulations like RoHS and anti-slavery laws that prohibit imports of goods produced under such and such circumstances etc., make a credible effort to enforce those, and you'll see manufacturing of more mundane things return home while still keeping the competent specialist companies where they belong (some of which will be in China).
       

    14. Re:Here's a better idea- by Phrogman · · Score: 1

      Sadly, its very close to the truth, or at least we are heading that way.

      --
      "The first time I got drunk, I got married. The second time I bought a chimpanzee, after that I stayed sober" Arian Seid
    15. Re:Here's a better idea- by ralphdaugherty · · Score: 1

      Those manufacturing jobs let a person support a family with several children and a stay at home mom to raise them. It wasn't enough to supply each child with the extravagent nonsense of today but I would say we were better off without it.

      The so called affluence of America after outsourcing much of our jobs is based strictly on borrowing. While outsourcing we have borrowed 14 trillion dollars since 1980. That is our affluence, and the bill has come due but we keep borrowing more to stave it off.

      When that gambit runs out you'll find out more about so called outsourcing affluence than you ever imagined.

    16. Re:Here's a better idea- by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Assuming that he has a job, a man can easily provide for a wife and two or three kids in a 1950's lifestyle. That's one car, a house that is 1500 sq ft or less, one telephone, one television (no cable). No computers. Little meat (go read a 1950's cookbook for ideas about how to stretch your food dollar). Mom makes lunch for everyone, makes clothes for everyone...

    17. Re:Here's a better idea- by anyGould · · Score: 1

      Stop doing businees in and with China, entirely. Bring manufacturing and jobs back to your home country/state and improve your own damn economy. /radical concept I know.

      And go out of business because your competitors did not and Labor costs here 20x's higher ($0.60/hr vs $12/hr). It is quite radical and the only way it won't be is if US labor costs go down and tarrifs/Made in the US tax exemptions are used to make the US manufacturing industry globally competitive at least in the US markets.

      Or, just to throw a completely unworkable option out there: if US citizens were willing to pay the extra for products made in non-sweatshops. But you're not, so they won't stop.

    18. Re:Here's a better idea- by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or we could just do what made the US a powerhouse economy up until the 1980s--raise tariffs and import taxes on foreign goods up to the level of what they would cost if produced by US labor. Instead, we travel down the insane road of "free market" supply side economics and the destruction of labor and the middle class, and somehow a large number of morons believe thisis a good idea despite the simple fact that policies like this HAVE NEVER WORKED ANYWHERE THEY'VE BEEN TRIED.

      There's a reason that worker productivity and wages rose together for almost the whole history of the US until we elected Reagan to office, and why since then productivity goes up and wages go nowhere because no national leaders of either party will attack or change this economic insanity. Remember that calls to Congress opposing NAFTA were absolutely overwhelmingly opposed, and it passed anyway. These things happen now no matter who is in office because they're all bought and paid for.

      This stuff is engineered, it benefits only multinational corporations, and people need to wake up and figure out who has been rigging the game against them.

    19. Re:Here's a better idea- by r00t · · Score: 1

      Two or three kids is NOT the 1950's lifestyle. More normal would be two bunkbeds in the boy room, and two bunkbeds in the girl room, plus a crib, for a total of 9. Yes it is a small house, but it's packed with mouths to feed.

    20. Re:Here's a better idea- by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not all men. Some men will be poor and some will be rich. What common profit ? R u delusional ? U r right. Democracy, human rights is dead, thanks to folks like you.

    21. Re:Here's a better idea- by Solandri · · Score: 1

      Stop doing businees in and with China, entirely.
      Bring manufacturing and jobs back to your home country/state and improve your own damn economy. /radical concept I know.

      You're mistaken in thinking that doing business with China is the reason those manufacturing jobs left. It's not. Income disparity between different regions of the world is the cause. If those manufacturing contracts were pulled out of China, they'd just end up going to Thailand, Vietnam, Malaysia, etc.

      Those manufacturing jobs aren't coming back until most of the rest of the world is at or near developed nation income levels. By which point pretty much all manufacturing is going to be done by robots anyway. Stop trying to revive the past, start trying to reshape the country for a better future.

    22. Re:Here's a better idea- by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      My solution is that if a company wishes to remain a US company that it must abide by US regulations regarding labor and environment, including in foreign branches and even with foreign subsidiaries. If they don't comply then they will face penalties or else be treated as a foreign corporation. That is they will not be allowed to obtain the benefits of third world slave labor and first world infrastructure simultaneously. This leaves companies with full freedom to do move to the third world if they want, I am not proposing to restrict the free market in that regard.

      This is in essence about patriotism. These companies are actively working against the interests of the US by sending jobs overseas and avoiding regulations. If this was an individual who sold out the US over mere money he'd be called a traitor. So why not use the same term for companies that sell out their home country?

    23. Re:Here's a better idea- by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      The problem is that there are people out there who believe this, and who worship this idea. They don't recognize the satire here or the quote it was adapted from. They are willing to give to corporations more and more power even though corporations are a separate species from humans, which have no morale sense of right or wrong only an innate hunger to increase profits.

      The individual cells that make up the corporate creature may have a moral sense but it gets degraded and subsumed in the larger creature. No one corporate employee ever gives the order to kill a human, but they will gladly seek out the partners with the worst health and safety records if it saves some money, they will find the supplier with the cheapest and youngest labor, they will announce their annual audits in advance so that they are sure only to find happy workers. If there happens to be an accident these individual humans will form a committee to find out what happened, blame things on a foreign subsidiary who took things too far, send out some lawyers and PR personnel to clean things up.

    24. Re:Here's a better idea- by siddesu · · Score: 1

      This isn't going to work though, not in a society like the US, whose value system is based on the notion that individuals live with the liberty to pursue happiness for themselves, and whose concept of happiness is mostly measured by the level of consumption you can afford.

      The problem with your position is that as long technology is lowering transaction and transportation costs, there will be a powerful incentive for companies to use the cheapest sources of labor and capital and a powerful incentive for consumers to choose the cheaper output. These will generate enormous legislative pressures against you, and your position will be voted out.

      Your position is based on your view of what is valuable in the long term, based on your ideas of what the national interest is. Okay. But can you define this national interest in terms of money and a time frame, like a company that says to its shareholders "next year we will move output to China and allow for profit increase of 50%"? No, you can't. You can make an argument that leveling the playing field is beneficial long-term, but long-term is heavily discounted against, and so is your argument.

      It is the same on the consumer side. The business will say "we can give you 20% cheaper X in 6 months, 25% cheaper in 12 months". What can you say to that? "In 20 years you will be out of jobs"? Again, almost nobody will care until that time comes.

      Moreover, those that do care today on either side will try to get prepared when the time comes anyway, so for them it will make more sense to get the cheaper goods/make the extra profits now and use the saved resources for preparation. In other words, even people who think like you may not vote for you.

      Also, can you guarantee that anyone in your audience will benefit from your proposal? The distribution of benefits from cheaper production are immediately obvious, both to companies and to consumers. The distribution of gains from your long-term ideological plan are not. In 20 years, US may well be better off, but that doesn't mean the particular shareholders and consumers who will benefit from the short-term low labor will make any gains from that. So, you cannot appeal to many specific voters, and you will not have support at the polls.

    25. Re:Here's a better idea- by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      Yes, there are currently tremendous pressures to get cheaper good by having foreign labor nearly akin to slave wages and conditions. However if the trend continues this attitude will have to change. There must be jobs and income in order to buy these goods. There will always be the elite who can buy this junk but there will be a huge and growing number of laborers in this country who will need jobs and they will be a powerful voting block that will insist upon domestic jobs, and the elites will insist that they get jobs instead of handouts as well. It is unsustainable. There will be massive demands for tariffs and all that other stuff the WTO considers heresy.

      Where will the US be in 50 years when all industrial jobs are overseas and manual unskilled labor will be essentially maintenance of infrastructure? We will get most of our food from overseas and most of the food grown here will be produced in a few large factory farms with off-the-books labor with a handful of small organic farms near upscale enclaves. Many service jobs will be outsourced as well, including high tech service jobs like IT. The trickle-down from the minority of workers who create and design things will not be enough to keep the economy afloat.

      When I was younger I'd see the signs when leaving my small home town that said "Shop First". There was also the ad campaign of "look for the union label". We need something like that now that encourages people to buy locally before globally; first loyalty to your town, then your region, then your state, then your country, etc. Buy from the retail store instead of Amazon. Support the economy you live in first before supporting someone else's economy. Otherwise the US consumers are hurting themselves in the long run.

    26. Re:Here's a better idea- by siddesu · · Score: 1

      However if the trend continues this attitude will have to change. There must be jobs and income in order to buy these goods. There will always be the elite who can buy this junk but there will be a huge and growing number of laborers in this country who will need jobs and they will be a powerful voting block that will insist upon domestic jobs, and the elites will insist that they get jobs instead of handouts as well. It is unsustainable

      I have covered the reasons this will not work already, but there is one more angle to it.

      What you describe is only part of the real problem. The full problem is that the concept of unlimited growth with good life for everyone is unrealistic and unsustainable, given the current combination of amount of resources, expectations, social organization and distribution of capital and technology.

      Those rather unrealistic expectations of what is desirable, both in terms of lifestyle and social organization were set during the past 70 or so years, in which period the US has had more than its fair share of growth. This growth was mostly due to historical circumstances that are unlikely to repeat- the emergence of the US as the dominant world power after WWII that has allowed the US to reshape world resources usage largely to her own benefit.

      As resources grow scarcer and its position wanes, the US will find it even costlier to impose its resource requirements abroad, and as costs go up, your proposal will become even more difficult to realize.

      The only real way to solve your problem is to work for a real leveling of the "playing field", and that must include a corrective for the historical circumstances from the previous paragraph. I somehow don't think most in the US will look warmly to such a proposal.

    27. Re:Here's a better idea- by siddesu · · Score: 1

      The problem is that there are people out there who believe this, and who worship this idea.

      True, and "The Network" was precisely about them. We can only hope that they are not the majority, and that the old saying that you can fool some people all the time, many people for awhile, but you can't fool everybody forever is true. And keep shooting the satire at them, I think that still works.

    28. Re:Here's a better idea- by the+eric+conspiracy · · Score: 1

      The primary reason manufacturing jobs have declined in the US is automation, not outsourcing. In terms of manufacturing output the US is just as large as China, just done with 1/10 the people.

      The jobs are not coming back, and if they did it means the standard of living in the US has completely crashed.

    29. Re:Here's a better idea- by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You get up here on Slashdot howl about America and democracy. There is no America. There is no democracy. There is only IBM and ITT and AT&T, and DuPont, Dow, Google and Apple. Those are the nations of the world today.

      So when do the Rollerball tournaments start up?
      [Note: accept NO SUBSTITUTES!]

      CAPTCHA: AUTONOMY [ how apt! :D ]

      PS: I'm trying to be fascetious and insightful(?) at the same time with this post.

    30. Re:Here's a better idea- by iggymanz · · Score: 1

      at the average of $35K a year, I think that $200K house is going to be out of reach

    31. Re:Here's a better idea- by iggymanz · · Score: 1

      and my parents had the money to well feed the family of seven, to send us to private school for junior high and high school, and to travel, and to loan us money for college (yes, I paid it back with interest [as thanks] over the next ten years). my mom and dad each had a car. later we kids had cars that we paid for ourselves with our summer and side jobs.

      In short, we were not in low wage class as half of U.S. people are today. and only my dad worked while we were home. mom later got part time job when last of kids in high school, not of necessity but of being industrious when house not full of kids.

  18. Misinformation by Maximum+Prophet · · Score: 3, Funny

    So take a laptop filled with misinformation, science fiction, and totally bogus stuff. If enough people do this, your adversary will bankrupt himself trying to figure it all out. Extra points for the size of the server farms you can get trying to decrypt output from /dev/random.

    --
    All ideas^H^H^H^H^Hprocesses in this post are Patent Pending. (as well as the process of patenting all postings)
    1. Re:Misinformation by MiniMike · · Score: 1

      So take a laptop filled with misinformation, science fiction, and totally bogus stuff. If enough people do this, your adversary will bankrupt himself trying to figure it all out. Extra points for the size of the server farms you can get trying to decrypt output from /dev/random.

      Why encrypt /dev/random, when you can have them working to unencrypt pictures from goatwhatever.com? Or if you don't want to have the goat pictures in the first place, encrypt a bunch of demotivational posters. Or if you want to mess with them, use steganography to embed the goat pictures in the posters.

    2. Re:Misinformation by Maximum+Prophet · · Score: 1

      Yes, that works too, but stay away from something that might be illegal in the target country.

      I propose a new form of encryption called Turtles. Under Turtles when you decrypt an encrypted text, you get another text, that may or may not be the "real" text. You can then decrypt that, and get another text, on and on. The "Key", is knowing when to stop. (Implementation details are left to the reader)

      --
      All ideas^H^H^H^H^Hprocesses in this post are Patent Pending. (as well as the process of patenting all postings)
    3. Re:Misinformation by greg1104 · · Score: 2

      You should take a look at the pornography laws in China before you do that. That's a good way to land in jail a few years.

    4. Re:Misinformation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's turtles all the way down!

      Maybe the encryption method could ensure that decrypting any number of times would yield a valid text of the general type originally encrypted.

      For example, consider encrypting computer source code. Decrypting the encrypted file once would yield valid source code with plausible comments, functions, and variable names, etc. Decrypting that result would yield yet another valid source code file. Even if the actual version of the source code lies 2 million decryption levels deep, the decryption could be repeated an infinite number of times, all yielding valid source code text.

      The basic mechanism would be simple permutation of items found in the original source file. But there would also be logic to transform every permutation in to a valid program, making it much harder to determine which version might be the correct one. (This would be like permuting words of a sentence, and then modifying the result in a deterministic and reversible manner to make the result grammatical and meaningful.)

      I think people have already created software that can procedurally generate an infinite number of bogus patent documents, complete with descriptions of the device and corresponding diagrams. But that software could be modified to instead permute elements of a real patent document, with some deterministic and reversible fixing after each permutation step.

      The "Turtles" encryption method is a great idea!

    5. Re:Misinformation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      'Turtles' crypto is a nice concept and COULD work.

      The plaintext secret message is at the heart of such a package and is the last thing decrypted in the naive implementation and offer NO SECURITY.

      The alternative is to encrypt it put it 'in the middle somewhere' in a chain of encrypted files produced from /dev/random 'plaintext' output.

      The bad guys have to guess which one of the decrypted gibberish blobs is the secret IF THEY LEAVE IT AT THAT.

      Otherwise, they'll just 'rubber hose' you to the brink of death (or OVER IT) to decrypt those blobs as well and WILL get the plaintext secret above if you haven't died first....

      CAPTCHA: DOCKSIDE [Where Darth Vader waits when he wants to take a boat out on the high seas. :D ]

  19. portable devices arent so bad by sl4shd0rk · · Score: 1

    Lets face it. Most companies are ill equipped to defend against compromise and it stems from people treating business computing resources like their personal equipment. Most places find out theyve been compromised by sheer accident. If the Pentagon, NSA, and US military can't keep from being owned* I think there are bigger problems to address.

      * http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/ciencia/secret_projects2/project396.htm
    * http://www.codemysafety.com/?p=1143

    --
    Join the Slashcott! Feb 10 thru Feb 17!
  20. Thermostat?? by subreality · · Score: 1

    OK, I understand the point that any equipment that could have been in Mallory's hands unsupervised needs to be considered compromised, and that it will spread the compromise if you give it a chance. I totally agree.

    And I understand that thermostats have IP stacks.

    But what attacker then goes and compromises the thermostat? This is the Chamber of Commerce. You're not going to use the last guy turning the heat off in the evening as the time to start your black ops raid. Thermostats don't have microphones (please, please let me be right on this).

    What POSSIBLE reason would you do this, with the obvious cost that it increases the chance you'll get caught?

    1. Re:Thermostat?? by vlm · · Score: 1

      Its just a windows box with PLC control software type stuff. IT might not even know about it. It might not be possible to install security patches while maintaining a valid support contract, or maybe fly-by-night-inc.com went out of business and there is no support of any type at all, at which time you pray it never breaks, and never ever touch it or change anything. IT might want you to upgrade from XP, but they're not offering a multi-million dollar capital budget to replace the entire HVAC system, and the new contractor is not going to just drop in a new controller because they know they have you over a barrel and can try to get you to spend $$$$$$$.

      IF the windows box can in any way communicate with the outside world, that's how you evade the firewall. Seems obvious?

      --
      "Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
    2. Re:Thermostat?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think you are looking at it wrong. The Thermostat is not a target, it's a carrier. It may not have any valuable data on it, but if it's part of the same IP network, it could certainly spread the infection. Who's to say that the shinny new thermostat that just came from China didn't come pre-infected with the Malware that then infected the rest of the "secure" environment.

    3. Re:Thermostat?? by subreality · · Score: 1

      From TFA: "... the Chamber recently discovered a thermostat in a Chamber-owned apartment was communicating ..."

      That doesn't sound like a PC-PLC.

    4. Re:Thermostat?? by subreality · · Score: 1

      That's a valid point, thanks.

    5. Re:Thermostat?? by vlm · · Score: 1

      Doesn't sound like the old mercury switch round honeywell in my mother in laws house either.

      --
      "Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
    6. Re:Thermostat?? by mbone · · Score: 1

      You're not going to use the last guy turning the heat off in the evening as the time to start your black ops raid.

      Now, I suspect that this was collateral damage Ii.e., not the intended target). However, have you ever hear of cryptographic traffic analysis ? (The British used it to deduce German sub movements before they could reliably decrypt the Enigma.) Did you know that people look at things like pizza deliveries to certain offices as signs of impending military moves ? I bet those same people would love to also have the thermostat setting changes for those offices.

      There are obvious commercial analogs. For example, if there are rumors of a possible merger of between company X and either Y or Z, you might be able to make a good deal of money if you knew whether Y or Z's financial people were working late.

    7. Re:Thermostat?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Perhaps whatever embedded OS is on it isn't quite stripped down enough to prevent someone from setting up SSH tunnels or a similar relay to connect to something else? The device itself might not have value, but it might still be used to connect to other things on the same network.

    8. Re:Thermostat?? by MiniMike · · Score: 1

      Thermostats are themselves now addressable over the network, usually via Ethernet if not UDP/IP. There will also be an Operator Work Station, hopefully running an updated OS (always Windows afaik, please please tell me if there's another option) on the network. This network should never, ever be connected to the outside world, but often is (firewall? What firewall? Sigh.).

  21. What's next... by ninguna · · Score: 1

    You got to wonder when the next stage in this story will come out; that with all those computers we purchase being made in China, they have hacked the chipsets to allow backdoors for their use. Probably the only reason this hasn't happend so far is that they make too much money with the current situation and breaking into M$ computers is too easy to make such a step necessary. But the Defense department better be thinking about this!

  22. Note. The author is selling something by ebonum · · Score: 1

    That said. If you are a CEO of a major corporation, you need to be careful. That is good advice. If I was CEO of Intel, I would be just as careful in the US as in China.

  23. "Little bit ?" by unity100 · · Score: 3, Informative

    China is 1.5 billion people. all of anglosphere and europe AND russia combined, cannot match that market. and its a growing market. not a saturated one.

    1. Re:"Little bit ?" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ummm ... So what.

      That market is tainted. And everyone knows it.

    2. Re:"Little bit ?" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      1.5 billion people with nearly every one living in poverty. You think like a typical PHB - you lose money on each sale, but think you'll make it up in volume.

    3. Re:"Little bit ?" by 1s44c · · Score: 1

      Ummm ... So what.

      That market is tainted. And everyone knows it.

      Quite right, it is. But then so is every other market with government protectionism and the various taxes made up to prevent free trade.

      Using less electricity is a great idea and LED lighting is a great way to do that. Have you looked at why LED lighting is so expensive? So called anti-dumping tariffs stranging free trade, that's why.

    4. Re:"Little bit ?" by unity100 · · Score: 1

      from another poster :

      The Chinese "middle class" surpassed the population of the entire United States or Europe several years ago. Sure, that still leaves roughly a billion poor people, but with nearly a half-billion doing well, they have some serious internal market power. This also bodes well for political change within China.... a half-billion people with iPhones (or clones) and cars are going to start asking why they don't have more control over their lives at some point.

      ..........

      long story short : dont talk on things you dont know shit about. ..........

      in addition are you aware that what selling pathetically low profit margin products to 1 billion people means ? china did the same to entire world - sold everything, even complex products with shitty profit margins. however, entire manufacturing of the planet is in china now.

    5. Re:"Little bit ?" by tnk1 · · Score: 2

      Actually, the US is still the largest manufacturing country in the world, although China is catching up.

    6. Re:"Little bit ?" by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      In general the business relationships between China and the US do not involve the Chinese buying US goods. The relationship is about getting slave labor wages from China to build fluff to give to our narcissist twenty-somethings.

  24. The lesson to take from this by Blahah · · Score: 5, Funny

    The lesson to take from this is: don't store valuable information on your thermostat.

    1. Re:The lesson to take from this by Ihmhi · · Score: 2

      The scene is a dark room with a solitary light bulb suspended by a cord. Two Chinese thugs hold an American businessman hostage.

      Thug: Give us the information on the chip fabrication process and we'll let you go. Otherwise, we may have to do something... unpleasant.

      Businessman: Do your worst!

      Thug: Very well! Turn his home thermostat up... to 71 degrees!

      Businessman: N-n-no! You bastards! YOU BASTARDS!

    2. Re:The lesson to take from this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But now I know why my office is always so damned cold.

  25. Color Me Paranoid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A few years ago a visiting Chinese exchange student was a guest at a party at my home and I caught her sneaking out of my home office where I keep my computer running 24/7. I scanned the computer in my office the next day and found a keylogger. For the past five years my wife has told me that I was crazy to think that the exchange student put it on there.

    When my wife read the story in the NY Times, she finally said "You were right."

    I am convinced that the woman who brought the exchange student to my home, a first generation Chinese-American, knew exactly what the exchange student was up to and brought her to the party for that purpose.

    1. Re:Color Me Paranoid by TheLink · · Score: 1

      How'd the student install the keylogger?

      Did the student need to power down the machine? Or did they know the password?

      --
    2. Re:Color Me Paranoid by 1s44c · · Score: 1

      The moral of that story is lock your computer whenever you are not at the keyboard, physically disconnect any firewire ports, and check the wiring for anything you didn't plug in every once in a while.

    3. Re:Color Me Paranoid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      perhaps the cardinal rule of security: physical access? fucked.

    4. Re:Color Me Paranoid by airdweller · · Score: 0

      Mr. Gates, was that "first generation Chinese-American" bald and wearing a turtle-neck?

  26. Good to see a sensible attitude by golodh · · Score: 1
    I'm glad to see a sensible attitude here. As in: don't get angry (as this won't solve anything), just take adequate measures to solve the problem.

    Oh, and about the Slashdot-standard post titled "pot and kettle". Their problems are no concern of us, Ok? We're trying to solve *our* problem here, not theirs.

    I personally trust them to be completely up to the task of concealing whatever useful IP they might have when they come here.

  27. Yep. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Perhaps one day we'll realize we should have kept manufacturing capability from bottom (raw materials) to top IN COUNTRY. Ah well. Since we now have to work with countries that have governments that may find themselves in opposition to ours, and depend on them for all our various tech products, well... I guess we're screwed, since there's no way I can know if my computer's chips are secretly radioing home to Thailand or China or Taiwan or Waitan, or wherever. Guess that means I daren't use my computer for anything I don't want others to know about.

    Or... I keep a second computer that never attaches to a network, and keep all my secret stuff on that, and use my internet connected computer to do stuff involving the outside world. I also should keep the secrets machine in a Faraday cage, complete with a completely isolated power system about which nothing could be inferred from without, i.e., it's powered by batteries which are swapped out for charging so there's no way to tell what I'm doing with it by looking at power consumption over time... etc.

    Or... I don't need to do anything like that anyway, so I don't worry about the whole problem myself anymore than I worry about the possibility of getting hit in the head by a meteorite while typing on my com... OWWWW! WTF?!? I think a meteorite just... owwwww....

  28. There can be only one by concealment · · Score: 1

    China, Russia, or the USA: which is the next great superpower?

    The EU is sitting this one out.

    There can be only one superpower, or we're in a state of global cold war like in the 1980s.

    So who will it be?

  29. effective countermeasures? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So...the Chinese can install "key-logging software" (not just hardware) but they can't install software to read screens, capture clipboard data, or traipse through storage devices? (FTA: He connects to the Internet only through an encrypted, password-protected channel, and copies and pastes his password from a USB thumb drive. He never types in a password directly, because, he said, “the Chinese are very good at installing key-logging software on your laptop.”)

  30. my roommate is from China by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I guess it goes without saying that his laptop is even now trying to steal my chem 201 notes.

  31. Lacks disposable income by realxmp · · Score: 2

    China is 1.5 billion people. all of anglosphere and europe AND russia combined, cannot match that market. and its a growing market. not a saturated one.

    China as a nation has a big GDP yes, but the per capita GDP is right down there with the Dominican Republic. There are a lot of people in China, but as a market western companies can only target the relatively small subset with relatively large disposable incomes. All of the migrant workers etc need their money to eat and clothe themselves and don't have much left over. Also you need to bear in mind that the rules aren't the same across China, some businesses are only possible in the Special Economic Zones. The other big problem is it is really hard to judge how big the market is, the only accurate figures are a state secret and that makes a lot of businesses nervous.

    1. Re:Lacks disposable income by stanlyb · · Score: 1

      Don't forget the "...clone themselves....".

    2. Re:Lacks disposable income by Cytotoxic · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The Chinese "middle class" surpassed the population of the entire United States or Europe several years ago. Sure, that still leaves roughly a billion poor people, but with nearly a half-billion doing well, they have some serious internal market power. This also bodes well for political change within China.... a half-billion people with iPhones (or clones) and cars are going to start asking why they don't have more control over their lives at some point.

      Of course, with twice as many people stuck in rural poverty while seeing a growing bourgeoisie, there's another potential road to political change....

    3. Re:Lacks disposable income by swb · · Score: 1

      How is that "middle class" defined?

      It's great PR and a neat concept, but what statistical construct do they use to define them?

      Given that the per capita GDP is on the same level as any other third world country, is a middle class as defined by some poverty-skewed average, or is based on something more comparable, such as disposable income (income after food, clothing, housing & utilities)?

      And given that the half-billion people in the US and Europe traded control over their lives for iPhones and big screen TV, I'm not sure that the CPC's materialism plan won't keep working, although the rural poor in Western China may give them pause, especially if there are enough bodies and sympathy within the military leadership.

    4. Re:Lacks disposable income by unity100 · · Score: 1

      the fact that all major companies, which have huge departments dedicated to those statistics, are falling little short of directly selling their ass to china in order to get into that market, should be explanative for you enough.

    5. Re:Lacks disposable income by swb · · Score: 1

      I don't see myself necessarily accepting the statistical insight of our business entities as quite as readily as I once did.

    6. Re:Lacks disposable income by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      You think half a billion people there have smartphones?

    7. Re:Lacks disposable income by CodeBuster · · Score: 1

      Of course, with twice as many people stuck in rural poverty while seeing a growing bourgeoisie, there's another potential road to political change

      A shrewd opponent would be working clandestinely to fan the flames of social unrest in China, slowing their growth. Unfortunately for us, our President is not shrewd but merely glib and so nothing towards that end is being accomplished. Hopefully our next President will not fail to grasp that the Chinese are dangerous rivals and ought to be treated as such.

    8. Re:Lacks disposable income by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Poor? Farmers who can produce their own food may not show up well on your stat sheet are poor in an extremely narrow, qualified use of the word--let's be responsible and qualify that, right?

    9. Re:Lacks disposable income by Cytotoxic · · Score: 1

      According to this chart there are nearly 400 million mobile subscribers in China today. C-Net seems to think that number is way too low. They pegged it at over a half million 4 years ago, with 200k new subscribers daily .

      So it is very likely that the number of smart phone users in China will exceed the entire population of the united states in very short order. When you've got a billion more people than the United States has, these kind of numbers are not all that surprising. The US is a pretty big country. So big that more than a half-million people die from heart attacks each year. This is more than the entire population of nearly 100 countries. China is so populous that they have more than 120 cities with populations exceeding 1 million. They currently have around 700 million people living in cities. That is close to the total population of europe and double the population of the USA. That's a lot of opportunities for selling cell phones.

    10. Re:Lacks disposable income by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      400 million mobile subscribers, not smart phone owners. The majority will be normal phones for making voice calls with, and yes that is a rising number. But smart phones are a small fraction of the mobile phone market, east or west.

  32. Firmware by EmperorOfCanada · · Score: 1

    Did they wipe their firmware? Personally I would bring a burner phone and laptop. Take devices that are about to be retired and dispose of them upon returning.

    A noodled firmware would allow the bypassing of any level of HD encryption.

    Also assume that the devices are hacked the moment you board the plane. Keep the important bits in your head and don't tell them to the sexy lady who finds you so interesting.

  33. Might as well leave the door unlocked... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Now a good question would be -- yet again -- why do people connect everything to the internet? It just opens them up to attack. Have an intermediary between the internet and important systems to protect the more important computers and technology from external control. This is something I'm yet to see in even the most sophistocated systems. The fact is, you need the internet for a few things, not everything, and there are computers containing secure information which can (and should) be isolated rather than connected to the internet. Otherwise, when your toaster starts spitting out toast with angry kanji burnt into it, it's your fault and yours alone for connecting the damn thing to the internet...

  34. TSA confiscates stuff by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Pot Kettle Black

  35. But what of Curiosity? by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 1

    Hypothetically, for an entity larger than some smallish business just trying to keep its head down, wouldn't not travelling light provide more useful information?

    Any device you bring, and your good buddies then bug, is now a device that you cannot trust; but also a device that can be analyzed for insight into the state of bugging techniques. Turning unknowns into knowns is generally a Good Thing(tm), and ought easily to cover the cost of a bit of burner hardware.

    Since you are dealing with threats that don't necessarily wait for you to get on the plane(they can go over the internet, or even in person, if the reward is large enough), it would seem that gathering samples of the attack techniques, exploit kits, etc. in use would be a good idea...

  36. And that doesnt happen in u.s. ? by unity100 · · Score: 2

    Nato has been an espionage networ that is called echelon for around 2-3 decades, and its now publicly acknowledged. i have a hard time believing that u.s. did not use the non-military information it intercepted through that or other means, for the benefit of its own corporations - the very corporations which back governments into power there by the way.

    Its naive to think that way. abusive parties abuse power, public or private. the only difference in between the chinese and what goes on in the west, is probably chinese do not care much to put a storefront up.

  37. burner phones or burner accounts? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    in any country, the likelihood of planting software in your phone is less likely than actually bugging your audio line. wouldn't the smarter course of action be to bring your wiped smart phone, have an encoded chat software on it, and get all the contacts you'll need to make new secured accounts on the same encoding software, and talk that way? it seems to make more sense than bringing a crappy burner phone and having all your conversations monitored and recorded via the central feed.

    AFAIK, Skype voice chats are encrypted, but i don't know to what degree because there are no options for encryption.

    1. Re:burner phones or burner accounts? by Tastecicles · · Score: 1

      Skype voice chats and file transfers are end-to-end encrypted using onetime keys, making them extremely difficult to break. I trust it enough that when I teleconference I insist that Skype is used; landlines and mobile voice, fax and email are avoided.

      --
      Operation Guillotine is in effect.
    2. Re:burner phones or burner accounts? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How do you know who Skype gives backdoor keys to? How do you know what vulnerabilities Skype has? None of it is open, so you just can't know what it does. It's also a big enough target to attract crackers, the well-paid military/commercial kind, not the kind that publish a pastie of their exploits. There's no reason to trust Skype's integrity, be it in terms of morals or of algorithms.

  38. It must be said by bytesex · · Score: 1

    The same happens in the US - I am not allowed to bring company hardware across the US borders for the same reason. We had Bill Clinton steal for Boeing, and it's not going to happen again.

    --
    Religion is what happens when nature strikes and groupthink goes wrong.
  39. Doubtful by GerryHattrick · · Score: 1

    When I did time in China, nothing happened. (Sure there was lots of software in the bicycle market, and about half those CDs did what it said on the cover). My lasting impression though was that Chinese people, at all levels, already knew a lot more than I had gone to tell them, and had a more disciplined structure for making the best of it. Can't see them bothering to spy.

    1. Re:Doubtful by airdweller · · Score: 0

      "When I _did time_ in China, nothing happened."
      What _exactly_ did you expect to happen? :)

  40. Pot calling kettle... oh wait, already done by Tastecicles · · Score: 1

    So sorry, was I a bit late to this party? This is another reason pro-copy[entitlement] legislation must never pass in Western jurisdiction: it would open the floodgates for ever more penetrative eavesdropping, to the point where peer to peer encryption is outlawed (since the content of such streams cannot be intercepted in any meaningful way without the key). Bye bye, Skype.

    --
    Operation Guillotine is in effect.
  41. Isn't this... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Isn't this exactly like how foreign business travelers avoid going to the USA, where your laptop is subject to search and theft upon arrival, and even upon departure if a TSA clerk decides they want it?

  42. yeaaah. by unity100 · · Score: 1

    This also bodes well for political change within China.... a half-billion people with iPhones (or clones) and cars are going to start asking why they don't have more control over their lives at some point.

    like how the people in u.s. has, isnt it.

  43. US is worse by stooo · · Score: 1

    As an employee of an EU corp, making buisness trips in US and china, I can tell that government spying industrials happens much more at the USA border.

    --
    aaaaaaa
  44. Reality has won by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So now realities of travel are forcing companies to follow "IT Best Practices".

    As always, only the IT staff understands how the real world works.

  45. When visiting New York TImes? by Skapare · · Score: 1

    What about when visiting New York Times? Or is that just an innocent paywall they put up on the linked article?

    --
    now we need to go OSS in diesel cars
  46. How about a sting/honeypot/lulz operation? by davidwr · · Score: 1

    Have your execs "forget" to wipe their "personal" camera card or "personal" camera's built-in memory or some personal item that is reasonably overlooked before they go in. Make sure the card contains carefully faked information.

    Then when the guy gets back, hook the camera up to a fake network that has fake information on it. Keep updating the info as if it were a real network.

    Then see how your adversary reacts.

    As lulz it's expensive, but as counter-espionage it may be cheap.

    --
    Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
  47. Wouldn't it be easier to spy the other way around? by davidwr · · Score: 1

    If I'm China and want to spy on a major American company, I might have more success if I tricked his kids into visiting a compromised web site using their home computer.

    If I do this to enough employees and the company isn't super-anal about security, one of them will infect a flash drive off of his home computer and eventually take that flash drive to work. I win.

    --
    Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
  48. security by obscurity ?? by stooo · · Score: 1

    >> I trust it enough that when I teleconference I insist that Skype is used

    Skype ? are you kidding ?

    Single point of failure for huge corporate insight.
    Proprietary crypto, whatever.
    P2P protocol means the attacker can (and will) control the relays
    Security by obscurity : shown to always have failed

    Must be bugged long ago. By USA agencies, who else.

    --
    aaaaaaa
  49. Isn't this the advice for entering the USA? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You know, how they'll confiscate your computer because it might have something illegal on it, so you don't take a computer into the USA AT ALL?

    Certainly sounds familiar.

  50. What about all the stuff being made there? by jtseng · · Score: 1

    I would imagine there'd be some possibility at least some of the stuff being imported to the US and elsewhere contains hardware backdoors for them to use. IMO it's naive to think they haven't at least tried, and it's stupid for them to not even have tried. And if they've tried, I'd think Apple would be a HUGE target.

    --

    Sanity.html - Error 404 not found

  51. Re:Egypt by Phrogman · · Score: 1

    If you want old civilizations with long histories, try Ancient Egypt: 5500 BCE (until arguably 30 BCE) according to Wikipedia. Yes I know Sumer and all that are old too, but they didn't last quite as long...

    --
    "The first time I got drunk, I got married. The second time I bought a chimpanzee, after that I stayed sober" Arian Seid
  52. How about bringing honey pots? by PeterM+from+Berkeley · · Score: 1

    Bring malware or false information on your electronics and turn the tables on the people getting your information?

    Have the malware lie low and just phone home so you can gather information on their information gathering techniques?

    How about loads of FAKE credit card identities that trigger "silent" fraud alerts that law enforcement can then trace back to the fraudsters?

    Poison the well of exploitable information enough and you will "kill" all the bad guys!

    --PM

  53. IT Secruity while traveling by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The easiest way to protect your infomation while traveling is to use and Ironkey with MokaFive. With these 2 products you have a secure vm which runs everything from the Ironkey. No memory is used other that to open the ironkey to run your windows or linux desktop. I have used this to run windows server with exchange in a class I tought. This combonation also blocks keyloggers and other spy tools which may be on the client machine.

    The Ironkey is a secure USB memory stick which requires a password and is ras/dod incription. If you try to guess the password to many times the administrator of the stick can either have the stick kill itself or just lock until returned to an administrator.

    If you would like more information on this you can contact me at tivoligardens@yahoo.com.

  54. If they plant bugs, stop doing business with them by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Isn't this the simplest solution? If they plant bugs, don't continue to do business with them.

    If they lose enough business, they will stop the bad behavior.

  55. I bet china tells there people not to come at all. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yes we say if you go to china "Your device will be penetrated" (middle school giggle) but I wouldnt be surprised if other countries tell there people "Look mate if youre going to america dont take anything, dont say anything, dont look at anybody, no sudden movements, dont tweet, dont email, dont check facebook, stay offline or else those american fucks will lock you up or throw you out"

  56. Why only China? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Do that everywhere you go, if you're using a plane, crossing a border or otherwise expect to be searched by whoever. Upload the data you will need on your trip to a server. Back up the data you won't need. Wipe your devices. Or better still, copy a 100% legal, innocuous and plausible image (that doesn't look pristine but like a system you're actually using) to them and keep the stuff that matters on that well-hidden encrypted partition.

  57. Chinese Visitors May Carry Spy Gear to the West by randyjparker · · Score: 1

    My son's physics class was visited by 3 Chinese teachers. As they walked into the classroom, his Macbook Air crashed. He tells me he was in gmail at the time. His laptop has never had a kernel crash before or since. Does this story prove anything? No. But it is conceivable that visiting teachers carry laptops that probe and spoof software such as gmail that the government has a keen interest in cracking. The teachers may be completely unaware of why their laptops seem to discharge batteries in a few hours even when the lids are closed.

    1. Re:Chinese Visitors May Carry Spy Gear to the West by Reservoir+Penguin · · Score: 1

      And people up the thread say Chinese have not innovated anything of value! I'd travel to China to steal this amazing remote MacBook crashing tech of theirs. Just imagine crashing an Apple Store full of macs, the possibilities for lulz are endless.

      --
      US-UK-Israel: The real Axis of Evil
  58. tin foil hat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Nice tin foil hat you have there.

  59. keep your IP out of China by Fujisawa+Sensei · · Score: 1

    If I were a major stakeholder in a company with valuable IP that had business with China; I would be doing my best to keep that IP completely out of China, and make sure that China was on the consumer side of my business and not the supplier side.

    Neither the Chinese nor the American government are doing to do anything should your IP get into Chinese hands and they start doing what they want with it.

    --
    If someone is passing you on the right, you are an asshole for driving in the wrong lane.
  60. not the first time by r00t · · Score: 1

    The French openly admit to spying for economic reasons.

    1. Re:not the first time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Turns out it was peeping for economic reasons, selling peeks in Her Majesties window for a Euro a peek.
      They had to stop though, it was restraint of trade for the granny pr0n sites. Solidarity, brother!
      Spying, peeking, six of one, half a dozen of the other...

  61. What, no attribution? by jbwolfe · · Score: 1
    Call me bitter (and off topic), but I submitted this a full four hours prior to timothy.

    Here's me:http://slashdot.org/submission/1939555/it-will-only-get-more-complicated,

    Here's timothy:http://it.slashdot.org/submission/1939613/travel-light-to-china/.

    I'm giving up seeking fame on Slashdot!

    --
    Have you ever noticed that anybody driving slower than you is an idiot, and anyone going faster than you is a maniac?
    1. Re:What, no attribution? by inputdev · · Score: 1

      I don't think you need to give up yet. I think his title line is more to the point and he has a better summary.

  62. Paranoia fail by Arancaytar · · Score: 1

    He connects to the Internet only through an encrypted, password-protected channel, and copies and pastes his password from a USB thumb drive. He never types in a password directly, because, he said, “the Chinese are very good at installing key-logging software on your laptop.”

    That makes no sense.

    If you're using a piece of technology that may have been compromised, then it makes absolutely no difference whether you type in a password or attach a USB drive, open a text file containing the password, display it on your screen and copy it to the clipboard. There are four simple vectors of attack just in that sentence, none of which require more access than a keylogger: Clone any drive as soon as it is mounted, copy every single file that is opened, record the screen, or store everything copied in the clipboard. (2 and 4 are probably the way to go, since they take the least time and resources while focusing on what is important to the user.)

    As the rest of the article makes perfectly clear, hardware is only your hardware while it is not compromised. This policy must be followed rigorously. Regardless of how many layers of VPN, tor or whatever you connect through, you have to be certain that your end of the connection actually belongs to you, in order to be certain that your information is not leaked prior to encryption or after decryption. As for connecting through someone else's computer or a computer in a public location, hah.

  63. And Now You Know: Don't Trust Symantec by cmholm · · Score: 2

    Those who RTTFA (read the third fine article) may have noted the discrepancy between what Mr. Mark Bregman of Symantec does when he travels to China, versus what he sells to the rest of us: he uses a dedicated laptop for China trips, and wipes the device before and after travel. On the other hand, he defends farming out coding to China based on 1) all the big s/w vendors do it, and 2) why worry about malicious code from China, when there have been terrorist attacks on the US committed by US citizens?

    Rebuttals, off the cuff:
    1) Evidently, capitalists don't just sell the rope that hangs them, they'll also teach you how to tie the noose.
    2) Timothy McVeigh and 8 "pro-life" murders over the course of 20 years, vs. opportunity to open back doors into virtually every PC in the United States. I think we need to check whether Mr. Bregman has registered as a lobbyist for the China Central News Agency.

    --
    Luke, help me take this mask off ... Just for once, let me butterfly kiss you with my own eyes.
  64. Who's our real enemy today? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We waste billions spying on our own citizens for the RIAA and MPAA, yet we still treat the Chinese like a civilized society while they rob us blind and try to poison us (literally sometimes) at every turn. WHY?

  65. Missing the point by Trogre · · Score: 1

    'Everybody knows that if you are doing business in China, in the 21st century, you don't bring anything with you

    Wait, why are we doing any kind of business with these people?

    --
    "Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife
  66. You already lost by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Turn your device over and read where it was made:

    a. China
    b. Republic of China

    It doesn't matter what they do to it while you've got it there, wiping it won't help because it was made there - if they want to own you they already did.