Slashdot Mirror


China Says It Is the Target of US Hack Attacks

An anonymous reader writes "Officials at the Chinese Defense Ministry say hackers from the U.S. have been attacking Chinese military websites. 'The sites were subject to about 144,000 hacking attacks each month last year, two thirds of which came from the U.S., according to China's defense ministry. The issue of cyber hacking has strained relations between the two countries.' This follows recent hacks from people in China on high-profile U.S. sites, as well as a report accusing the Chinese government of supporting a hacking group. '[Defense Ministry spokesman Geng Yansheng] called on U.S. officials to "explain and clarify" what he said were recent U.S. media reports that Washington would carry out "pre-emptive" cyber attacks and expand its online warfare capabilities. Such efforts are "not conducive to the joint efforts of the international community to enhance network security," he said.'"

242 comments

  1. Big surprise by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    US government & corporate groups are hacking too. I cant wait for the "blah blah no proof" bullshit next.

    1. Re:Big surprise by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I'm sure it's a great consolation to be killed by your own government rather than someone else's.

    2. Re:Big surprise by gnasher719 · · Score: 2

      US government & corporate groups are hacking too. I cant wait for the "blah blah no proof" bullshit next.

      More likely that the Chinese count every spam email as "hack attack".

    3. Re:Big surprise by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We be bad, we be bad.

      You be sure you turn the other cheek, and you really get slapped down, turn the cheek again....

    4. Re:Big surprise by slick7 · · Score: 1

      US government & corporate groups are hacking too. I cant wait for the "blah blah no proof" bullshit next.

      More likely that the Chinese count every spam email as "hack attack".

      More likely that the Cabal wants WWIII so they can ramp up the NWO.

      --
      The mind conceives, the body achieves, the spirit manifests.
  2. About time. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    About time. And preemptive my ass. China has been making state-orchestrated cyber attacks for years now. There's a war in cyberspace, did they just think the U.S. wouldn't show up?

    1. Re:About time. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      So it's wrong when they do it but not when the US does it, is that what you're saying?

    2. Re:About time. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, you pick sides.

    3. Re:About time. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      About time. And preemptive my ass. China has been making state-orchestrated cyber attacks for years now. There's a war in cyberspace, did they just think the U.S. wouldn't show up?

      So has the USA. More facets of the Stuxnet story are slowly being unearthed and it now appears the thing was already under intense development in 2005. It makes one wonder how widespread this kind of thing really is and how early the various intelligence services started doing it... Post 9/11? In the early 90s? Stuxnet was a pretty sophisticated piece of kit, especially in 2005. It makes these Chinese hack and snatch attacks look a bit crude. Stuxnet was only discovered when the spooks tried to make it 'more aggressive' to increase the infection rate and found out that it's really easy to make it too aggressive and when that happens and your spyware starts infecting civilian computers in large numbers you also blow the lid off the operation.

    4. Re:About time. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In grade school.

    5. Re:About time. by DynamoJoe · · Score: 1

      It's wrong to do it. It's more wrong to NOT do it.

      --
      bah.
    6. Re:About time. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I'm saying when you hit me in the nose, and then do it again, and then do it again, then yes, it's okay when I hit you in the nose.

    7. Re:About time. by Baloroth · · Score: 2

      So it's wrong when they do it but not when the US does it, is that what you're saying?

      That depends. Self-defense is not wrong, so if the US is doing it in self-defense, then yes. Since we know the Chinese have been launching attacks against the US for many years now, it seems likely that the US is in fact doing it in self-defense, so yes, it is OK when the US does it but not when they do it. Ideally, neither one would do it, but in the case of war the aggressor is in the wrong (barring any other extenuating circumstances, like the defender attacking it's neighbors, or committing genocide).

      --
      "None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license." --John Milton
    8. Re:About time. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      No, in real life outside of liberal art college where everything is abstract, the truth is subjective, and we're all one happy global community of free thinkers (damn I have to go wash my mouth out now).

      No matter how much people think we are capable of rising above war, selfishness, ambition, pride, arrogance, etc the fact is that we all have those elements. They are embedded in our DNA. I happen to believe it was because of the fall, but regardless of how it happened I think anyone who is honest with themselves knows that what I'm saying is true. If you think you've risen above it, it's only because you've turned a blind eye to your true nature. Knowing that, and that the Chinese people are every bit as bent on world domination as we are, I'm going to go ahead and side with the guys whose soil I happen to be standing on.

    9. Re:About time. by BasilBrush · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Self defense? He started it! No, he started it! No I didn't! Yes you did! It's the stuff of children.

      In Britain, we used to have a "War Office". in 1947 they changed that to "The Ministry of Defence". They still do the same thing. It's words. Propaganda.

      If you honestly think when China does hacking it's attack, and when the USA does it it's defense, you've fallen for the propaganda.

      Do you know what real defense to hacking looks like? It looks like like patching up vulnerabilities. It looks like using better encryption. It looks like not connecting things to the internet that don't need to be connected to it.

    10. Re:About time. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      FUCK CHINA !!!! A bunch of needle dick nerds that steal American ideas. We should do all we can to destroy them.

    11. Re:About time. by Luckyo · · Score: 1

      If you seriously think that West hasn't done several times more of the same long before China clued in, I have land on the moon to sell you.

      But we're also much better at propaganda. It's valuable to scream "I'm a victim" on every corner after you've beaten the shit out of someone much weaker then you who doesn't know that he's supposed to vocally complain. That's one of the things that East really loses in - they are afraid to lose face so they don't complain. As a result it starts to look like they're the ones on offensive. Our culture just works much better with modern propaganda.

    12. Re:About time. by Nerdfest · · Score: 0

      Self defense if protecting yourself, by building using better firewalls, isolating critical systems, using software with fewer exploits, etc. Hacking China does nothing to protect the US.

    13. Re:About time. by fustakrakich · · Score: 1, Insightful

      So, it's impossible for you to believe the US drew first blood? You know, like in Central/South America, Africa, and the Middle East? Well, okay, the last two are more of a European adventure, but there are very few cases where the US can cry 'self defense'.

      --
      “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
    14. Re:About time. by Jawnn · · Score: 1

      So it's wrong when they do it but not when the US does it, is that what you're saying?

      Who said that? If you want to argue that war is wrong, fine. I agree, but please, don't even try to suggest that overtly hostile activity, sponsored by a foreign state's military, is not deserving of, at least, response-in-kind. As the GP pointed out, this is a war.

    15. Re:About time. by Drethon · · Score: 1

      And given this argument is between ACs, we are free to picture the argument as between which ever individuals we wish. A gradeschooler is arguing with a liberal college dropout?

    16. Re:About time. by kilfarsnar · · Score: 5, Insightful

      No, in real life outside of liberal art college where everything is abstract, the truth is subjective, and we're all one happy global community of free thinkers (damn I have to go wash my mouth out now).

      No matter how much people think we are capable of rising above war, selfishness, ambition, pride, arrogance, etc the fact is that we all have those elements. They are embedded in our DNA. I happen to believe it was because of the fall, but regardless of how it happened I think anyone who is honest with themselves knows that what I'm saying is true. If you think you've risen above it, it's only because you've turned a blind eye to your true nature. Knowing that, and that the Chinese people are every bit as bent on world domination as we are, I'm going to go ahead and side with the guys whose soil I happen to be standing on.

      I believe it was Henry Ford who said that whether you think you can or cannot do something, you're right. I think your description may describe the world and humanity as they currently exist. But it forecloses the ability to improve. By resigning ourselves to a future of tribalism, and the chauvinism and hypocrisy that it brings, we miss the opportunity to realize that the boundaries of the tribe are arbitrary. We decide who is in the tribe an who is out. We could expand the tribe to include all of humanity. Or we can reduce it to our own neighborhood. It's up to us, not embedded in our DNA. We reap what we sow, and we get the world we choose.

      --
      "What the American public doesn't know is what makes them the American public." -Ray Zalinsky (Tommy Boy)
    17. Re:About time. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm surprised you can even say 'about time'. I would honestly be shocked if they haven't been attempting to (or likely succeeding in as well) hacking China as well as dozens of other countries databases for years.

      I mean seriously, this is quite possibly one of the most corrupt times in US history. Do you REALLY think that they haven't been hacking the living shit out of everything under the sun until just now?

    18. Re:About time. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So it's wrong when they do it but not when the US does it, is that what you're saying?

      I don't see anything in the OP that would support that assertion.

      More to the point, if you are attacked, is it wrong to retaliate? Naturally, some would make an argument that all agressive acts are wrong, no matter the provocation, but that is just not a realistic stance when you're talking about nation-states.

      Any nation with sufficient resources and international interests (USA, UK, Israel, Russia, China, and probably most other Western and Eastern European countries) is probably actively engaged in spying, including computer penetration, against their international adversaries. That's the way things are, and have always been.

      The alternative is a hot war. Personally, I like this option much better.

    19. Re:About time. by kilfarsnar · · Score: 1

      So it's wrong when they do it but not when the US does it, is that what you're saying?

      That depends. Self-defense is not wrong, so if the US is doing it in self-defense, then yes. Since we know the Chinese have been launching attacks against the US for many years now, it seems likely that the US is in fact doing it in self-defense, so yes, it is OK when the US does it but not when they do it. Ideally, neither one would do it, but in the case of war the aggressor is in the wrong (barring any other extenuating circumstances, like the defender attacking it's neighbors, or committing genocide).

      Considering how the US conducts itself in the world, thinking that the US is launching cyber-attacks only in response to Chinese action is incredibly naive. The US has likely been conducting espionage via computer since the capability existed. It amuses me that the US can complain publicly about the Chinese or Iranians without anyone pointing out that the pot is calling the kettle black.

      --
      "What the American public doesn't know is what makes them the American public." -Ray Zalinsky (Tommy Boy)
    20. Re:About time. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So if it's wrong for you to punch me in the face it's wrong for me to punch back?

    21. Re:About time. by kilfarsnar · · Score: 1

      About time. And preemptive my ass. China has been making state-orchestrated cyber attacks for years now. There's a war in cyberspace, did they just think the U.S. wouldn't show up?

      So has the USA. More facets of the Stuxnet story are slowly being unearthed and it now appears the thing was already under intense development in 2005. It makes one wonder how widespread this kind of thing really is and how early the various intelligence services started doing it... Post 9/11? In the early 90s?

      Yes, of course. The US and any other country has been doing this since the capability was realized. The fact that people get all bothered about the Chinese while seeming to think other countries, including the US, don't do the same thing, indicates to me that a lot of people don't really understand how the world works.

      --
      "What the American public doesn't know is what makes them the American public." -Ray Zalinsky (Tommy Boy)
    22. Re:About time. by CanHasDIY · · Score: 0

      So it's wrong when they do it but not when the US does it, is that what you're saying?

      That depends. Self-defense is not wrong, so if the US is doing it in self-defense, then yes.

      Considering that our government is using the term "pre-emptive strike," even if they are using the term incorrectly, implies that even they don't consider it self-defense.

      Otherwise, every bully in the nation can claim 'self-defense' when he shoves a future member of our ranks into a locker.

      --
      An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
    23. Re:About time. by CanHasDIY · · Score: 1

      More facets of the Stuxnet story are slowly being unearthed and it now appears the thing was already under intense development in 2005. It makes one wonder how widespread this kind of thing really is and how early the various intelligence services started doing it... Post 9/11? In the early 90s?

      Possibly earlier than that - it's a pretty well established idea that all the cool tech we see coming out today, was being designed and implemented by secretive government organizations for at least a decade prior. The SR-71, the internet, Stuxnet, and uncountable other technologies were used to wage war against the enemies of the US government long before the public even knew such things existed.

      --
      An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
    24. Re:About time. by CanHasDIY · · Score: 5, Insightful

      FUCK CHINA !!!! A bunch of needle dick nerds that steal American ideas.

      "Steal" implies that once they take the idea, the person who had it originally does not anymore. That's just silly hyperbole.

      No, China "borrows" American ideas, then figures out how to mass produce them cheaper than we can. It's called capitalism, it is the basis of both the Chinese and American economies. Hell, if anything, we should be proud - American capitalism won out over Russian communism, isn't that what the Joe McCarthy's of this nation always wanted?

      We should do all we can to destroy them.

      Yea, because scorched earth policies always work out for the best, especially when nuclear-armed states are involved.

      --
      An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
    25. Re:About time. by GodfatherofSoul · · Score: 1

      My guess is we've been at it for longer and much better since you *aren't* hearing anything about it.

      --
      I swear to God...I swear to God! That is NOT how you treat your human!
    26. Re:About time. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm an American. I care about American companies and American interests. I don't particularly give a crap about China and Chinese interests. It's great that my government is striking back against Chinese corporate espionage... For me anyway. The Chinese have Chinese interests in mind and are not trying to have a global love fest... Hacking them seems like a viable way to find out what they're going to do to us next and to defend against that attack. In an ideal world there would be no warfare, but we don't live in that world, so we can't be pansies about this.

    27. Re:About time. by RabidReindeer · · Score: 3, Insightful

      No, in real life outside of liberal art college where everything is abstract, the truth is subjective, and we're all one happy global community of free thinkers (damn I have to go wash my mouth out now).

      No matter how much people think we are capable of rising above war, selfishness, ambition, pride, arrogance, etc the fact is that we all have those elements. They are embedded in our DNA. I happen to believe it was because of the fall, but regardless of how it happened I think anyone who is honest with themselves knows that what I'm saying is true. If you think you've risen above it, it's only because you've turned a blind eye to your true nature. Knowing that, and that the Chinese people are every bit as bent on world domination as we are, I'm going to go ahead and side with the guys whose soil I happen to be standing on.

      If you believe in The Fall, then you are likely Christian. Christianity does not subscribe to the "eye-for-an-eye" approach to problem resolution.

      The USA is not - despite what some wish to think - a Christian nation, but the founding principles were based in large part on Christianity, which is why things like pre-emptive warfare, torture, and other extreme or retaliatory measures were always considered "un-American" up until 2001. We strove to be better than that and to provide a better example for others. To rise above our baser natures.

      Christianity notwithstanding, there is a pretty clear case to be made that endless retaliation Old Testament-style may feel good, but it simply propagates the damage down through generations forever. We have some pretty clear-cut examples in recent history on what happens in countries where they say "Enough is Enough" and stop trying to "balance the scales" versus countries that continue on the same old cycles expecting that one day things will be better.

      Having said that, however, there's no virtue in being a doormat, either. If the Chinese attack us, we should take defensive - and if necessary - offensive steps. I only desire that whatever is open and above-board where the world can see and judge. Don't pretend to false virtues, because once established as a liar, it's hard to be believed when you say anything later, even when it's true. Don't do things that you know you'll regret being discovered.

    28. Re:About time. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Also, the Chinese want their gun-powder back. Enforcing that IP should make the fighting fun. Oh and while were're at it the Germans want their rockets and nukes back and the Brits want their jet engines and computers back.

    29. Re:About time. by LordLimecat · · Score: 1

      Its wrong for you to walk up and punch me in the mouth. Its generally considered OK for me to defend myself.

      Likewise, if Canada one day decided it didnt like us and invaded, it would be considered "unprovoked" and "problematic". For us to then respond with military force would not.

    30. Re:About time. by Shoten · · Score: 3, Insightful

      So it's wrong when they do it but not when the US does it, is that what you're saying?

      There's a difference between taking action against a military target and taking action against a civilian entity. When Country A has its military attack civilian and military entities of Country B, but Country B's military only attacks Country B's military, this means two things: 1, Country B is following widely-accepted norms around military action (and Country A is not), and 2, Country B is unlikely to be the primary (initial) aggressor. Counterforce actions have almost always been the realm of a defending nation, while countervalue actions have belonged to aggressive nations.

      --

      For your security, this post has been encrypted with ROT-13, twice.
    31. Re:About time. by fafaforza · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Defense also looks like trying to get your own data to see what the other side found out from their hacks of you. Satellite photos of the other side arming? Decrypting their communication? Would those not count as steps towards your own defense? Or would you just close your eyes and plug your ears, build the biggest wall you can, and call that defense?

      Besides, China's hacking has been very much in the news lately. How do you know this isn't just China's PR push? How do you know China isn't simply counting a hacked home box sitting on a cable connection as a governmental hack? Don't you think the US would be a bit better about hiding their source?

    32. Re:About time. by yankeessuck · · Score: 1

      We're not talking about the same types of attacks though. I think it's safe to assume all major governments conduct military and diplomatic espionage. However, the US complaint is that the Chinese military is conducting industrial espionage and gives the stolen secrets to their own industry.

    33. Re:About time. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, why on earth would we want anything they have? As it is they're destroying our country with cheap, low quality products. If their military is built with the same level of rigor, their pilots must be falling out of the skies!

    34. Re:About time. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nope... You need a different mind set for this. The typical american brute force head to the wall approach doesn't work here and hence US is far behind on this. China has already manufacturing clone military equipment using blueprints stolen through hacking activities with unimaginable in US speed for from design to production cycle. They are just laughing at us with those denials of wrong doing and accusations of been a target. Unless US side was smart enough to make them into believing that what they stole was a top secret project, where in reality it was just a hot air to send them in circles.

    35. Re:About time. by BasilBrush · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Defense also looks like trying to get your own data to see what the other side found out from their hacks of you.

      It might involve hiring outside hackers to probe your own defenses and report any breaches they find. But hacking into some foreign government computers to see what they have in case anything of what they have is yours - that's attack, not defense.

      Or would you just close your eyes and plug your ears, build the biggest wall you can, and call that defense?

      Don't confuse two different issues.
      1) What I, you, they or anyone else WOULD do or SHOULD do.
      2) The nature of the action. (In this case attack or defense).

      Just because you may think your side should do something does not make it defense.

      Besides, China's hacking has been very much in the news lately. How do you know this isn't just China's PR push?

      How do you know China's hacking being in the news isn't just the USA's PR push?

      What's the biggest example of cyber hacking by a government in recent years? Stuxnet. A worm designed to sabotage Iran's uranium enrichment centrifuges. Who's responsible? The USA and/or Israel. And it's attack. It's not defence, even if you happen to be on the side of the USA and Israel.

    36. Re:About time. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Counterforce actions have almost always been the realm of a defending nation, while countervalue actions have belonged to aggressive nations.

      Not always: Hiroshima, Dresden

    37. Re:About time. by TapeCutter · · Score: 1

      The US has likely been conducting espionage via computer since the capability existed.

      The US/UK were spying on Israel using compromised mainframes as long ago as the 1960's, they also didn't tell their allies they could break WW2 encryption methods.

      --
      And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
    38. Re:About time. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Capitalism cannot last if it depends on infringement and "borrowing" of others ideas as you refer to it. There's no motivation for one company to produce new products/ideas if others depend on copying them and selling them cheaper, without having to deal with research/development/marketing costs on their own. While the American economy and patent system may not be perfect it still values success by being inventive/creative instead of companies leeching off of other's work.

      I don't think Joe McCarthy would look up to the Chinese capitalist economy.

    39. Re:About time. by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      Maybe you didn't notice but there has been a cold war going on for ages now. The US has been spying on China pretty aggressively, and China regularly blocks US spy satellites with blinding lasers. The CIA is a para-military organization, not part of the military but doing missions similar to what other country's military intelligence branches do. The US also launched the first salvo in the cyber war.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    40. Re:About time. by cusco · · Score: 1

      China's hacking has been very much in the news lately.

      Keep in mind which country spends several hundred million dollars a year on Madison Avenue marketing specialists. I'm not at all surprised that the US press corpse runs regular stories about Chinese hacking, we pay them very well to make sure that happens.

      I wonder what percentage of these attacks are actual government actions, and what percentage are random cyber-criminals looking to score. China is one quarter of the world's population, that means there are a LOT of suspects that don't work for the government.

      --
      "Think about how stupid the average person is. Now, realise that half of them are dumber than that." - George Carlin
    41. Re:About time. by cusco · · Score: 1

      Even more amusing is that when the US catches Israel doing the same thing the FBI just quietly deports them back home.

      --
      "Think about how stupid the average person is. Now, realise that half of them are dumber than that." - George Carlin
    42. Re:About time. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think you may find, AS FUCKING USUAL......
      it's the ARSEHOLES in the USA that have started all this shit.

      The USA has been on an Anti China bash for at least the last 5 years.
      And the brainwashing of the american public to support this shit has worked quite well.
      (As if it wouldn't with such a stupid (General) population!)

    43. Re:About time. by Tacticus.v1 · · Score: 1

      Didn't the US get quite a significant economical boost with wholesale infringement of European IP in its early days?

    44. Re:About time. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's wrong when the military does it. The article can't tell if it's Joe/Jane Hacker in his/her mom's basement or a Russian botnet.

    45. Re:About time. by EvilHamster · · Score: 1

      This seems to be a common attitude coming out of the USA. What you often fail to realise is that others are effected by your actions, or the actions you actively encourage your government to partake in, which is much the same thing. I work for an ISP in Australia. The level of security work that we have to go through because the US and China have started this undeclared war costs me significant lost sleep. Of course, this is nothing compared to the suffering the USA has instigated in other nations as it plays it political games with nations as pieces. _Everything_ the USA does outside its borders reverberates around the world, but responsibility for actions is something that the USA seems to lack.

      September 11: 3000 dead. War in Iraq 100,000 dead (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_Iraq_War) and _still_ counting. How many in Afghanistan? So if I punch you in the nose it is ok for you to butcher me and everyone I know or ever have known?

      The US is very big on rights, but very small on responsibility. Responsibility is much harder.

      For the record: I would say that Australia is similarly bad in this respect. The difference is that with the US the scale is much larger.

      Of course China is fighting the US on the only battlefield where it has much of a chance at present. The US' response to that will dictate what occurs in the future when the equality becomes economic, then military. The US needs to step very carefully here because the lives of many more people in foreign countries depend on what you do. Mine included.

    46. Re:About time. by Lesrahpem · · Score: 1

      How do you know China isn't simply counting a hacked home box sitting on a cable connection as a governmental hack?

      Perhaps we should be asking the same of our government? Whose to say that many of these "Chinese hackers" we keep hearing about aren't, in fact, hackers from elsewhere using compromised machines on Chinese networks?

    47. Re:About time. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They can have it back. We replaced it with the much more efficient and less corrosive smokeless powder (nitrocellulose).

    48. Re:About time. by CanHasDIY · · Score: 1

      Capitalism cannot last if it depends on infringement and "borrowing" of others ideas as you refer to it.

      100% correct - it is a wholly unsustainable model.

      Think about that for a bit.

      --
      An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
    49. Re:About time. by CanHasDIY · · Score: 1

      Have heard that in the past, but have yet to find any evidence to substantiate the claim.

      Still, doesn't seem beyond reason for such a thing to have occurred.

      --
      An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
    50. Re:About time. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Stuxnet is the attempt to disrupt a nuclear weapons program without resorting to war. Chinese hacking is the attempt to steal industrial and military secrets to benefit China. Big difference

    51. Re:About time. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      China isn't borrowing anything. China is stealing in the attempt to get up to speed. Look at their so called stealth fighter the J-20, the entire forward fuselage is an exact copy of the F-22. China is a thief country and the sooner we cut off their access to our secrets the better. Let them develop their own technology

    52. Re:About time. by DeVilla · · Score: 1

      So it's wrong when they do it but not when the US does it, is that what you're saying?

      It's kinda like a non-cyber attack. If you someone attacks you without provocation, there is generally reasonable grounds to consider their action "wrong". If someone whom you've just attacked without provocation attacks you, there might be less reasonable grounds to consider their action "wrong". Rhetoric and other situations can make things more complicated to asses.

    53. Re:About time. by Shoten · · Score: 1

      Maybe you didn't notice but there has been a cold war going on for ages now. The US has been spying on China pretty aggressively, and China regularly blocks US spy satellites with blinding lasers. The CIA is a para-military organization, not part of the military but doing missions similar to what other country's military intelligence branches do. The US also launched the first salvo in the cyber war.

      Actually, you have a couple of things wrong. One, China blinded a US satellite once, as a test/demonstration. And saying that the CIA is a para-military (as opposed to intelligence) organization because it performs missions similar to what military intelligence organizations do is like saying that the Department of Labor is a para-military organization simply because both their headquarters and the Pentagon have cafeterias. There's a reason that the word "intelligence" is in the phrase "military intelligence."

      --

      For your security, this post has been encrypted with ROT-13, twice.
    54. Re:About time. by Raenex · · Score: 1

      the founding principles were based in large part on Christianity, which is why things like pre-emptive warfare, torture, and other extreme or retaliatory measures were always considered "un-American" up until 2001

      This is just an extremely short-sighted view of history. You can start with the founding of the United States, where the land was brutally taken from the indigenous inhabitants, to the Civil War, to the Banana Wars, atrocities committed in World War II, Vietnam, the invasion of Panama, etc. The list is extremely long. The response to 9/11 wasn't all that unusual in the grand scheme of things.

      By the way, true Christianity as Jesus preaches in the New Testament is to "turn the other cheek", or in other words, to not even fight back, which probably came about as a political stance for Jews split among the desire to rebel against Rome or to accept Roman occupation. It was a Christian ideal I've never seen evidence of in our founding principles.

  3. On the contrary... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ...this kind of stuff will absolutely enhance network security. It's geopolitical stability that's in danger in the long term. But if we didn't destroy ourselves with nukes during the cold war, I think we'll come out of this one okay too.

    1. Re:On the contrary... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If by "enhance" you mean "lock down" then yes.

      In 5 years the internet will be a VERY different place, citizen.

    2. Re:On the contrary... by jamiesan · · Score: 1

      The computer will no longer be your friend, but happiness will still be mandatory.

  4. Really? by Sparticus789 · · Score: 5, Informative
    --
    sudo make me a sandwich
    1. Re:Really? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      That looks like the start screen of an arcade game.

    2. Re:Really? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh, don't be silly. As everyone who posts on Slashdot knows, the US government — the military in particular — is full of nothing but complete morons who couldn't understand technology any more advanced than a ball-point pen used to sign checks written to them by lobbyists. Hell, the rest of the world agrees! The US is just a bunch of undereducated assholes with guns who bomb the shit out of anything that remotely threatens their oil! How could they POSSIBLY be behind these attacks? You're just talking nonsense!

    3. Re:Really? by Mike+Frett · · Score: 1

      Oh, that page is a game, see the two old guys posing as Officials?. Your mission is to show them how to turn the Computer on by moving their fingers to the location of the Power button.

    4. Re:Really? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I wonder what basic training is like for the cyber command?

      If I had to guess I'd assume it consists of nothing but red bull, gummy bears and call of duty modern warfare 3 without sleep for a week.

    5. Re:Really? by Sparticus789 · · Score: 3, Funny

      Those training methods are classified. Please redact your previous statements

      Sincerely,
      NSA

      --
      sudo make me a sandwich
  5. Me Too - Too Late by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Yea, whatever China.

    Next you're gonna tell me that your dad can beat up my dad.

    1. Re:Me Too - Too Late by Antipater · · Score: 2

      George Washington could TOTALLY beat up Mao Zedong.

      --
      Everything is better with chainsaws.
    2. Re:Me Too - Too Late by CanHasDIY · · Score: 1

      George Washington could TOTALLY beat up Mao Zedong.

      Wooden teeth do make excellent fist-packs.

      --
      An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
    3. Re:Me Too - Too Late by cusco · · Score: 1

      No way, Mao was a huge morphine junkie, Washington could have punched him all day and Mao wouldn't have felt anything at all.

      --
      "Think about how stupid the average person is. Now, realise that half of them are dumber than that." - George Carlin
  6. Pot, meet kettle... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Sorry, can't find it in me to feel at all sorry for them.

    1. Re:Pot, meet kettle... by magarity · · Score: 1

      Indeed; this is definitely a case of needing to call the Waaambulance.

    2. Re:Pot, meet kettle... by Reverand+Dave · · Score: 1

      That is the exact same thing I thought. It's kind of like Apple claiming someone else is patent trolling or Microsoft claiming someone else is engaging in anti competitive practices.

      --
      I got here through a series of tubes
    3. Re:Pot, meet kettle... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      So "your" saying they had a lollerskating accident?

    4. Re:Pot, meet kettle... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, it was a ROFLcopter crash. It was terrible!

    5. Re:Pot, meet kettle... by devforhire · · Score: 1

      Funny that the USA is so quick to attack China about state sponsored cyber warfare while we are holding the Struxnet smoking gun. I think the US just needs to deny better.

    6. Re:Pot, meet kettle... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Funny that the USA is so quick to attack China about state sponsored cyber warfare while we are holding the Struxnet smoking gun. I think the US just needs to deny better.

      Wasn't Stuxnet Israeli, not American?

    7. Re:Pot, meet kettle... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      well... if they turned around the great firewall so it kept people out instead of keeping people in...........

  7. Good way to mess up economic growth by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Way to go us and china

  8. Tor Nodes by dfn5 · · Score: 2, Funny

    U.S. claims Tor nodes were running on their machines and so not responsible.

    --
    -- Thou hast strayed far from the path of the Avatar.
  9. Ooooh Website attacks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    While China continues to loot the US.

    1. Re:Ooooh Website attacks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      From TFA: "Mandiant said that Unit 61398 was believed to have "systematically stolen hundreds of terabytes of data" from at least 141 organisations around the world. "

    2. Re:Ooooh Website attacks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Did they manage to recover any of it?

    3. Re:Ooooh Website attacks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      From TFA: "Mandiant said that Unit 61398 was believed to have "systematically stolen hundreds of terabytes of data" from at least 141 organisations around the world. "

      Sounds impressive but I bet most of it was garbage.

    4. Re:Ooooh Website attacks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If I pay them a few bucks, can I get my server backup?

    5. Re:Ooooh Website attacks by biodata · · Score: 1

      Ohnoes how will we ever get it back?

      --
      Korma: Good
    6. Re:Ooooh Website attacks by fustakrakich · · Score: 1

      How did that get modded up? It's the banks that are looting the US, with China's elite enjoying some of the spoils. National boundaries do not apply.

      --
      “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
    7. Re:Ooooh Website attacks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      mmm... hundreds of terabytes of porn... *homer simpsons drooling noise*

  10. What if.. by houbou · · Score: 3, Interesting

    If the US is under cyber attack from China and China is under cyber attack from the US.. Anybody ever thought that maybe it's a 3rd party group doing the work? spoofing IPs? etc.. Sheesh.

    1. Re:What if.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yea, China is hacking themselves through US servers.

    2. Re:What if.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Haha! No one ever expects the Danes!

      I typed that and hit submit, didn't I? Well, time to go into hiding until I can find a new Evil Genius, maybe there's a competant one in Sri Lanka...

    3. Re:What if.. by chainsaw1 · · Score: 1
      --
      - Sig
    4. Re:What if.. by Rob+Riggs · · Score: 1

      Anybody ever thought that maybe it's a 3rd party group doing the work? spoofing IPs? etc.. Sheesh.

      Really? Do you think that the IPs have not been spoofed? The hard part is tracking down the source of the attacks through all the various agents running on infected hosts -- and finding the sources that do not originate from an IP. Besides, what is the point of doing that? What do you think is the strategic goal of such a scenario?

      --
      the growth in cynicism and rebellion has not been without cause
    5. Re:What if.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They are not going to spoof IPs, too hard and it's not really worth it (they are used for routing, so to do it right you have to hack the routers and/or spoof the ARP tables [not sure how well that works on the backbone routers]). Why do that when you can just buy access to 200 comprimised chinese (or american) machines for a few bucks and proxy your stuff through all of them, then the IP is real and your enemy has to hack all the machines to trace it back to you, which is far far more difficult than the method you used to get access to them.

    6. Re:What if.. by Anubis+IV · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Anybody ever thought that maybe it's a 3rd party group doing the work? spoofing IPs? etc.. Sheesh.

      Or maybe they hacked our Internets and burned down our firewall? Seriously, IP spoofing is not as useful as the movies make it out to be.

      Spoofing IPs is easy, but it's only effective in a few situations, such as when you're sending a message with no expectation of a reply (e.g. spam e-mail, DDoS attack, etc.). If you're trying to break into someone's system, you need to be able to get a response back, and that means providing an IP address you can be reached at to your target. Now, you may try to anonymize your IP address somehow, such as through the use of proxies, VPNs, and other such technologies that can allow you to hide behind or within someone else's system, or you may spoof an IP address of a zombie computer you control and can use to route return packets to you, but at some point, an IP address you control needs to be provided to someone else, otherwise you have no way of getting back a response, and that address can be traced.

    7. Re:What if.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Read the mandiant report. They actually got screen capture agents on the attacker's computers.

    8. Re: What if.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have an Apple sticker on my Dell laptop - Mac spoofing

    9. Re:What if.. by jafac · · Score: 1

      SPECTRE.

      It's SPECTRE - on both sides. They're attacking BOTH sides, trying to start a cyber war, so they can profit by selling both sides new cyber war weapons. It's genius, I tell you. And now, Mr. Bond, I expect you to die.

      --

      These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
    10. Re:What if.. by Lesrahpem · · Score: 1

      I often wonder how the origin of all of these attacks is determined without actually tracking down the culprits. In today's world it is simple to stage an attack seeming to originate from anywhere in the world.

    11. Re:What if.. by Lesrahpem · · Score: 1

      Or maybe they hacked our Internets and burned down our firewall? Seriously, IP spoofing is not as useful as the movies make it out to be.

      Spoofing IPs is easy, but it's only effective in a few situations, such as when you're sending a message with no expectation of a reply (e.g. spam e-mail, DDoS attack, etc.). If you're trying to break into someone's system, you need to be able to get a response back, and that means providing an IP address you can be reached at to your target. Now, you may try to anonymize your IP address somehow, such as through the use of proxies, VPNs, and other such technologies that can allow you to hide behind or within someone else's system, or you may spoof an IP address of a zombie computer you control and can use to route return packets to you, but at some point, an IP address you control needs to be provided to someone else, otherwise you have no way of getting back a response, and that address can be traced.

      I think the point still stands that it's possible for an attack to appear to originate from a location different from where it actually did. What is to stop someone from using a hijacked wifi access point to attack servers in, let's say France, and then use those French servers to launch attacks on Australian businesses?

      I have personally witnessed an attack where computers owned by an American company were infected with a persistent agent designed to infect computers in a specific business in China (during a visit of the American execs to the Chinese location), for the purpose of then using the hijacked Chinese computers to conduct industrial espionage against another American company which also conducted business with that Chinese company. The actual attackers were neither American nor Chinese.

  11. Honesty.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I say the U.S should just come out and say, "yep we are hacking you"..

    1. Re:Honesty.... by ak3ldama · · Score: 1

      The US should come out and give a full explanation of their cyber warfare policies and practices. When should anything be taking place? Would we need to be at war? Are the practices "meant" to just be defensive in nature? The citizens and businesses that are online are thus affected by the actions the military takes part in - we have a need to know. Typical warfare is seen. It is in the "public" eye. This is not - unless they setup some honey pots and proved what happens. That. Would. Be. Awesome. (For either side to do and expose.)

      --
      "but money is the God of Algiers & Mahomet their prophet." - Rich. O'Bryen June 8th 1786
  12. World is changing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    This is a pretty good option for small nations who want to get back at larger ones.

    Step 1: buy server time with bitcoin from someone in China
    Step 2: hack some highly visible US companies with basic java exploits.
    Step 3: stand back and watch them hack each other for the next 10 years with professional grade stuff.

  13. dumb mistake, China by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    You never let your military directly comment on the country's network security You're supposed to let "independent" security firms within your country make the assessments/accusations! Gives you plausible deniability when they're exposed for hyping a "cyberwar" in order to land lucrative government/commercial contracts for their services.

  14. Here comes the APT thing once more by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    zomg lots of "APT" here and "APT" there coming again.

    Because it needs to be aknowleged: http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=WMD

    ======
    1.Weapons of Mass Destruction--A mythical concept that lives in the minds of paranoid, old, white guys and is used to scare the public and gather support for attacking another country.
    (also see bogeyman)
    2.A term used to generate income for Haliburton.
    3.Something that the US is permitted to own, but reserves the right to determine which other countries may also own them.

    If we can convice Americans that Iraq has WMDs, we can kick the snot out of them and pay Haliburton to rebuild the place.
    =====

    1. Re:Here comes the APT thing once more by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I hear that this shadowy group "Ubuntu" is heavily involved with APT.

  15. Off Topic: Did Slashdot update the site by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I used to be able to scroll down to the bottom of the page and it would automatically load the next page of stories. Now, I have to press Next.

    I was messing with the settings. So, perhaps I changed a setting I shouldn't have.

    Is there a setting that will change all options back to default?

    1. Re:Off Topic: Did Slashdot update the site by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nope, same here and I didn't change any settings.

  16. Only 144,000 a month.... by who_stole_my_kidneys · · Score: 1

    for a typical point of entry, that's usually a daily total, guess the US is not trying hard enough.

  17. How Chinese... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Always copying others' innovations. "They attack U.S.!" "Now THEY attack US!"

  18. Moooommm, they're doing it toooooooo! by crazyjj · · Score: 3, Funny

    Don't make me have to stop this car and separate you two!

    --
    What political party do you join when you don't like Bible-thumpers *or* hippies?
    1. Re:Moooommm, they're doing it toooooooo! by jadv · · Score: 1

      Don't make me have to stop this car and separate you two!

      So if USA and China are the children, who is the mother? (ducks for cover)

    2. Re:Moooommm, they're doing it toooooooo! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The public.

    3. Re:Moooommm, they're doing it toooooooo! by CanHasDIY · · Score: 1

      Don't make me have to stop this car and separate you two!

      This is far more profound a commentary that it appears.

      Two wrongs never, ever make a right, no matter how much one may try to justify it.

      --
      An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
    4. Re:Moooommm, they're doing it toooooooo! by gstoddart · · Score: 1

      Two wrongs never, ever make a right, no matter how much one may try to justify it.

      So, explain the death penalty then. Or, for that matter, the entire Iraq, er, 'conflict' since it ultimately had nothing to do with the stated reasons. Some people believe god has told them that revenge is good (an eye for an eye).

      People try all the time to commit a second wrong in response to the first one.

      It's a nice platitude, but it's far from universally applied. People like revenge and retaliation. Infer what you will about human nature from that.

      --
      Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    5. Re:Moooommm, they're doing it toooooooo! by CanHasDIY · · Score: 1

      Two wrongs never, ever make a right, no matter how much one may try to justify it.

      So, explain the death penalty then.

      It's wrong - I know some people will bitch about the cost of lifetime imprisonment, but what those people fail to realize is A) it's actually more expensive to execute a prisoner than to keep them locked up for life, and B) if our nation didn't focus so much treasure on incarcerating non-violent drug offenders and the like, there'd be plenty of money for lifetime imprisonments.

      the entire Iraq, er, 'conflict'

      Also wrong, for so many reasons...

      Some people believe god has told them that revenge is good (an eye for an eye).

      People have used 'god told me to' as a justification for fucked up behavior for millennia. Still wrong.

      It's a nice platitude, but it's far from universally applied.

      Not being universally applied does not make it a "trite, meaningless statement." It just means that there are a lot of people out there who have absolutely no respect for one another.

      --
      An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
    6. Re:Moooommm, they're doing it toooooooo! by gstoddart · · Score: 1

      Not being universally applied does not make it a "trite, meaningless statement." It just means that there are a lot of people out there who have absolutely no respect for one another.

      I'm not saying there isn't value to the expression ... but it's not a natural law or anything like that, and people don't seem to follow it for the most part.

      It's a moral observation that it would be better if we played nicely, but in the end, it's a sound bite -- which pretty much makes it a platitude. It's a nice sentiment, I just see no evidence for it in actual human behavior in general.

      Then there's the whole thorny issue of who gets to decide 'right' and 'wrong' -- the Amish, or the Pastafarians?

      The examples I cited are meant to be glaring examples of how, collectively, people have decided that "two wrongs don't make a right" depends on who is deciding it -- because humans clearly do the opposite all the time.

      So, by virtue of being something which is a good idea, not a natural law, and rarely applied in human society ... I'll stick with platitude. I'm not saying it's a bad idea or wrong, but so much of human society is based on the exact opposite principles that to pretend it's some enduring tenet of human behavior is a little naive.

      It's things like this which make me say "all categorical statements are wrong or incomplete". ;-)

      --
      Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    7. Re:Moooommm, they're doing it toooooooo! by CanHasDIY · · Score: 1

      I'm not saying there isn't value to the expression ...

      Then you shouldn't have used the term 'platitude.'

      It's a moral observation that it would be better if we played nicely, but in the end, it's a sound bite -- which pretty much makes it a platitude. It's a nice sentiment, I just see no evidence for it in actual human behavior in general.

      Go visit a prison. I'm certain you'll meet all sorts of people who wronged someone who wronged them, and are thus suffering the punishment, no matter how right they thought they were at the time.

      Then there's the whole thorny issue of who gets to decide 'right' and 'wrong' -- the Amish, or the Pastafarians?

      Shouldn't be all that thorny; the concept of Mores and Folkways is pretty well established in human culture.

      It basically boils down to one simple question: Would you like it if someone did that to you? If the answer is 'no,' perhaps you should reconsider your actions.

      i.e., would you like it if someone murdered you? No? Me either; therefore, we can establish that murder is wrong, because nobody in their right mind wants to be murdered.

      It is my opinion that those who attempt to make 'thorny issues' out of obvious moral duties are merely snakes attempting to justify their own desires. So far, I've yet to be proven wrong.

      The examples I cited are meant to be glaring examples of how, collectively, people have decided that "two wrongs don't make a right" depends on who is deciding it -- because humans clearly do the opposite all the time.

      The fact that those issues - the death penalty, Iraq War, and religious zealotry - are highly debated, proves your assertion as incorrect.

      So, by virtue of being something which is a good idea, not a natural law, and rarely applied in human society ... I'll stick with platitude

      Then you're insisting on being incorrect - it is not, by definition, a platitude.

      I'll stick with platitude. I'm not saying it's a bad idea or wrong, but so much of human society is based on the exact opposite principles that to pretend it's some enduring tenet of human behavior is a little naive.

      Again, I never said or implied that it is "some enduring tenet of human behavior," I merely stated it as the fact that it is - doing something wrong, in response to something wrong that someone else did, is never, ever, the right thing to do.

      --
      An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
  19. "military websites" by Culture20 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    hackers from the U.S. have been attacking Chinese military websites.

    Wake me up when the U.S. military is hacking Chinese civilian/banking computers or trying to SSH into everything.

    1. Re:"military websites" by kilfarsnar · · Score: 1

      hackers from the U.S. have been attacking Chinese military websites.

      Wake me up when the U.S. military is hacking Chinese civilian/banking computers or trying to SSH into everything.

      Wake you up when they're doing it, or wake you up when it comes out that they're doing it?

      --
      "What the American public doesn't know is what makes them the American public." -Ray Zalinsky (Tommy Boy)
    2. Re:"military websites" by Infiniti2000 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      For the record, it would be difficult for outsiders to discern the difference between true Chinese civilian and Chinese government-owned companies.

  20. China and U.S. hacking one another by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Didn't Prohias have a cartoon series about this?

  21. Digital Mongols? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    What about this so-called "Great Firewall"

    1. Re:Digital Mongols? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's great!

    2. Re:Digital Mongols? by CanHasDIY · · Score: 1

      What about this so-called "Great Firewall"

      Built out of minnow traps, apparently.

      --
      An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
  22. war? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    the war already started and nobody knows?

  23. China suing US by Grayhand · · Score: 5, Funny

    They're claiming an original art patent on spying on foreign governments using hackers.

  24. Big Difference by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Even if this were true (and all signs point that it's just a knee-jerk reaction by China), what the Chinese are reporting is attacks against their military infrastructure from US IPs. This is way different than what the NYT and Mandiant claim the Chinese are doing which is leveraging the capabilities of it's cyber army (god I hate that term) against private corporations for the betterment of it's government controlled businesses.

    That's a huge difference. Yes the US is probably targeting the Chinese army but it sure as heck isn't specifically targeting Huawei and giving the information over to Cisco.

    Seriously China, grow up.

    1. Re:Big Difference by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What for? THEY are doing it right. What is the point of hack the hell of your adversary if you are not going to take full advantage of it?

      Captcha: worriers

    2. Re:Big Difference by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why would Cisco (et. al.) want their own source code back? They already have it...

    3. Re:Big Difference by Cenan · · Score: 1


      while(!done) {
            string usIPAddress = addressList[random.Next(addressList.Length)];
            logFile.WriteLine(usIPAddress + ": connection established.. blah blah blah");
            done = logFile.Length == 144000;
      }

      PresentLogFileAsProof(logFile);

      --
      ... whatever ...
    4. Re:Big Difference by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's a huge difference. Yes the US is probably targeting the Chinese army but it sure as heck isn't specifically targeting Huawei and giving the information over to Cisco.

      You know, statements like that are precisely of the sort that makes me believe it probably is happening. I mean, if there's a serious fear that Chinese telecommunication equipment companies may be installing backdoors in their firmware and outright cloning Cisco hardware to get around the "buy Cisco cause it's safe", what's to really make you think that the US military wouldn't commission Cisco or another company to clone Huawei hardware and try to infiltrate China under the same scheme which would potentially entail hacking Huawei to get detailed specs on the hardware?

      Having said all that, the small point to be said is, it may not be the US military doing the work. It'd seem more likely to be the CIA. But, that's a rather moot point.

    5. Re:Big Difference by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How do you know that? It wouldn't be the first time US companies benefit in that manner.

  25. We really need cajones in this country by RogueWarrior65 · · Score: 1

    We need a leader who is willing to quote Kang saying "You've committed a wanton act of war!"

    Seriously, what is it going to take before people in our government are willing to publicly accuse China of acts of war?

    1. Re:We really need cajones in this country by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do you think you'd benefit (as in you, personally) from a war against China?

    2. Re:We really need cajones in this country by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      what is it going to take before people in our government are willing to publicly accuse China of acts of war?

      A Cyber Force that can be used to spread around as much pork as any of our current military services. Make the Cyber Force separate from the rest of the military just as the air force was separated from the army, and have them issue some multi-billion dollar cost plus contracts with subcontractors in at least 48 states. Then we'll have a cyber war!

      One thing you can say for America is that we've always had an equitable split amongst the services. Afghanistan and Iraq were mostly army and air force operations. Of course the navy managed to get involved even with a war in a land locked country like Afghanistan. A few carrier sorties, some SEAL's, and of course the marines (though their association with the navy seems to be more a legality than a reality). Still, the navy felt left out, so it's now their turn with the "pivot to Asia". What better place to use those floating thingies the navy is so fond of than the site of their last great glory, the Western Pacific? How much ordinance do you think we can expend over some uninhabited rocks and intimidated fishing boats?

    3. Re:We really need cajones in this country by jadv · · Score: 2

      You mean, the USA needs drawers? Like, they have a lot of wardrobes or cupboards but no drawers on them? I believe the word you are looking for is COJONES.

    4. Re:We really need cajones in this country by CanHasDIY · · Score: 1

      Seriously, what is it going to take before people in our government are willing to publicly accuse China of acts of war?

      A sudden and marked decrease in free-trade lobbying dollars.

      --
      An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
    5. Re:We really need cajones in this country by geekoid · · Score: 1

      And the phrase YOU are looking for is "tener cojones"

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    6. Re:We really need cajones in this country by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Posting anon, as I moderated. I can't disagree more. Perhaps this could be considered an act of war but I would rather have the chinese probing our defenses (and vice versa) than some terrorist. In a way these attacks benefit us by exposing flaws, which can then be patched. If we weren't attacking each other constantly our "immune system" would never properly develop and some 16 year old jihadist script kiddie could do some actual damage.

    7. Re:We really need cajones in this country by RogueWarrior65 · · Score: 1

      Okay, so this gringo doesn't know the correct spelling. At least the intent is there unlike pasty white people who roll their R's in order to pander to activist latino groups. Pronouncing it "Dorrrrrrrritos" doesn't make them Mexican food.

    8. Re:We really need cajones in this country by cusco · · Score: 1

      It will take having people running our government who don't have multi-millions invested in companies that depend on Chinese production for a large portion of their income.

      --
      "Think about how stupid the average person is. Now, realise that half of them are dumber than that." - George Carlin
    9. Re:We really need cajones in this country by jadv · · Score: 1

      Hey, cool down pal, didn't mean to offend anyone... Just tossing in a little humor, that's all. Peace!

  26. US response by Caledfwlch · · Score: 1

    The US could respond by saying the Chinese "lacked technical proof" and was "not based on fact." but they could be accused of breaking copyright!

    --
    These views express my own personal opinions, not those of the other voices in my head
  27. YAWN by benjfowler · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Wake me when American military hackers are targeting Chinese civilians.

    What's probably happened, is that they got all butthurt at being found out for the criminal hacking and economic espionage, went rummaging through their logs, found a ping sweep from some US IP and said "we're morally equivalent to you, we get hacked too".

    The Red Chinese *still* come across as idiots and piss-weak Third World losers. That hasn't changed in the slightest.

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

      Those "piss-weak Third World losers" are eating our economic breakfast. I have to give China credit, though it sure doesn't hurt that our "American" MNC's and their political lackeys bend over backwards to give it away.

    2. Re:YAWN by geekoid · · Score: 1

      AS is their plan. They do NOT want to loose 3rd world status. It gives them many exemptions on the world stage.

      "The Red Chinese" wow, 1950 called, they want your mentality back.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    3. Re:YAWN by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nah, parasites like MNC's take time to kill their hosts, so we Yanks still have it much better.

      And our trade deficit with China and Chinese currency manipulation are part of what keeps those Chinese factory workers so poor. Instead of enjoying the fruits of their labors, their efforts go to allowing the PBoC to buy more US treasuries. Profitable mercantilism for the Chinese plutocrats and profitable labor arbitrage for American plutocrats, but not so good for Chinese factory workers.

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

      It doesn't matter how many things the US government could do, if it's not willing to actually do any of them. American plutocrats find labor arbitrage too profitable for them to allow any of their political servants to act in the interests of this country.

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

      I wasn't aware that those average citizens had any major sway over the Party itself and the corporations that benefit from said advantages.

    6. Re:YAWN by hackingbear · · Score: 1

      China is very poor at public relation marketing and packaging. The government hasn't really needed to spit out anything other than blunt propaganda that nobody in China believe (go check out comments in any Chinese news forum to see.) As their society becomes modernized with more and more PR, marketing people and lawyers trained in the West, they will eventually refine their PR just like us. They will enter the era of marketing just like us.

      The USA, on the other hand, has been very very good at that, both government and private companies. That's why we got world-wide brand names like Coke and McDonald's. Ad that's why we all believed in WMD in Iraq before we spent a trillion dollars and thousands of lives to find out it is a flop and nobody got punished for the 'intelligence error".

    7. Re:YAWN by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      benjfowler *still* come across as idiots and piss-weak Third World losers. That hasn't changed in the slightest

      FTFY

      But OTOH, since we are borrowing so much money from these third world losers, what does that make us Americans?

    8. Re:YAWN by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, we know, pimps have more money than whores!, I just don't want to be either/.

    9. Re:YAWN by Lesrahpem · · Score: 1

      Wake me when American military hackers are targeting Chinese civilians.

      Is it so hard to believe that something like that may actually be happening already? Afterall, many of the operations conducted by our intelligence agencies (namely the CIA) are aimed at people many would consider civilians.

      If I'm a national intelligence service and I want to create a botnet for military purposes, I also want to have plausible deniability. So, I construct my botnet the same general way criminals do. I hijack civilian computers, I purchase services through stolen credentials and fake ID's, etc.

  28. De-escalation by elerran · · Score: 1

    From world war to cold war to cyber war. Can't say I don't like the trend...

  29. How much of that is freelance? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Let's face it, enough china controlled IP addresses are the origins of malicious behavior on the internet that the hacking targeted at China from the US doesn't all necessarily have to come from military actions. There's been more than one time I've thought about retaliating against repeat offenders myself but know I'm not good enough to do so without either getting caught or making things worse. As I have more self control than most I find it difficult to believe that others have not given in to the urges for cyber vengeance.

    This invisible war has been going on for a while and I doubt that the governments and their soldiers are the only people waging it.

  30. Idea.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Here's an idea, don't put anything worth stealing on said website.

  31. File that under "duh, what did you expect?" by f00zbll · · Score: 1

    Anyone that has a vague understanding of breaking into systems knows it's happening all over the world. It's not a question of "is government A attacking other governments?" The real question is "what data has been stolen and who is tightening their security to keep sensitive data safe?" You'd have to be a moron to think it's not happening.

  32. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  33. Typical chinese propaganda strategy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The point of this announcement is to distract from the criticism they are receiving for launching hack attacks by painting a picture of everyone does it. So whether its true or not they would make this claim. I would believe they are receiving hack attacks from the US, but 2/3rds of them having a US origin sounds suspicious.

  34. You steal! by Arkiel · · Score: 1

    New evidence recently uncovered indicates the first digital computer was developed under the leadership of Chairman Mao during the Long March. Recent academic publishings out of China claim modern hacking techniques are mere derivations of mathematical techniques pioneered in ancient China, during the Quing Dynasty. And also, they made Alien.

  35. Of course we are by dsvick · · Score: 1

    Yep, the US government is hacking the Chinese military in order to steal all their valuable, state of the art, highly effective, totally awesome ..... oh who am I kidding. It went like this.

    US government: We need you to hack in to the Chinese military and steal all their secrets.
    Hacker: Sure thing, I'll get right on it.
    .... a few weeks later ....
    Hacker: Here you go, there was quite bit there but I got it all.
    US Government: perfect, you've done your country a great service ..... ahhh, wait a minute ....
    Hacker: what?
    US Government: You hacked the wrong country, these are all our military files ... in fact, you got the wrong decade, these are all really old.
    Hacker: Dude, it was from China, it was all right there in the folder named "R sekret stuf that we didnt get from noone else", behind the folder labeled "Taiwan Invasion plans"
    US Government: Ok, well, errr thanks, I guess we have nothing to worry about.

    1. Re:Of course we are by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nothing to worry about? Our old stuff worked!

  36. Not just China vs US, Everybody vs Everyone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    When it comes to countries of the world that happen to have internet connections, it turns out that pretty much everybody is hacking everyone else. Maybe not all of it is government sanctioned, but if you were to argue that it wasn't happening you'd be lying.

    So the point is?

    Instead of whining about it and expecting somebody to do something to make it stop, make sure to implement good security on anything that comes in contact with the internet. If you don't like that you can always GTFO and stay offline or build your own separate isolated network.

  37. Nothing is off limits for military by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Wake me up when the U.S. military is hacking Chinese civilian/banking computers or trying to SSH into everything.

    I forecast that you're not going to be getting much sleep.

    If you think that the US military treats civilian websites in other countries as out of bounds for their well-funded hacking, you're very naive indeed.

    1. Re:Nothing is off limits for military by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Prove it. Where is the report? There are plenty on China doing it. You go ahead and dig up just one report that says the US is attacking civilian servers.

  38. Robber Barons by tylikcat · · Score: 1

    Behind this is the larger problem that we have no particular way of resolving international disputes on the internet. The net maps poorly to international boundaries. And if national law on hacking is young, clunky and often pretty awful, effect international action is pretty much nonexistent.

  39. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  40. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  41. China IS the enemy of the US. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The Chinese are not like Westerners. Look at the dry wall
    contaminated with industrial waste. Look at the pet food
    contaminated with melamine. These people are scum and
    have no morals or ethics.

    Mark my words, the US will wish it had nuked China into
    oblivion when it had the chance.

  42. Obviously it was SPECTRE by fustakrakich · · Score: 1

    They got us shooting at each other.

    --
    “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
  43. coughBULLSHITcough by jon3k · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The Mandiant report links the attacks to the Chinese government. To a specific group in a specific location during business hours Beijing local time. The Chinese see attacks from US IP address and blame US.

    1. Re:coughBULLSHITcough by GodfatherofSoul · · Score: 1

      I see intrusion attempts from China and I blame China. Check your SSH logs dude!

      --
      I swear to God...I swear to God! That is NOT how you treat your human!
    2. Re:coughBULLSHITcough by jon3k · · Score: 1

      Of course, so do I. My point is the US has relatively solid evidence that the attacks are from the Chinese government. the Mandiant report linked them to the Chinese beyond simply using the source address. The Chinese don't have any proof beyond the fact that they come from US address space. That could be anyone using a compromised computer in ARIN address space.

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

      My point is the US has relatively solid evidence

      Really? Like what? (beyond some address in China).
      Not trying to call you out, but I'm not savvy in network technology beyond it appears both sides are flinging the same shit at each other.

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

      Yes they also have solid evidence for WMD and yellow cake.

  44. Re: Typical Political BS by XopherMV · · Score: 3, Informative

    This is typical political BS so prevalent in the US. When the Dems blame the Republicans for some issue, the Republicans say the Dems do it too. That's regardless of whether either statement was true or not. The point is to deflect blame and raise suspicion of the other side.

    Further, since we can't trust the media to actually dig into the actual truth on this or any issue, the Chinese likely will be successful in their efforts.

  45. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  46. The time has come by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's obvious that the only way how the U.S. can save itself is to create a nationwide firewall that would protect it from all the outside enemies. The name "Great wall" is unfortunately already taken, so I suppose we should call it "Wall of freedom". It will protect the citizens from all dangerous information they should not be exposed to according to the rules defined by the Ministry of Love.

  47. IMporant distinct need to be made by geekoid · · Score: 1

    "US Hack attacks" and US based Hack Attacks are two separate things, and it's an important clarification.
    SO less then 50,000 attacks, all of last year from computers reporting to be from the US.
    I mean, people need to stop, and I don't want to excuse it, but lets not get; crazy in the head about this.

    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  48. Re:We need Ronald Reagan by geekoid · · Score: 1

    It would have been nicer if he had the balls to say it BEFORE it already started happening. Or even answered Russia request to help the transition.

    Worst. President. Ever.

    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  49. Re:We need Ronald Reagan by GodfatherofSoul · · Score: 1

    Reagan would've just funneled arms to China through Israel to bribe them to stop. Then, made a half-assed ambiguous apology on national TV when he was caught.

    --
    I swear to God...I swear to God! That is NOT how you treat your human!
  50. Just like the USA, then? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Where every portsniffer looking for an unsecured home Windows box is counted as a "hack attack".

    Remember, hackers have been refused phone access in case they whistle a crack down the phone and take out government computers.

    1. Re:Just like the USA, then? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Funny thing, when any other country is accused of hacking, the first comments to hit top moderation are those pointing out the irrelevance of locating attackers through IP, and those that bring out morally relativist arguments like "so what everyone does it, is this even news?" But when the US is accused of hacking, Slashdotters accept it at face value and get preachy about morals.

    2. Re:Just like the USA, then? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just wait until a story about N. Korea comes up.

  51. I'm shocked. simply shocked by boddhisatva · · Score: 1

    to find that hacking has been going on here.

  52. Pot, Kettle, Black by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The next thing you know, China will be complaining about their companies outsourcing manufacturing to the US for cheap labor rates.

  53. Re:We need Ronald Reagan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm always surprised that people are STILL butthurt over Reagan, which is why thirty years from now you'll still be crowing "It's Bush's fault".

  54. 144k hack attacks per month against web sites by WaffleMonster · · Score: 1

    If Chinese checked their state forestry administration (SFA) web servers my guess they will see the same patterns of "attacks". e.g. random scans from botnets.

    There is a real problem with definition what constitutes an attack. We also routinely see US peeps in government and industry who should know better sit in front of congress and pop off scary specious figures to bend reality twoard their policy goals.

    With all of these "we're being attacked" rumblings from government, warnings from Penetta and Sunday show rounds from former CIA's Hayden.. I expected to see some legislation... oh look SOPA is being reserrected.

  55. Advancement of Network Security by sabt-pestnu · · Score: 3, Insightful

    > Such efforts are "not conducive to the joint efforts of the international community to enhance network security," he said.

    Perhaps statements like "we're just defending ourselves" are not productive towards network security. But cyber-attacking China? China cyber-attacking the US? You must be kidding.

    Even bacteria "know" that being attacked causes the greatest advances in defenses. What greater motivator can there be than an active and verifiable threat?

  56. The distribution of IP addresses by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you look at any attack map, it's clear the distribution mirrors that of the world-wide IP address distribution (much like many "maps" of "interesting" stuff really are just population density maps). In short, attackers spoof the source address randomly so an attacker that looks like it's from Spokane Washington is really a hacker in Shanghai. These Chinese accusations are based on faulty data; in reality they have no idea where the attacks originate.

    The US, on the other hand, has NSA hardware installed at every ISP to track where the packets really come from.

  57. Re:We need Ronald Reagan by phantomfive · · Score: 1

    I don't know what Reagan would do, I don't care, he's dead.

    But we do need someone to point out that what China is doing is wrong, that they don't allow free speech, that they are horribly oppressing the Tibetans and other minorities, and that they are hurting the environment. Instead we get politicians who go to China and hope they will continue to trade with us if we ignore their human rights violations.

    Would it be too much if once in a while, when he was talking about China anyway, he added something like, "China is still a pariah because they don't allow free speech?"

    --
    "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
  58. F.B.I. IP address total by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    over 128 million ip address ONLINE and out there
    total net users currently 2.4 billion
    and i know thee are more im not saying.

  59. Crybaby China's by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Cry me a river, China. You've been hacking the world for years.

  60. Of course by thetoadwarrior · · Score: 1

    The US government's complaints were stupid because you know full well they do the same thing.

  61. Blame Wall Street by sgt_doom · · Score: 1

    So what? Who cares? To all the lowbrows and halfwits who criticize the Chinese military for hacking the USA and elsewhere:

    Evidently they are some deviants living in a cave, completely oblivious to the offshoring of all those jobs, all that technology, and all the investment to China, and Micro$oft opening their source code to them some years back, and Boeing's subsidiary, Narus, selling them the software to make it easier to arrest, torturne, incarcerate and/or execute the pro-democracy and rights activists in that country?

    Blame Wall Street and Korporate ameriKa.

  62. Chuck Hagel says... by Immerial · · Score: 1

    "American laws prohibit any action including hacking that damages Internet security." He added that "to accuse the American military of launching cyberattacks without solid proof is unprofessional and baseless."

    ;)

  63. Hash attacks? by SilverBlade2k · · Score: 1

    Why do I picture a bunch of obese Americans throwing hash browns at some Chinese people??

  64. Re:We need Ronald Reagan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "China is still a pariah because they don't allow free speech?"

    So you're saying it's ok in the west to say the Jews exaggerated the Holocaust to cheat reparations from the Germans?
    I believe this will land you in jail in Germany oddly enough.

  65. Re:We need Ronald Reagan by cusco · · Score: 1

    A century ago the Chinese didn't have free speech, and millions of them died every year of starvation because they were too poor to buy food. Today they don't have free speech. China has over five thousand years of history, and this is the first period in all that time when portions (or all) of the country were not wracked by war, famine, or plagues. They'll get free speech eventually, just like they eventually got freedom from famines. Just because it's not on your externally-imposed timeline isn't actually a problem to the Chinese, they don't really give a shit what outsiders think.

    --
    "Think about how stupid the average person is. Now, realise that half of them are dumber than that." - George Carlin
  66. Re:We need Ronald Reagan by phantomfive · · Score: 1
    They got freedom from famine when they stopped doing stupid communist things (ie, lysenkoism, great leap forward).

    they don't really give a shit what outsiders think.

    Believe it or not, they do.

    --
    "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
  67. Re:We need Ronald Reagan by cusco · · Score: 1

    Wow, I never knew that China has been communist for 5,000 years. Amazing the things you learn on SlashDot.

    --
    "Think about how stupid the average person is. Now, realise that half of them are dumber than that." - George Carlin
  68. Re:We need Ronald Reagan by phantomfive · · Score: 1

    You're clearly in the bottom half of the people mentioned in your sig, but the point is, the Chinese people should be free to choose what kind of government they want. It shouldn't be imposed on them by the ruling class and the princelings. Without freedom of speech, they will not be able to do that. This isn't a cultural problem.

    --
    "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
  69. Re:We need Ronald Reagan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Without freedom of speech, they will not be able to do that.

    So you're saying it's ok in the west to say the Jews exaggerated the Holocaust to cheat reparations from the Germans?
    I believe this will land you in jail in Germany oddly enough.

    You think those depraved krauts are up to no good again?

  70. Re:We need Ronald Reagan by phantomfive · · Score: 1

    When you realize WHY the Germans don't have freedom of speech, you will understand why freedom of speech is so important (hint: it wasn't to help them choose their own government).

    --
    "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
  71. Re:We need Ronald Reagan by cusco · · Score: 1

    It shouldn't be imposed on them by foreigners, either. Western-style democracy is not the universal and unique solution to every situation everywhere. It IS a cultural problem, at least in that their culture has never, in fifty centuries, allowed the free expression of speech and ideas to the majority. The majority don't expect it as a 'right' the way that we do, the idea that one can speak truth to power is still viewed with suspicion by many. It's as new to their culture as the idea of granting homosexuals equal rights is to ours.

    --
    "Think about how stupid the average person is. Now, realise that half of them are dumber than that." - George Carlin
  72. Re:We need Ronald Reagan by phantomfive · · Score: 1

    What part about my post made you think I wanted to impose anything on anyone?

    Also, is your point really that they haven't had freedom of speech for 5,000 years, so they can't handle it now?

    --
    "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
  73. Re:We need Ronald Reagan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So you are admitting one of our great allies the Germans have no freedom of speech?
    Perhaps your outrage should be directed at our so called "friends" ahead of competition like China?

    When you realize WHY the Germans don't have freedom of speech

    Umm, so WHAT is this reason?

  74. Re:We need Ronald Reagan by phantomfive · · Score: 1

    So you are admitting one of our great allies the Germans have no freedom of speech?

    Yes, and for good reason.

    Umm, so WHAT is this reason?

    Go find out, and get wiser. Or don't, and remain ignorant.

    --
    "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
  75. Re:We need Ronald Reagan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So you are admitting one of our great allies the Germans have no freedom of speech?

    Yes, and for good reason.

    Nice! So why isn't Germany a "pariah"?

    Umm, so WHAT is this reason?

    Go find out, and get wiser. Or don't, and remain ignorant.

    But I have no problems with the Germans.
    It is you who is making the accusation without presenting facts.
    Go dig up your reason and get credible. Or don't, and remain a poser.

  76. Re:We need Ronald Reagan by phantomfive · · Score: 1

    All your questions would be answered if you read a history book. But you didn't. So you remain ignorant.

    --
    "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
  77. Re:We need Ronald Reagan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ah, but I read the history books. So you remain a poser.

  78. Re:We need Ronald Reagan by phantomfive · · Score: 1

    And yet there is a reason that Germany doesn't have freedom of speech. Whether I am a poser or not, you are ignorant.

    --
    "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
  79. Re:We need Ronald Reagan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ah but whether I'm ignorant or not, you are a poser.

    But let's go with your assertions without substantiation for the time being.
    You are saying freedom of speech can be trampled on for cause.
    Now correct me if I'm wrong, but being conveniently selective about your convictions, doesn't that make you a smelly hypocrite?
    Oh I can see why you're so reluctant to divulge your great wisdom now.

  80. Re:We need Ronald Reagan by phantomfive · · Score: 1

    I don't mind being a poser. I do mind being ignorant.

    --
    "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
  81. Ask China about port 21543 by Wizardess · · Score: 0
    My wee little DSL account received some 5000 probes from well over 100 Chinese domains and a small sprinkling (tens) of domains in other nations just a few days ago. Are they going to tell me that this was the US government probing my machine? It's far easier to believe it is their government getting a burr under the saddle over one small single Internet address in Southern California that houses a small business in a small niche market. Scroom.

    {^_^}

  82. Re:We need Ronald Reagan by cusco · · Score: 1

    Sorry, that was an assumption in my part, normally when someone posts about the lack of free speech somewhere they follow up with claims that democracy has to be implemented as well. A lot of people don't seem to be able to separate the two ideas.

    Can't handle it? Not what I was implying at all. It's just not as important to the majority of Chinese people, because they haven't been brought up to see it as an explicit right they were born with. It will happen there eventually (probably as the current generation of children come of age), but it will be on their timeline, not ours.

    --
    "Think about how stupid the average person is. Now, realise that half of them are dumber than that." - George Carlin
  83. Re:We need Ronald Reagan by phantomfive · · Score: 1

    Nah, free speech is important, because if the people don't know what they have and what is possible, then they can't decide for themselves.

    America should encourage democracy, but only with words; American diplomacy is strongest when it leads with words and ideas rather than force. Hard to promote freedom by conquering countries.

    --
    "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
  84. Re:We need Ronald Reagan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I don't mind being a poser

    Admitting your problem is the first step to a solution. Bravo!

    Unfortunately you have proven to be also ignorant (your reply time went from 12min to 66min...that's like 6min per word phantomfive! I had though you gave up and went to bed).

    And of course, we have demonstrated that you are a two faced hypocrite.

  85. Tit for tat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I run a small data center. We're attacked several thousand times a day. We have a honeypot that records whodunit and iptable blackhole the offending addresses within a minute of an attack. However just before we become invisible we also blast back with "nmap -P0 -v -f -O $1" which should wake up any sysadmin on the other end. The ip addresses are spread all over the world with about 30% coming from the US, 10% from South America, 20% from Eastern Europe and 35% from China with a smattering of Vietnam and Indonesia. The most persistent attacks (where three or more [as many as 10] IP addresses simultaneously attack one of our servers) come from Eastern Europe and China.

    I personally would love to see someone big release the IP addresses of the offending hosts so that the rest of the world can DDOS them. I've threatened to blackhole all of China but my boss thinks that's a bad idea. DISCLAIMER: my father was an American Businessman in China when the Commies took over. He lost a lot of money so I have no great love for the Chinese government. They are not our friends and they are very close to being mortal enemies.

  86. Re: Typical Political BS by Phoghat · · Score: 1

    This is typical political BS so prevalent in the US. When the Dems blame the Republicans for some issue, the Republicans say the Dems do it too. That's regardless of whether either statement was true or not. The point is to deflect blame and raise suspicion of the other side. Further, since we can't trust the media to actually dig into the actual truth on this or any issue, the Chinese likely will be successful in their efforts.

    The best defense is a good offense, after all.

    --
    Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
  87. Re: Typical Political BS by lsatenstein · · Score: 1

    This is typical political BS so prevalent in the US. When the Dems blame the Republicans for some issue, the Republicans say the Dems do it too. That's regardless of whether either statement was true or not. The point is to deflect blame and raise suspicion of the other side.

    Further, since we can't trust the media to actually dig into the actual truth on this or any issue, the Chinese likely will be successful in their efforts.

    You are naive is you think that the USA is sitting around with their hands in their pockets. Of course they are doing exactly what the Chinese are doing, as is every major power.
    I spy on a dozen countries, and each of them spies on their dozen. Somehow it seems to always be the same dozen.

    --
    Leslie Satenstein Montreal Quebec Canada
  88. Obviously by bobvious · · Score: 1

    We have to break into their systems. How else are we going to figure out what they've stolen from us?

  89. From my perspective... by Douglas+Goodall · · Score: 1

    As a person who keeps an eye on the packets arriving at my Internet server, I see the majority of the systematic attempts to crack my sshd server coming from China.. There are other sources to be sure. I have emailed the admin contacts for the domains from which the attacks originate, and I have not received back a single email from an admin that was concerned about the behavior of their customers. This means to me that the admins either don't care, or are part of the problem. I don't want to just block all IP traffic because there are legitimate humans, students, and researches that I would like to be able to contact and whom I would like to receive email from. "Methinks they doth protest to strongly".

  90. Re:We need Ronald Reagan by phantomfive · · Score: 1

    Are you ever going to figure out why Germany doesn't have freedom of speech, or are you going to just keep babbling?

    --
    "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
  91. Re:We need Ronald Reagan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    As a public service, I'll try to make this as simple as possible, since you are too stupid to figure it out.
    Write this down: You are the only party babbling here.

    Are you ever going to figure out why Germany doesn't have freedom of speech

    Again, since you are too stupid to figure it out, we don't need "why" to show that you're a hypocrite.
    And since you are so stupid, the reason why Germany doesn't have free speech is similar to the reason China doesn't have free speech. Can you figure out why?

  92. Re:We need Ronald Reagan by phantomfive · · Score: 1

    Heh, your post in ignorance is quite entertaining. Please, continue to entertain me.

    --
    "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
  93. Re:We need Ronald Reagan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well that was fast, good to see you are attentive.
    Considering that we have proven that you are a hypocrite, and not too swift cerebrally, and by your own admission you are a poser, I think it's the least that we can do to educate (and entertain) the under-privileged like yourself.

  94. Re:We need Ronald Reagan by phantomfive · · Score: 1

    Yes, keep it up. Or alternately educate yourself.

    --
    "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
  95. Re:We need Ronald Reagan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Aww comon, where's the gratitude poserfive?

  96. Re:We need Ronald Reagan by phantomfive · · Score: 1

    gratitude for what?

    --
    "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
  97. Re:We need Ronald Reagan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    gratitude for what?

    Oh sorry, I forgot you're not too bright.

  98. Re:We need Ronald Reagan by phantomfive · · Score: 1

    Nope, I'm not bright. Just knowledgeable.

    --
    "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
  99. Re:We need Ronald Reagan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Nope, I'm not bright. Just knowledgeable.

    Translation: duh I know 1+1=2, but I don't know why.

  100. Re:We need Ronald Reagan by phantomfive · · Score: 1

    lol yes, but continuing your analogy, you don't even know what 1+1 is. So I win.

    --
    "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
  101. Re:We need Ronald Reagan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    but continuing your analogy, you don't even know what 1 is. So I win.