Slashdot Mirror


U.S. Calls On China To End Hacking; Start Cyberspace Dialogue

New submitter trickymyth writes "For the first time, the United States has mentioned the People's Republic of China in relation to cyber crime, officially acknowledging what has been long suspected by private security experts and the U.S. business community. The Obama Administration seeks to get the Chinese government to acknowledge the problem, to cease any state-sponsored hacker activity, and to start a dialogue on normative behavior on the internet. This announcement follows the recent 60-page report from the American cybersecurity firm Mandiant, who spent two years compiling evidence against the so-called 'Comment Crew.' They traced IP addresses, common behavior, and tools to track the group's activity, which led to a Shanghai neighborhood home to the People's Liberation Army (PLA's) Unit 61398. This tracking came at the behest of the Times, who has experienced some trouble with hacking in the past. The Chinese government rejected the report as 'unprofessional' and 'lacking technical evidence.' This announcement also comes amid a delicate leadership transition in China and numerous new reports on the vulnerability of U.S. business and government networks to attack."

160 comments

  1. "Normative behavior" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Seriously guys, stop hacking us! It makes us look bad when we can't do the same to you, because you happen to have a firewall around your entire country!"

    1. Re:"Normative behavior" by daremonai · · Score: 4, Informative

      Um, the "firewall" in China is mostly to keep Chinese from getting out, not others from getting in. I assure you, systems in China are hacked all the time. Mostly for things like botnet recruitment, of course.

    2. Re:"Normative behavior" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wait a second, it's the US hacking China? In a paranoia laden US administration, and with a preventive strike mad military, I'd expect the US to start collecting some evidence they actually performed research prior to building-up the rhetoric on why they should increase military spending, not that it will ever prove actual threats by China, before an eventual attack.

    3. Re:"Normative behavior" by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 5, Funny

      "We are not hacking. Now go away, or I shall taunt you a second time."

      (Guard 2 whispers): "Are they leaving?"

      "I told them we weren't hacking." (Both snicker.)

      --
      (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
    4. Re:"Normative behavior" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Everyone hacks everyone, it's only the most modern implementation of the Game of Houses, so to speak. Hell, even if the world were completely at peace, I would still expect 60 different countries, both allies and enemies, to all be conducting various acts of espionage against one another.

    5. Re:"Normative behavior" by slick7 · · Score: 1

      "We are not hacking. Now go away, or I shall taunt you a second time."

      (Guard 2 whispers): "Are they leaving?"

      "I told them we weren't hacking." (Both snicker.)

      Begin dialog
      Fuck you!
      End dialog

      --
      The mind conceives, the body achieves, the spirit manifests.
    6. Re:"Normative behavior" by Dr+Max · · Score: 1

      Yeah guys no fair, your only allowed to hack the evil terrorist countries.

      --
      Rocket Surgeon.
    7. Re:"Normative behavior" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What, so no one can route their hacking activities through china and so be seen as it originating from china ???

  2. Crybabies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Only complain when you lose.

    1. Re:Crybabies by lesincompetent · · Score: 2

      The whole foreign policy of the USA in a nutshell.

    2. Re:Crybabies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Who's losing? The USA military isn't exactly an underdog in any scenario.

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

      Underdog is not the same as losing party in a conflict.

    4. Re:Crybabies by lesincompetent · · Score: 1

      Besides any asimmetric warfare scenario it ever encountered.

    5. Re:Crybabies by lesincompetent · · Score: 1

      asimmetric

      *asymmetric*

    6. Re:Crybabies by v1 · · Score: 1

      Only complain when you lose.

      So true. It'd be like if the US wanted to go into talks with China to agree to stop spying on each other. Really? That's just not going to go anywhere. These are just countries looking after their best interests abroad. Why should they stop? Give me one good reason. (morals don't count. morals never count on a national scale, only things that get results count where entire nations are concerned)

      --
      I work for the Department of Redundancy Department.
    7. Re:Crybabies by gmuslera · · Score: 2

      Wrong analogy. This one is "you don't attack us, and we keep attacking you", or maybe "my data is only mine, and your data is ours". Or even maybe "you stop your attacks, and we jail our hackers" (and those "hackers" are the ones that hack against us, not for us, be pirates, people that fight for people rights, or whoever disclose government/corporations abuses)

    8. Re:Crybabies by cavreader · · Score: 0

      The military has relentlessly kicked the ass of anyone stupid enough to get in their way. Even when they have to fight with one hand tied behind their backs. It is the politicians who always pull defeat from the jaws of victory. The same politicians who have failed in every facet of running a government. The current group of incompetents should be embarrassed by their job performance and retire from the political scene before they do any more damage. Every military victory the US has had in the past 20 years has been wasted by the same politicians who make the decisions that get us into wars in the first place.

    9. Re:Crybabies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yo, Joe! G.I Joe will be there.

    10. Re:Crybabies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "It is the politicians who always pull defeat from the jaws of victory."

      "Dolchstoßlegende" AKA the stab-in-the-back theory. The mating call of losers everywhere!

    11. Re:Crybabies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It looks to me like you are still in Iraq and Afghanistan, got run out of Somalia, thrown out of Vietnam? What wars are you talkign about? What victories are you speaking of? You have won nothing in any of these places, except the disdain of the people living there?

      Can America pull it's head out of it's own collective butts and realize the only ones who believe the hype about America now are yourselves. The rest of the world do not look at you as that great, free, or a place to make your dreams come true anymore.

    12. Re:Crybabies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why would any US resident give a shit about what the rest of the world thinks? It's not like it really matters or anything. It's still a mystery to me why there are lines out the door at every US Embassy in the world filled with people looking for Visas to enter a country that is supposedly on the same level as North Korea.

  3. Yeah they'll get right on that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    This is the same country they has a national firewall infrastructure to use against its own citzens. I'm sure their morals will guide them right when it comes to using hacking as a weapon of war.

    1. Re:Yeah they'll get right on that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't think morals, as in "feel good fuzzies", even enter into the equation with regard to national defense, in either country. The difference is we have to care about being caught doing it, where they obviously just don't give a shit.

  4. Good Luck With That by Farmer+Pete · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I hope this ends well, but I have a feeling that either nothing will come out of this, or the Chinese will ramp up efforts since they don't have to worry about hiding their efforts.

    1. Re:Good Luck With That by Synerg1y · · Score: 4, Funny

      Cyber war = rise of the nerds?

    2. Re:Good Luck With That by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Well, China did respond angrily when some US hacker resources were pointed at finding out where all the Chinese hacking was done from. That was a sort of subtle 'we know where you live' message to those actually doing the spying for China.
      Depending on how the diplomats take the message, this declaration is either an admission of failure (not likely considerring the prior story), a meeting of equals, or a mild threat with the implication that US hackers could do a whole lot worse than just tracking the attacks.

    3. Re:Good Luck With That by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 5, Funny

      Cyber war = rise of the nerds?

      In case of Chinese government-fed hackers, it's rice of the nerds.

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    4. Re:Good Luck With That by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Classic.

    5. Re:Good Luck With That by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      If that's the case were toast. They have more nerds, government support, training and no fear of legal consequences on their side. We have a bunch of lone wolf types with very little training, government condemnation, legal threats ever looming and no peer support. Point being there is very little in the way of approved security training / college level beyond the week long class type from SANS. We really don't have anything at the scale needed to compete at any level and that is why we are routinely owned. /rant off

    6. Re:Good Luck With That by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hi Mr. Obama, this is PLA Unit 61398.
      As long as we can get our monitoring equipment into CIA, NSA, and the Pentagon, just to be sure you Americans are not cheating, we are quite happy to make some accommodations.
      BTW, that's quite the large mole on your ass, better have it look at by your doctor.

    7. Re:Good Luck With That by richlv · · Score: 1

      If that's the case were toast.

      if it's the same level of spelling in the code, "your toast" indeed :>

      --
      Rich
    8. Re:Good Luck With That by Synerg1y · · Score: 1

      And more rice... we shall counter with Starbucks and McDonalds... they'll be too fat and over-caffeinated to counter. Or we could just send Dennis Rodman.

    9. Re:Good Luck With That by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bullshit. If this became a serious problem (i.e. if foreign threats exceed the mischief potential of a squad of professionally trained domestic crackers), many of those ``lone wolf types" would do it for free (or nominal stipend and perks) given the right propaganda, and the more elite remaining would chip in for a healthy bundle of $ (read: on the order of $million each per year) to train the script kiddies. Apportioning about 1e-5 of the current military base budget to this project would be quite adequate to just outright hire enough of them as mercenary-consultants. If they would spend an equivalent of what is currently spent on, say, aircraft R&D, I guarantee you that the results would be terrifying.

      We're currently trying to do it on the cheap, without raising public outcry, without disrupting the chain of command, and without diverting $ from the major MIC corporations. This can easily change if necessary and when/if our eyes are opened by significant damage. As it stands right now, most of the military probably would consider Chinese hackers less of a threat than another Bradley Manning.

  5. Mr President by RS449 · · Score: 1

    We can not allow a cyberspace gap!

    1. Re:Mr President by Farmer+Pete · · Score: 1

      I propose that we find 200,000 hackers and barricade them inside a giant command center. From there, they will fight our enemies! Of course, the command center would be stocked with a high female-to-male ratio....wait, who am I kidding. More like 199,900 men and 100 women.

    2. Re:Mr President by Looker_Device · · Score: 3, Funny

      No women! They'll destroy the purity and essence of our natural fluids!

      --
      Your political party doesn't care about your rights and only represents corporate interests.
    3. Re:Mr President by X0563511 · · Score: 4, Informative

      You are not funny.

      --
      For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
    4. Re:Mr President by Farmer+Pete · · Score: 1

      More like they'll find the hackers petabyte pr0n collection.

    5. Re:Mr President by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A Strangelove ref stays at 1, but "that isn't funny" is +5 Informative?!?!?!

      I call for a Congressional investigation into astroturfing.

    6. Re:Mr President by gmhowell · · Score: 1

      I propose that we find 200,000 hackers and barricade them inside a giant command center. From there, they will fight our enemies! Of course, the command center would be stocked with a high female-to-male ratio....wait, who am I kidding. More like 199,900 men and 100 women.

      So... the Internet?

      Mein Fuhrer, I can walk!

      --
      Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
  6. Not all good at home... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    the desire to ship a product to maximize revenue rather than quality is the objective of many companies. The license agreements are better coded than most software.

  7. shake on it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    USA: Syn(100) -------> China

    Your move China.

    1. Re:shake on it? by fazey · · Score: 1

      USA: Syn(100) -------> China

      Your move China.

      USA: <----------- TCP_RST(100) China

  8. What does China say about the U.S regarding hacks? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Surely the U.S is hacking back? My best memory of "China hacking" is Operation Aurora. I find it difficult to believe the U.S has been on the purely defensive side since then (if not before).

  9. But Stuxnet was ok, eh? by A+nonymous+Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It's ok for the US but no one else?

    Guess some left hand isn't talking to the right hand.

    1. Re:But Stuxnet was ok, eh? by 0123456 · · Score: 1

      More like someone just realised that America is about 3,000,000% more vulnerable to such attacks than Iran or North Korea.

    2. Re:But Stuxnet was ok, eh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Let's see...
      Hacking military installation to stop uranium enrichment beyond what is necessary for commercial power generation
      vs
      Hacking civilian companies to uncover the Chinese person/persons who leaked info on Wen Jiabao family's fortune in order to intimidate/punish them.

      And in your mind these are equivalent?

    3. Re:But Stuxnet was ok, eh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      its ok in that its a retaliation against a nation that is already violating the geneva convention.

    4. Re:But Stuxnet was ok, eh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That would be America then yes?

    5. Re:But Stuxnet was ok, eh? by gmuslera · · Score: 1

      Is nice to throw the first stone and then complain if someone else want to play that game too.

    6. Re:But Stuxnet was ok, eh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      U.S. is also actively violating the Geneva Convention, so it is free game too.

      google "us violating the Geneva Convention"...

      baltimorechronicle.com/geneva_feb02.shtml
      >On January 11, 2002, the United States announced that it was refusing to abide
      by the 1949 Geneva Convention on the treatment of prisoners of war.

    7. Re:But Stuxnet was ok, eh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Its okay to be disproportionate in foreign affairs. Its called winning. Its not hypocritical, its what you are supposed to do.

    8. Re:But Stuxnet was ok, eh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Russia also had violations of the Geneva Convention during the Chechen war in the 1990's. So that excuses the US. Just following your logic.

    9. Re:But Stuxnet was ok, eh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Russia did it too back in the 80's and 90's, why are you complaining about the US? Look at me I'm an edgy Slashdotter now.

    10. Re:But Stuxnet was ok, eh? by Uberbah · · Score: 1

      Russia also had violations of the Geneva Convention during the Chechen war in the 1990's. So that excuses the US. Just following your logic.

      The Chechen war was in, you know, Chechnya. Not against the United States, and Stuxnet wasn't released upon Russia - so no one is excused.

      There goes your logic.

    11. Re:But Stuxnet was ok, eh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're not good at following logic are you?

      Stuxnet was deployed at the Natanz facility, you know in Iran, not against China. And the current hacking by the PLA wasn't directed at Iran. This means the above logic of bringing up Stuxnet (a US-Iran hacking issue) in a NYTimes hacking (a US-China hacking issue) story, is directly comparable to bringing up Russian violations of GC in Chechnya (a Russian-Chechnya war issue) when confronted with US violations of GC in Afghanistan (a US-Taliban war issue

  10. Re:What does China say about the U.S regarding hac by lesincompetent · · Score: 1

    Surely the U.S is hacking back?

    Yeah sure! Now where did i put my netbus...

  11. I have a cheap solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Silly Times, if you are scared of the Chinese hackers, you can just insert this code at the top of your site:

    < h1 > tiananmen square < /h1 >

    1. Re:I have a cheap solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hmm. Mikhail Gorbechav always wins.

  12. Agreed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Next step is send in the drones and turn that cyber war into a real one. Hey China, if you aren't sanctioning it and aren't stopping it, the U.S. WILL go in and do what is in their best interest.

    1. Re:Agreed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      yep, because there's no way sending a remote controlled robot after a team of hackers could go wrong.

    2. Re:Agreed by c0lo · · Score: 4, Insightful

      the U.S. WILL go in and do what is in their best interest.

      I don't know why I have a feeling that US'es best interest is to fix their security flaws. Otherwise... what, will you do the same when e.g. Belarus (as a country) or a group of Russian hackers (acting "in private name") decides they'd like to test US tubez?
      Or is one of your kinky pleasures to pay taxes that will end into the bank accounts of the "defense industry"?

      --
      Questions raise, answers kill. Raise questions to stay alive.
    3. Re:Agreed by thomasw_lrd · · Score: 0

      I for one welcome our new communist hacked drone overlords.

    4. Re:Agreed by lennier · · Score: 5, Funny

      I don't know why I have a feeling that US'es best interest is to fix their security flaws.

      Fix... the flaws? But... that would be like... shipping products which were warranted to be of merchantable fitness! It would require mandatory code regression analysis and testing which might cost money and would certainly create jobs! You're asking the software industry to submit to invasive scrutiny from the same kind of Government jackboots that the food, banking and building industries now tremble under daily! And that's socialism.

      The only thing that can stop a black hat with a rootkit is a white hat with a rootkit!
      If you outlaw shoddy, worthless software containing a million zero-day exploits, only outlaws will be exploited!
      You'll take my imperative thread-based unsafe self-modifying code from my cold dead FATAL EXCEPTION AT 00FE:4358 SYSTEM HALTED!

      In conclusion, I support Mom, apple pie, and an American software developer's inalienable right to immediately patent and ship whatever string of line noise can be coerced to come out the other end of a rusty, sawn-off C++ compiler, and my esteemed opponent does not.

      I know I can trust you all to vote with your hearts.

      --
      You are not a brain: http://books.google.com/books?id=2oV61CeDx-YC
    5. Re:Agreed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I for one welcome our Chinese made drone clones one month later on ebay.

  13. It will fade away by Spy+Handler · · Score: 5, Interesting

    China is about to have an epic crash when their real estate bubble bursts:

    60 minutes on China Real Estate Bubble

    When that happens, their economy will tank... similar to what happened in U.S. in 2008. And that will bring out people demonstrating in the streets. The Chinese security apparatus will have its hands full trying to stifle online dissent and stop people from plotting against the government. Cyber attacks on external targets will fade.

    1. Re:It will fade away by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      That logic assumes the Chinese government won't blame "foreign interference" for each and every possible thing that goes wrong, and attempt to fool the population into thinking it's "them, not us" that is the problem. This is one of the favorite excuses of an authoritarian government when things go wrong.

    2. Re:It will fade away by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      similar to what happened in U.S. in 2008. And that will bring out people demonstrating in the streets.

      The only people I remember demonstrating at that time was The Tea Party. I really doubt the same thing will happen in China. People there are unlikely to demand the government do nothing about a fiscal crisis.

    3. Re:It will fade away by ljw1004 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      China is about to have an epic crash when their real estate bubble bursts

      A different view, published a week after your CBSNews report:
      http://www.forbes.com/sites/kenrapoza/2013/03/11/chinas-non-bubble-housing-bubble/

      "By comparison, China’s housing bubble is a non-bubble... There’s also nothing close to a mortgage backed securities bubble and no sub-prime lending...'You don’t see the same amount of bank stress that you see in the U.S. because the debt levels are significantly lower, both for the builders and for the buyers'."

    4. Re:It will fade away by Mister+Liberty · · Score: 1

      You're whistling in the dark.

      I for one hate to see Americans including the US Govt being so
      dumbassed obviously anal towards the Chinese.
      They, Americans, used to be smart, across the board.

      Better shape up. China will bury you. Do you even know how many
      there are to 1 US [delusioned, fatigued -- like you] citizen?

    5. Re:It will fade away by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      OR, orrrr, they could be about to do something really insane: open their borders to anybody and have insanely cheap housing.

      It'd likely not work very well since, you know, international moves are expensive as hell, on top of even cheap or free housing.
      So there goes my crazy idea.

      The only place it would really attract anyone from is nearby, but even then, good luck with that.

    6. Re:It will fade away by Spy+Handler · · Score: 3, Insightful

      that's true, China doesn't have the mortgage-backed securities and subprime lending we saw in the U.S.

      But while those things certainly help fan a bubble, you can still have a bubble without them. There was no subprime lending or Tulip-backed securities, yet the Tulip bubble still took place.

    7. Re:It will fade away by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      You're whistling in the dark.

      I for one hate to see Americans including the US Govt being so
      dumbassed obviously anal towards the Chinese.
      They, Americans, used to be smart, across the board.

      Better shape up. China will bury you. Do you even know how many
      there are to 1 US [delusioned, fatigued -- like you] citizen?

      As an American, I wanted to respond, but ran out of breath typing this...

    8. Re:It will fade away by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "By comparison, China’s housing bubble is a non-bubble... There’s also nothing close to a mortgage backed securities bubble and no sub-prime lending...'You don’t see the same amount of bank stress that you see in the U.S. because the debt levels are significantly lower, both for the builders and for the buyers'."

      Get back to me when they clear up the opacity of their stock markets, let alone their economy. No reliable objective (i.e. non-governemnt cooked) data available, and Forbes is making predictions.. that's cute.

      One of my hobbies is financial intelligence. In reality very few people know exactly what the fuck is going on over there. It makes the US look sane, and that's bad.

    9. Re:It will fade away by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do you even know how many
      there are to 1 US [delusioned, fatigued -- like you] citizen?

      LMAO! Approximately three to one, junior.. and.. we have arable land. They are running out of it. In reality we're going to starve them out. They do NOT own most of the debt (US citizens do). So, pretty much, they're going to be fucked. It's just the waiting game.. yes, I'll take four hundred processors for this ton of grain, prole.

      The real winners will be the Canadians after global warming gives them double growing seasons.

    10. Re:It will fade away by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...you hope.

    11. Re:It will fade away by DigiShaman · · Score: 1

      The bubble won't pop unless we have a global currency war in which all major nations start to purposefully devalue their own currency in order to bolster exportation of goods and services. China has publicly stated they are ready for this "war" (financial, not militarily...though could lead to that...) with Japan and the US egging them on. And to be fair, it's the Chinese partially to blame for keeping their on currency under valued in fact. Hypocritical of course.

      Basically, cities like Shanghai will only increase in wealth like Hong Kong, Tokyo, and Moscow. There are too many people competing for the same jobs in the same space.

      --
      Life is not for the lazy.
    12. Re:It will fade away by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      China's leaders have been very careful to avoid a bubble after seeing what happened in other east Asian countries that the US heavily invested in. That is why China lent the US so much money - it gives them control they can use to prevent the US doing it again. Obviously they wont do it themselves.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    13. Re:It will fade away by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There was no subprime lending or Tulip-backed securities, yet the Tulip bubble still took place.

      Actually, there were. The bubble wasn't based on the sale of actual tulips. It was based on contracts for the supply of tulips in the following spring. In other words, futures contracts.

  14. Dear China, please stop hacking. by DougOtto · · Score: 0

    China: You go now!

    --
    Solving Unix problems since 1989...
  15. Don't be fooled, military complex wants more by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The military complex wants there to be more hacking, not less, so that they can justify grabbing more tax dollars for national "protection".

    So-called cyberwarefare is a dream come true. Producing defense hardware costs the defense contractors a fair bit of money as a per-unit cost, whereas cyber "armaments" cost nothing to replicate yet they'll still charge the government on a per-unit basis. All that lovely tax moola, yummy.

    1. Re:Don't be fooled, military complex wants more by perceptual.cyclotron · · Score: 1

      Spot on. The cyber-warfare rhetoric has been in an upward spiral for ages, but now they're even dumping money into hollywood for the full fear-mongering propaganda treatment (Skyfall, anyone?). "We don't know who our enemies are. They work in the shadows, so we must work in the shadows." Probably the closest you could ever come to an honest policy statement.

      There aren't any credible visible threats, so we're being indoctrinated to believe in invisible monsters. My fellow Canadians might resonate with our recent "rise in unreported crime" as justification for building new prisons...

  16. LOL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    These Americans...

    1. Re:LOL by DougOtto · · Score: 0

      Walk into a bar...

      --
      Solving Unix problems since 1989...
    2. Re:LOL by invid · · Score: 1

      And the bartender says...

      --
      The Moore-Murphy Law: The number of things that will go wrong will double every 2 years.
    3. Re:LOL by socceroos · · Score: 1

      I'm sorry, we don't serve whales here....

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

      If you want to be believably Canadian you should include at least one eh and one apology.

  17. JFK by nikros · · Score: 2

    I believe we possess all the resources and talents necessary. But the facts of the matter are that we have never made the national decisions or marshaled the national resources required for such leadership. We have never specified long-range goals on an urgent time schedule, or managed our resources and our time so as to insure their fulfillment. JFK 1961 ppl who who don't know history are doomed to repeat it

  18. Yes by schneidafunk · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Call me hypocritical, but preventing Iran from having a nuclear bomb for the safety of the middle eastern region (and global security) is definitely worthwhile.

    What is the purpose of China's hacks? Mostly economical, not exactly an apples to apples comparison here.

    --
    Some people die at 25 and aren't buried until 75. -Benjamin Franklin
    1. Re:Yes by Mister+Liberty · · Score: 2

      The Middle East itself disagrees with you.

    2. Re:Yes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Call me hypocritical, but preventing Iran from having a nuclear bomb for the safety of the middle eastern region (and global security) is definitely worthwhile.

      You really haven't learnt from 50 years+ of blowbacks from US government interference. The world didn't end when South Africa, India, Pakistian and Israel got the nuclear weapons and it won't end if Iran ever gets nuclear weapons.

      Sure, Iran doesn't like the US government very much, but then they did get their democratically elected government overthrown and replaced with a US-backed dictator. And a war which saw US use Iraq as its proxy/puppet. Of course, that's in the past because the US government has apologised and made repatriations...actually wait, the US government never did that.

      What does cause instablility is the US government playing world police and deliberately provoking countries into continued spending on its miltary-industrial complex rather than trying to solve its internal problems. Don't you think there's something seriously wrong with a country's priorities when a country with 5% of the world's population has about the same number of aircraft carriers as the rest of the world combined?

      What is the purpose of China's hacks? Mostly economical, not exactly an apples to apples comparison here.

      Thank God it's only economical. So it's not all that different from US spying on European companies with its Echelon network. Would you really rather the China government went around bringing down your electricity networks or destroyed industrial equipment?

    3. Re:Yes by Incadenza · · Score: 1

      No, only Iran disagrees, plus maybe Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, the PLA. That are the only allies it has in the ME, and even those countries might not like a too powerful neighbour.

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

      I respectfully disagree. Based on my understanding of middle eastern dynamics (I lived in Egypt for a few years) there would be an arms race if Iran got nukes. Saudis would be the first. There is a lot of political and religious division within the region and having a clear superior nation will raise alarm bells for all the neighbors.

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

      You are comparing U.S. allies with Iran? Original poster was just pointing out the difference between comparing the attacks.

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

      I notice how you say 50 years, because the obvious counter example would be WWII. Are you really naive enough to believe Israel and Iran are not going to fight soon? But hey, lets allow North Korea and Iran to get WMDs because they are totally reasonable societies... Not like those crazy Germans

    7. Re:Yes by Uberbah · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Call me hypocritical

      Okay. You're a hypocrite.

      but preventing Iran from having a nuclear bomb

      Iran has no nuclear weapons program.

      for the safety of the middle eastern region (and global security) is definitely worthwhile.

      So when are you going to invade Israel to dispossess them of their ~200 nuclear weapons?

      U.S. and Israeli bitching about Iran is like Biff Tannen bitching that Stephen Hawking has made a retaliatory threat to run over Biff's toes with a wheelchair if Biff attacks him first.

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

      Shh your sounding like a terrorist, was that drone passing by?

    9. Re:Yes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The USA and Israel are democracies, Iran is not.

    10. Re:Yes by coinreturn · · Score: 1

      The USA and Israel are democracies, Iran is not.

      You're right. The democratic leaders of Iran were overthrown by the US government. Look it up.

    11. Re:Yes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And they overthrew the Shah and replaced it with muslim clerics... great improvement.

    12. Re:Yes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They do not have a working bomb but they certainly have a program. Based on your profile, it appears you have a boner for Iran. What fantasy world do you live in where Iran is a peaceful loving nation?

    13. Re:Yes by Uberbah · · Score: 1

      They do not have a working bomb but they certainly have a program

      Even the U.S. and Israel admit Iran has no nuclear weapons program.

      Link 1. Link 2.

      What fantasy world do you live in where Iran is a peaceful loving nation?

      Reality. Feel free to visit it any time.

      The United States has: overthrown Iran's democratically elected government, backed a torture loving dictator in the Shah, shot down an Iranian passenger jet, backed Iraq when it attacked Iran, committed an act of war with Stuxnet, has either assassinated Iran's nuclear scientists or aided our client state Israel in doing so, and has spent years violating international law over the nuclear weapons program we admit they don't have.

      What Iran hasn't done:

      Overthrown socialisticy democracies in favor of capitalistic dictators, launched two illegal wars of choice, set up a world-wide torture regime, set up a world-wide system of gulags, shredded it's own Constitution to deal with a "threat" less severe than a slip in a bathtub, and engaged in illegal covert wars across the world with drones.

      Stick that in your jingoistic, American-exceptionalist ass and smoke it.

  19. this just in from iran by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    stuxnet what?

    pot meet kettle....

  20. Imagine it's 2003 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Imagine it's 2003, and Slashdot has an article about the widely criticized Iraqi invasion. An American makes a post just like yours:

    "But invading Kuwait was ok, huh?"

    Would you have embraced that sentiment? Would the moderators have modded it up?
    I imagine that poster would be flooded with indignant replies containing variations of "two wrongs don't make a right"

    1. Re:Imagine it's 2003 by NoKaOi · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Imagine it's 2003, and Slashdot has an article about the widely criticized Iraqi invasion. An American makes a post just like yours:

      "But invading Kuwait was ok, huh?"

      Would you have embraced that sentiment? Would the moderators have modded it up?
      I imagine that poster would be flooded with indignant replies containing variations of "two wrongs don't make a right"

      Now imagine again that it's 2003. We know that North Korea is close to getting nukes, and their leader is literally insane. Far away, we have a bit of unreliable intelligence from some dude that was tortured and told us Saddam had WMDs, that we know is unreliable (because the guys that tortured him and told us about it also told us that it was unreliable). We also know that even if these WMDs do exist, they are not nukes. Also, unlike North Korea, Saddam was a major asshole but was not actually literally insane (at least not more than any other asshole politician). We know that if we take Saddam's regime out, we'll have to be there for a very, very long time to prevent an even bigger asshole from taking over. Meanwhile, our friends in South Korea would be happy to take over North Korea if we took out Kim Jong-Il's regime, and unite North and South Korea, significantly helping the entire population of North Korea.

      10 Years prior, your daddy (president at that time) and your current VP (Secretary of Defense at that time) had both said invading Iraq to go after Saddam would have been obviously stupid. Your current VP even explained why it would be utterly stupid in an interview with C-SPAN in 1994.

      Which country do you invade?

    2. Re:Imagine it's 2003 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Probably post something like "So what, how is this different from the Soviets invading Afghanistan?"
      Do you even know how to play the "deflect-to-another-country" game?

  21. Alternative solutions by GrBear · · Score: 1

    You know, the US could just turn off their overseas Internet connectivity and isolate itself. Or you know, be part of the international community and accept they are no more special than any other netizen with attempted hacks on their IP addresses.

    1. Re:Alternative solutions by sjames · · Score: 1

      Or just cut links to China and keep talking to the rest of the world.

    2. Re:Alternative solutions by invid · · Score: 2

      The internet, just by being the internet, is far more damaging to China than Chinese hackers are to the Unites States.

      --
      The Moore-Murphy Law: The number of things that will go wrong will double every 2 years.
    3. Re:Alternative solutions by RabidReindeer · · Score: 1

      Or just cut links to China and keep talking to the rest of the world.

      But then how would Wal-mart get their orders filled?

    4. Re:Alternative solutions by sjames · · Score: 1

      Build a factory in some other 3rd world hellhole and exploit those people for a while, of course.

    5. Re:Alternative solutions by gtall · · Score: 1

      Wow, you really don't get the internet, do you?

    6. Re:Alternative solutions by sjames · · Score: 1

      Sure I do. I'm not the one who thinks it runs on spooky action at a distance. Block the routes to China at the routers and as far as the U.S. internet is concerned, there is no China.

      That still leaves the possibility of hacking themselves a proxy in some other country, but it greatly increases the chances that a U.S. inquiry would get it shut down.

    7. Re:Alternative solutions by socceroos · · Score: 1

      Except that there is nothing worth stealing from china....

      (I am referring to electronic goods/documents, not rare-earth materials which cannot be downloaded over the internet)

  22. Cyber Space War slashdot, c'mon by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    C'mon @soulskill, you had the opportunity to legitimately put the phrase "Spacewar" in your headline and you didn't. I don't think you can correct headlines, but it may be worth it.

  23. Corrollory to Betteridge's Law by rhysweatherley · · Score: 5, Funny

    Any headline where the US is demanding that some other country stop doing something can be simply answered with "You First Sparky!".

  24. How would this be possible? by TheSkepticalOptimist · · Score: 1

    How could any government control the actions of 1 billion people....oh wait a minute.

    --
    I haven't thought of anything clever to put here, but then again most of you haven't either.
  25. Translation: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We're going to keep doing that shit to you, but please stop doing it to us, because you know, we're the United States and you're not allowed to do to us what we do to you.

  26. "How about we call it a draw?" by jfengel · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Seems to me that this is like asking for a truce when we're losing. They've got no reason to say yes.

    Fortunately, this isn't a battle we have to lose. Yeah, I think we have to admit that every grandma-box running Windows 98 is going to be a spam-spewing zombie for the foreseeable future, but the corporations that make the juiciest targets should also be capable of at least some self-defense. If thy IP block offends thee, cut it off. Social engineering is always going to trump user education, but we can at least make it an arms race.

    At least it's not nukes, which are harder to walk away from. That means we also don't have Mutually Assured Destruction. They're going to do it even if they sign a treaty saying that they won't, so we're going to have to hunker down and deal. Asking them to call it a draw isn't going to get us anywhere.

    1. Re:"How about we call it a draw?" by lennier · · Score: 2

      but the corporations that make the juiciest targets should also be capable of at least some self-defense.

      You might think that, but apparently no. For example, here's this January 2013 report from the Defense Science Board, which I'm surprised hasn't made it to Slashdot yet. It's very sad and sobering reading.

      After several months of researching best practices of cyber metrics in commercial, academia and government spaces, the Task Force determined that no metrics are currently available to directly determine or predict the cyber security or resilience of a given system. .... Even knowing if a system is compromised is very difficult. ...
      In the process of conducting this study, it became apparent that the full spectrum cyber threat represented by a Tier V-VI capability is of such magnitude and sophistication that it could not be defended against. ...
      Organizations in the Department today, however, do not generally share details about cyber attacks that have compromised their systems. Instead, system compromises are often classified, keeping people in the dark who must be aware so they can anticipate similar attacks. Consequently, DoD organizations are trying to field defenses based only on partial knowledge of what kind of vulnerabilities are being exploited. ...
      For more than 15 years, the Department has invested significant resources (people and funding) in an effort to prevent, detect and respond to a full range of cyber threats. ... Strong authentication based on the Common Access Card (CAC) and Public Key Infrastructure (PKI) capabilities and other Defense in Depth mechanisms added to the overall “assurance” of the networks. Then, based on a significant infection of the Unclassified but Sensitive Internet Protocol (IP) Router Network (NIPRNet) and the Secret Internet Protocol Router Network (SIPRNet) in 2008, deployment of additional technologies, e.g., Host Based Security System (HBSS) and other hardening and situational awareness tools were accelerated.

      While well-intentioned and strongly supported, these and subsequent initiatives have not had the desired impact on the overall IA posture of the Department. Defensive measures implemented at the boundaries between the NIPRNet and the Internet proved to be only marginally effective in blocking successful intrusions or reducing the overall attack surface of DoD networks and systems. Mobile platforms (smart phones, tablets, etc.) exacerbate this already challenging problem. Red teams, conducting operations during military exercises or at the request of Military Department and Agency officials, continue to have a nearly perfect success rate breaking into the systems.

      Within classified networks, once thought to be safe for military command and control traffic, our adversary has successfully penetrated vulnerabilities created by poor user practices and a lack of discipline at all levels of the command structure. Operation BUCKSHOT YANKEE was clearly a wake-up call, suggesting that every system relied on for the conduct of war fighting operations is at risk of exploitation by an increasingly sophisticated adversary; an adversary ready and able to exploit any technical or human weakness to achieve their objectives.

      Emphasis mine, but this is scary stuff. Even the classified US military IP networks have lousy security and have been infected by viruses.

      I've never seen this announced before, but it's basically game over for network defense. The DoD can't keep their boxes patched. That's why they're talking about offensive cyber and nuclear first strike.

      --
      You are not a brain: http://books.google.com/books?id=2oV61CeDx-YC
  27. Cyberspace Dialog? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    U.S. to China:

    a/s/l ?

    Wanna cyber?

  28. Getting tired of terrorist? by rmdashrf · · Score: 1

    Looks like governments start noticing that 'the terrorists' are no longer an effective bogeyman and need to conjure up a new one.

    --
    Nihil in publicum sputa.
    1. Re:Getting tired of terrorist? by detritus. · · Score: 1

      The Patriot Act targets hackers just as much as it does terrorists.

    2. Re:Getting tired of terrorist? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're forgetting the obvious fact that hackers are terrorists. /s

    3. Re:Getting tired of terrorist? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The new bogeyman isn't 'hackers', it's 'China'.

  29. 3 Strikes by Zamphatta · · Score: 1

    All the US needs to do, is sit back and wait for these Chinese hackers to download too much copyrighted material. Just wait, it'll happen soon enough. Then their ISP will cut down China's bandwidth to like, really really slow. They won't be able to really get any hacking done then.

  30. Stop using religion as your government by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How about stop censoring your political opposition?

    1. Re:Stop using religion as your government by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You First Sparky!

      Or don't you trust in God?

  31. China Responds by CanHasDIY · · Score: 1

    "You first, fuckers!"

    I think we can all see where this is headed...

    Wouldn't you prefer a nice game of chess?

    --
    An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
  32. This is the worst security idea ever!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I for one would rather see the security ignorant persons setting up government and infrastructure IT systems here in the USA constantly checked from the outside and exposed in small chunks than any "secure because we say so" due to unenforceable policies.
    Security would never improve, rather it would get very much worse if there wasn't the constant threat posed by hackers. They are doing us all a favor. If and when a real organized and unified hackers attack, hopefully the larger security doors and windows will already have been closed.

    Security is NOT a goal, it's a process. Constant hacking is arguably the most important part of that process as it's a reminder of the constant diligence needed to keep systems locked down.

    I would think a large 0-day stockpile combined with a couple year moratorium on foreign hacking would be the most effective strategy for wreaking instant remote havoc if that's the goal. Attacks by a million cuts results in very thick armor over time. Maybe China want's our infrastructure to be better and this is their most effective way to make this happen.

    I would rather see each government or infrastructure system put in place require the security persons private signature - where they are publicly shamed if and when the signature is collected by hackers and exposed. Hackers could turn in these signatures for anonymous large rewards. Successful 0-Day exploiats could be turned in for even greater rewards as that could be added to our own 0-Day stockpile.

    I'm much more worried at the moment about low-level back doors in equipment coming out of China. There's lots of room for un-fixable mischief to be had with ICs with the right microcode, and it's already been proven that they have the technology and know-how to do this.

    Pleasant dreams!

  33. Welcome to the party, pal. by lexsird · · Score: 2

    China has been hacking US gamers for years. I get notifications from Guild Wars 2 that someone in China tried to access my account, please change my password. Welcome to the world wide web, Mr President and Congress, we need smarter policies, not more neolithic special interests pandering bullshit. Set up a firewall that you can monitor the hits on it, you will find that China is a beehive of hacker activity.

    We do have people highly qualified and capable of not only securing our country's systems, but being our scalpel as well. Let's not panic for fuck's sake.

    --
    Take the Red Pill.
    1. Re:Welcome to the party, pal. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But states of non-panic are not ideal for funneling tax money into defense contractor pockets!

  34. Shushu! by l0ungeb0y · · Score: 1

    That's what the US State Dept is crying over in Beijing right now.

  35. Poor timing by Dishwasha · · Score: 1

    The Obama administration really needs to learn some tact. Did they really need to launch this initiative RIGHT now? Could it not have waited 6 months since it has taken them 2+ years so far to gather the evidence? The Chinese government has always used the "it wasn't me" and "As I told you, it would be absolutely, totally, and in all other ways inconceivable" arguments. All this will do is raise their hackles while we deal with a true international crisis that we need and have finally started getting China's help on, a.k.a. illegal North Korea nuclear capabilities.

    At least with the hacking problems, that is something we can work on internally to resolve through better security measures. NK going nuclear, that is nothing we can fix by ourselves without severe global consequences.

  36. Or what... by detritus. · · Score: 2

    Issue sanctions? Stop it, it hurts to laugh.

  37. This is our way of saying were stuck. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Anytime the US says they want someone else to change their policy, to stop doing something or to talk about a problem usually means they are beating us at something. We do whatever we please and strut around like pretentious dicks but as soon as someone does it better and we cant beat them they we try to act diplomatic or simply go and run to mommy to say someone isnt playing fair.

    The whole cyber thing is the next boogeyman anyway. The US always has to conjure up some scheme to direct attention to and "declare war on" to justify blowing trillions of dollars and not actually trying to improve the country. The whole terrorist thing is getting old and no one cares anymore. So now its all about cyber war

  38. Which country to you invade? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    None, because invasion violates national sovereignty and it inevitably results in people, innocent and otherwise, being killed or injured without the benefit of due process or equal protection of the laws and is, generally, neither democratic, just nor peaceful. Surely the most powerful nation in the history of the human species can do a little better than indiscriminanatly blowing up property and killing people whenever they don't get what they want for themselves. Do you know the history of US attrocities in Korea and Iraq? Do you really want more of that?

  39. How truth is made by mars-nl · · Score: 1

    1. Some company gets hacked
    2. Some security company (Mandiant) investigates and makes a non-peer-reviewed report (PDF) with very thin evidence that jumps to conclusions
    3. Sensational press repeats claims from report without investigating
    4. Government uses "evidence" of what now seems a big problem and a certain source to start a war
    5. Profit...

    I'd like some smart Slashdot reader to read the report and tell us what you think. It contains a lot of random facts and then draws some very unscientific conclusions. I think it was written starting with the conclusions, then finding facts to "support" it.

  40. Won't work by dutchwhizzman · · Score: 2

    Blocking overseas network traffic will just mean that the hackers will start using US based places to start hacking from. Just blocking China won't work since the hackers almost exclusively use intermediate (hacked) computers that are not in China to do their stuff from. The fact that China isn't really hiding their economic hacking doesn't mean that other countries aren't doing just that as well. Don't forget that commerce and government are more or less the same in "communist" China. This is nothing but industrial espionage, which takes place everywhere, not just in China-USA. The real difference is that in this case the owners of the industry aren't people claiming to be private citizens in a claimed democracy. You're basically fighting a very powerful economy that happens to be a lot more efficient at their corruption than the the US economy is, with the exception of the arms industry.

    --
    I was promised a flying car. Where is my flying car?
  41. morals never count on a national scale by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And that, in a nutshell, is why the US has lost the moral high ground and is no better than any other tyranical power that has ever existed.

    1. Re: morals never count on a national scale by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Name another power that wouldn't act the same way given the same resources and opportunities. Even the fucking Scandinavians play their dirty spy games...

  42. Translation by EmagGeek · · Score: 1

    China owns the US
    China owns networks in the US
    China has complete visibility of everything that happens in the US

    We surrender. Please don't hurt us.

  43. Don't forget Echelon... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And I may have forgotten whatever other structural industrial espionage the USA has done...

  44. Imagine you have a relevant analogy by Uberbah · · Score: 1

    Imagine it's 2003, and Slashdot has an article about the widely criticized Iraqi invasion. An American makes a post just like yours:

    "But invading Kuwait was ok, huh?"

    Iran hasn't invaded any countries in an aggressive war of choice in 200 years. As opposed to you-know-who.

    1. Re:Imagine you have a relevant analogy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      GP wasn't talking about, he was drawing an analogy to GGP's talking of Iran. You bringing up Iran to GP does not follow.

  45. Silly to even try by WindBourne · · Score: 2

    China ignores all their treaties. For example, they recently joined the UN in condemning NK and promising that they would stop NK's slush fund if found. OK. So, America obviously KNEW where it was and points it out. What does China do? Nothing.
    Then you have their treaty with USA and WTO. They were required to drop most of their tariffs (around 90 at the time), no subsidies for exported goods, no dumping of exported goods, and free their money. Instead, they now have over 400 tariffs, subsidize many key items, are constantly dumping in foreign nations, and manipulate their money.
    Likewise, they have a treaty with Japan that requires them to have pollution control on all new cement and coal plants. Sadly, the Japanese made a mistake in not requiring them to turn on the controls. As such, China simply turns off the controls most of the time. They only turn it on when Chinese gov. tells that they must and for how long (typically a special event or somebody coming to check the environment).

    And now somebody thinks that CHina will keep their word? Not a chance.

    --
    I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    1. Re:Silly to even try by Nivag064 · · Score: 1

      Probably about the same chance that the USA would keep their's!

      I remember a US president saying on TV, that America had No Intention of bombing Hanoi! Not too long after that, Hanoi was bombed! In fact, I read that Hanoi was the most heavily defended city (in terms of anti-aircraft defences) ever to be bombed. Much to their surprise, the North Vietnamese managed to shoot down some B52's1!

    2. Re:Silly to even try by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're missing the point. The politicians didn't design this announcement to build a way to stop state-sponsored electronic espionage with laws (those already exist). This is a response to the pressure from corporate lobbyists wanting something done at the state level. Unfortunately, that's all it is: a response. It says, "Yes, we know you're hacking, and you know we're hacking".
      It feels like another baby-step towards *requiring* companies and gov't offices to hire white hats, and gives them justification towards that end. Does it solve anything on its own? Of course not. But you simply can't move a complex structure like ours on a dime, it handles more like an iceberg than a hot-rod.

  46. Hit 'em where it hurts.... by Rick+Zeman · · Score: 1

    ...get their Most Favored Nation status taken away.

  47. For domestic consumption only by russotto · · Score: 1

    I know China isn't going to stop. You know China isn't going to stop. Obama knows China isn't going to stop. China sure as hell knows it's not going to stop. So most likely this is grandstanding so Obama can say he's "doing something" to his more clueless buddies in business.

  48. Discovery by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The 'China Hackers' discovered Obama's porn stash and the tweeter/facebook/e-mail of his 'mistress.'

    Oh Dear ! If the Washington Times or the Daily Mail get this, it is the END of Obama. :)

    Ha Ha Ha Ha ! .n|m Obama-kun

  49. too much politics by fazey · · Score: 1

    While everyone is crying politics... did everyone forget about all of the god damn sshd and email password cracking on random targets by Chinese ip space?

  50. You tried. by zyphyrus · · Score: 3, Insightful

    So what incentives exactly does China have to stop hacking? Stop a cyber war? Their hackers are better than yours. Afraid after sanctions? It's unlikely enough countries would be willing to stop trading. Best thing to do imo is to upgrade US's digital infrastructure. Solve the root of the problem.

  51. Good for users - bad for manufacturers by SlashDev · · Score: 1

    I bet a long list of security appliance manufacturers are sweating bullets after reading this.

    --

    TOP DSLR Cameras Reviews of the top DSLRs
  52. Misplaced Priorities by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Focusing on China's hacking instead of botnet spamming and malware is like going after graffiti vandals while ignoring the constant ongoing occurrences of murder and rape everywhere you look.

  53. cyber attacks by suamaytinh · · Score: 1

    President Obama and his administration has raised the level of urgency in protecting the government and domestic businesses from the increased level of cyber attacks. However, U.S. leaders have avoided calling China out by name in the past. http://www.cuuhomaytinh.info/

    --
    http://www.cuuhomaytinh.info/
  54. Like asking fire not to burn you... by hateflyy · · Score: 1

    We can ask till we are blue in the face. Unless we get something on them that is without refute, nothing will change. Even then, if we did have something like that it would be handled in a very hush-hush manner as to not hurt someones feelings in the international community; it will be back-door. We need to upgrade our security, or just outright ban foreign IPs from certain companies. This is one of those problems where there really isn't a good solution.