Slashdot Mirror


Pentagon Ups Hacking Accusations Against China

wiredmikey writes "A new report from the Pentagon marked the most explicit statement yet from the United States that it believes China's cyber espionage is focused on the U.S. government, as well as American corporations. China kept up a steady campaign of hacking in 2012 that included attempts to target U.S. government computer networks, which could provide Beijing a better insight into America's policy deliberations and military capabilities, according to the Pentagon's annual assessment of China's military. 'China is using its computer network exploitation capability to support intelligence collection against the U.S. diplomatic, economic, and defense industrial base sectors that support U.S. national defense programs,' said the report to Congress (PDF). The digital espionage was part of a broader industrial espionage effort that seeks to secure military-related U.S. and Western technology, allowing Beijing to scale back its reliance on foreign arms manufacturers, the report said. One day later, Beijing dismissed the Pentagon's report that accused it of widespread cyberspying on the U.S. government, rejecting it as an 'irresponsible' attempt to drum up fear of China as a military threat."

97 of 151 comments (clear)

  1. Surprising? by venom85 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Is this supposed to surprise anyone? And, more importantly, does anyone out there actually believe that the US isn't doing the same thing toward [insert long list of nations here]? I, for one, certainly believe they are.

    1. Re:Surprising? by gmuslera · · Score: 1

      US is not doing espionage. What is does is closely watches everything that goes thru internet or any connected device. Calling that espionage is like calling the ocean a flood.

    2. Re:Surprising? by PolygamousRanchKid+ · · Score: 1

      Is this supposed to surprise anyone?

      I'm actually surprised that China doesn't complain about the US hacking them. I mean, they did complain about Coca-Cola's GPS devices being too accurate . . . and they did complain about US electronic warplanes getting too close to their border . . . but have they ever blatantly accused the US of hacking them . . . ?

      Do they not know about it? Or do they not want to let the rest of the world know, that they know about it, and carefully monitor the hacking . . . ?

      --
      Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
    3. Re:Surprising? by Ceriel+Nosforit · · Score: 1

      What the Russians do when it's time to negotiate is they tout some kind of unfairness in their media for a few months and then just in time for the meetings they forgive but don't forget. Usually it's just a plausible fabrication they believe they'll get away with, but they do it so often it's kind of a ritual by now.

      Or maybe the Pentagon really is ignorant enough not to put "botnet" and "proxy" together. Who knows. Not my tax euros.

      --
      All rites reversed 2010
    4. Re:Surprising? by Austerity+Empowers · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Compared to a communist dictatorship, yes we are. I am free to talk about how much my government sucks, loudly and with great fanfare. It's not that we don't suck, it's that they suck much, much more.

      The question is whether we should continue to prop up their mfg industry which seems to be a major attack vector for their espionage activities. Pre-owned cars have a market, pre-ripped jeans have a market, I'm not sure who the market is for pre-rooted machines.

    5. Re:Surprising? by grumpyman · · Score: 1

      Ditto - with US spending on military outpace the other next top 10 nations combined, logically you'd think US is hacking 10x as much as Chinese. It's all political dancing by US government.

    6. Re:Surprising? by nitehawk214 · · Score: 1

      The US can always rebuild its manufacturing base and build its own stuff as it once did. Of course the corp profits would be lower, but so would US unemployment numbers so everyone wins?

      I believe the US Corporations would rather run the US economy into the ground before giving up any profits.

      --
      I'm a good cook. I'm a fantastic eater. - Steven Brust
    7. Re:Surprising? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      convincing evidence

      I'm afraid no evidence will convince you Amimojo. Your comment history has a record of you using the argument of "we don't know this for sure" when claims are made with regard to China or Iran, and proclamations of "this shows/this proves ..." when claims are made with regard to the US.

    8. Re:Surprising? by mars-nl · · Score: 1

      Maybe no evidence was giving each time the comment was made. I myself are also fail to see any evidence to back these claims up. Until then, it's all propaganda to me. I'm not saying China isn't spying, because I'm pretty sure they do. But still, it's all assumptions, no evidence. It's important to note this, because not too far in the future, all these "facts" will be used to justify something bad.

    9. Re:Surprising? by mars-nl · · Score: 1

      Note to self: use preview to catch typos.

    10. Re:Surprising? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Do you really believe anything valuable (for the government and military) is even accessible from the internet?

      From my experience, yes.

    11. Re:Surprising? by TapeCutter · · Score: 1

      Depends on how you measure "freedom", if you choose to mesure it by the size of the prison population the US has the highest incarceration rate in the world, more than China and 7X that of the EU. The current incarceration rate in the US is comprable to that of pre-WW2 soviet union under Stalin (albeit not as inhumane). Most of the extra inmates in the US are in jail because they chose to smoke a joint rather than drink a beer.

      --
      And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
  2. Polite pretense by onyxruby · · Score: 4, Insightful

    How long do we uphold the polite pretense that China isn't behind the overwhelming majority of real world hacking? How long are we supposed to avoid to avoid offending them and continue to allow them to steal all of our intellectual property that we supposedly value? At least the Chinese government actually bothers to protect Chinese businesses from foreigners unlike the US government which only protects big business. Turn the other cheek, what if your out of cheeks?

    1. Re:Polite pretense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Because Diplomacy

    2. Re:Polite pretense by chill · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Intellectual Property? Like we give a shit. Here's one fine example from U.S. history.

      http://www.bigsiteofamazingfacts.com/why-did-president-thomas-jefferson-smuggle-rice-out-of-italy

      During their early years, the United States freely ignored existing European patents and copyrights as we saw fit. Developing our economy took precedence over some Old World kvetching about theft of ideas.

      If you have knowledge, let others light their candles with it. - Margaret Fuller

      To press China on theft of IP would require a truthful accounting of the cost. Look no further than the BSA for the depth of deception on the "cost of software piracy". There is no way China would accept valuation numbers like $200 per pirated copy of Windows 7.

      It is my fervent wish that the BSA get just what they ask for -- the ability to absolutely prevent people from using their client's software without payment. Think of how many copies of Windows would be installed in China if it was *IMPOSSIBLE* to pirate. Think of a number close to zero.

      There would be an utter explosion of growth in FOSS software. If Microsoft wanted to sell Windows and Office they'd have to lower the price to what the market would actually bear -- somewhere most likely around 10% of current prices.

      Congress uses those inflated numbers every year to justify all sorts of bullshit. They value of bogus "IP" valuations far outweigh Chinese IP theft.

      --
      Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
    3. Re:Polite pretense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I wouldn't be so quick to swallow what government tells you to swallow. My first instinct is that both governments are sowing the seeds for the next "cold war", possibly even with collusion. As history has proven over and over again, it is prudent to take every single word that comes out of their mouths with a bucket full of salt.

    4. Re:Polite pretense by onyxruby · · Score: 2

      I'm not defending the BSA or the like here so stop putting words in my mouth already. By Intellectual Property I'm talking about things like formulas, trade secrets, manufacturing processes and so on. I'm not defending Congresses BSA based math from the **aa's and never would or will.

      My point was that the US has been putting it's eggs into the IP basket and then refusing to guard it. After abandoning a manufacturing economy to switch to an IP based economy our leadership is being incredibly foolish. An IP based economy is incredibly fragile and susceptible to being taken over with entirely too much ease.

    5. Re:Polite pretense by onyxruby · · Score: 1, Troll

      Get off your Anti-American high horse jackass. The Chinese freely hack people the world over and I never claimed that this was either exclusively an American problem or that American were the worlds only inventors.

    6. Re:Polite pretense by DarkOx · · Score: 1

      How long do we uphold the polite pretense that China isn't behind the overwhelming majority of real world hacking?

      As long as we uphold the myth almost as many attacks originate by the USA for from the USA.

      How long are we supposed to avoid to avoid offending them and continue to allow them to steal all of our intellectual property that we supposedly value?

      I don't know probably until the economy collapses so much of the rest of trade relationship and financial relationship with China is based on various fictions I see no reason this should be different.

      At least the Chinese government actually bothers to protect Chinese businesses from foreigners unlike the US government which only protects big business.

      Citation please? From my observations working for a multinational with Chinese subsidiaries and talking to people there, corruption is pretty rampant. The business that get 'protection' are the state owned enterprises, and the ones that pay large enough bribes. China might have lots savings in the way of Federal Reserve notes, but in terms of resource availability, sustainability, and social stability is probably as much a house of cards as we are here in the US.

      --
      Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
    7. Re:Polite pretense by chill · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Trade secrets, such as formulas and manufacturing processes are the responsibility of the individual companies to protect, not government. Copyrights and Patents are given governmental protection thru legal prosecution because they are, by nature, disclosed to the public. They are published and the protection of secrecy is not available.

      We didn't abandon a manufacturing based economy. The United States is the number one manufacturing country in the world, measured by production. What has gone away is the manufacturing JOBS. This is a result of automation as much as outsourcing, and there isn't a damn thing you can do about it. Brush up on the history of the Luddite Movement and the Industrial Revolution to understand how futile an attempt at stopping progress and efficiency by refusing to automate is.

      If you aren't talking about copyright and patents, then the answer becomes -- do we value the quality process improvements in Chinese manufacturing more than the supposed "theft" of trade secrets? I'd argue the answer is "no". We gain more from the stuff we're buying from China being better quality than we lose in any lost competitiveness.

      I'd also argue that the competitive companies in the U.S. are not sitting still. IP that is "stolen" is ever evolving. If a Chinese company takes Process v1.0 and uses it to improve their manufacturing, they're still behind the company who is constantly upgrading their processes and already on Process v3.0. Copying isn't innovation, and innovation is much more important economically than mass production.

      --
      Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
    8. Re:Polite pretense by Darth+Snowshoe · · Score: 1

      That's really your argument? Let the Chinese hack us, because rice?

      There must be a moral or ethical accounting for today's actions, apart from prior history, or else wars would never end (just for starters). Just as I wouldn't expect to walk into someone's house uninvited and raid their refridgerator, I don't think it's right for others to hack into my computer, uninvited, and take the stuff I have there. At root, that should be pretty easy to comprehend, and I think we can all agree to that.

      And I think the issue about pirating copies of Windows etc is separate from active hacking of domestic systems in order to steal industrial and defense secrets.

    9. Re:Polite pretense by chill · · Score: 1

      As I responded above, Trade Secrets are not the responsibility of the gov't to protect. It is the sole responsibility of the company that owns it.

      Leaving Patents and Copyrights aside, the answer then becomes -- get off your ass, stop whining and properly secure your corporate network.

      Companies that bitch about this are just looking to externalize the costs and avoid having to pay for security themselves. I have little sympathy.

      --
      Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
    10. Re:Polite pretense by istartedi · · Score: 1

      Until one side or the other has an economic collapse and/or a revolution. Then you declare "victory", lose lots of opportunities brought by peace, and deal with blowback from proxy wars. At least, that's what happened with the USSR.

      --
      For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
    11. Re:Polite pretense by dkleinsc · · Score: 1, Troll

      How long do we uphold the polite pretense that China isn't behind the overwhelming majority of real world hacking?

      They probably aren't, given that there are lots of other kinds of people hacking out there:
      - The NSA and US Air Force Cyber Command.
      - Israeli's intelligence agency Mossad (Most notably Stuxnet)
      - Former Soviet bloc mobsters
      - For that matter, the Russians
      - Anonymous
      - Script kiddies
      - Spammers

      --
      I am officially gone from /. Long live http://www.soylentnews.com/
    12. Re:Polite pretense by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 1

      Just as I wouldn't expect to walk into someone's house uninvited and raid their refridgerator, I don't think it's right for others to hack into my computer, uninvited, and take the stuff I have there.

      Did they erase any stuff from your computer? Did the refrigerator contain the same stuff after the raid that it had contained before it?

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    13. Re:Polite pretense by VortexCortex · · Score: 1

      How long do we uphold the polite pretense that China isn't behind the overwhelming majority of real world hacking? How long are we supposed to avoid to avoid offending them and continue to allow them to steal all of our intellectual property that we supposedly value? At least the Chinese government actually bothers to protect Chinese businesses from foreigners unlike the US government which only protects big business. Turn the other cheek, what if your out of cheeks?

      HEAR HEAR! A hearty Flag Salute to you! Let's institute some strict Cyber Spying Laws that only apply to US citizens! We should Outlaw the use and creation of Hacking Tools! I don't care if you're a "security researcher", you're making tools for the Enemy to use against us! Hacking tools should only be made in secure military secured facilities, or no one will be safe. We CAN NOT Let this Chinese Threat sleep. We implore Congress -- A preemptive strike against the Chinese Cyber Army is needed. This Means Cyber-War!

      Except.... We started the damn cyber war. We created the CIA expressly for that purpose. No one is innocent here. Don't let fear sway your mind into agreeing with an increasingly dystopia future. Sew. Reap. Cry me a river about what was harvested.

      China is after our Intellectual Property. I have a foolproof counter attack: OUTLAW PATENTS AND COPYRIGHTS. Let researchers and artists make money the same way every other labor industry does. We simply get rid of the idea of Artificial Scarcity of Bits, and instead market the ability to configure more bits and do actual work for money! Crisis Averted. Sew. Reap. Cry me a river about reaping what was harvested. I'll defer any "but patents are good" arguments to my previous comments on the issue. The gist is: We have NO scientific proof that Intellectual property is beneficial to society, so we should get rid of those laws in order to test the unproven hypothesis and thus end the Cyber War too -- they're the spoils and thus direct cause of war and oppressive laws now? Let go of Artificial Scarcity of Ideas already... Welcome to the Information Age: Bits are in infinite supply. IP is a futures market that is guaranteed to fail: It defers payment for your work until the work is completely devalued by being published and in infinite supply (thus $0 price, regardless of cost to create). It's as economically insane as trying to sell ice to Eskimos. It's like I'm dealing with infants here: "But I don't Wannaaaa!" To bad, there is no other sane option.

      Science or Bust

    14. Re:Polite pretense by cheesybagel · · Score: 1

      When you count manufacturing facilities on foreign soil owned by US corporations as US manufacturing output the numbers get skewed.

    15. Re:Polite pretense by jellomizer · · Score: 1

      We can keep it up for a while if needed. The trick is to know more then you let on.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    16. Re:Polite pretense by localman57 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Trade secrets, such as formulas and manufacturing processes are the responsibility of the individual companies to protect, not government.

      I would agree that it's up to them to protect themselves from other companies. But individual companies don't stand a chance of protecting against attacks from the resources available to a nation-state. It is reasonable to expect our government to take action to prevent hacking by the Chinese military and other government sponsored efforts, in the same way that we would it expect it to protect some office building in Hawaii from being burglurized by Chinese special forces.

    17. Re:Polite pretense by lgw · · Score: 1

      It is still the job of the police to prevent your house being robbed, even if you do a poor job of locking the door.

      This attitude in IT of "well, if you didn't secure it properly, you don't deserve to keep it" is just childish victim-blaming.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    18. Re:Polite pretense by chill · · Score: 1

      You are sadly misinformed. It is by no means the job of your local police to PREVENT your house from being robbed. That is YOUR job. Check with your local police. They are under no obligation to protect you at all.

      --
      Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
    19. Re:Polite pretense by nitehawk214 · · Score: 1

      It is still the job of the police to prevent your house being robbed, even if you do a poor job of locking the door.

      This attitude in IT of "well, if you didn't secure it properly, you don't deserve to keep it" is just childish victim-blaming.

      The police do not prevent crime, they deter it by catching and making sure the perpetrators are punished.

      While it is a similar concept, it is a fine line. Just because the police exist does not mean one should not bother protecting themselves. You need to help the police help yourself by not making their job impossible.

      --
      I'm a good cook. I'm a fantastic eater. - Steven Brust
    20. Re:Polite pretense by similar_name · · Score: 1

      individual companies don't stand a chance of protecting against attacks from the resources available to a nation-state

      True for China but not true as a statement. 25 corporations bigger than countries.

    21. Re:Polite pretense by Darth+Snowshoe · · Score: 1

      Some of the things on my computer have value relative to their scarcity elsewhere. If I am the only one in the world who has some great idea (or even say, the next Justin Beiber album) then it has much more value than if that same item were emailed to everyone in the world including myself.

      I think you're being disingenuous to pretend not to see the argument. If you enter somewhere you're not supposed to be, and exit with something you didn't have before, (and didn't produce somehow while you are there) that's theft. That's stealing things that don't belong to you. Why does that seem like such a radical interpretation?

      Further, it's a privacy issue as well. I have a right to keep some things on my computer apart from the public view, just as, when I close the door to my house, I have a right to expect other people not to enter and look around.

    22. Re:Polite pretense by saarbruck · · Score: 2

      Because Cheap Labor.

      There, I fixed that for you.

      --
      I am the very model of a modern major general!
    23. Re:Polite pretense by mars-nl · · Score: 1

      Hackers from China != China, just as hackers from USA != USA. So, can you now please prove that China (meaning the government of China) is behind the majority of real world hacking?

      And stop using this stupid term "intellectual property" which could mean just about everything (which is why it is used usually). If I download a mp3 without paying it's called stealing intellectual property. If I hack a defense contractor and steal the design docs of their new bunker busting laser canon it's also called stealing intellectual property.

    24. Re:Polite pretense by real-modo · · Score: 1

      Further, it's a privacy issue as well. I have a right to keep some things on my computer apart from the public view, just as, when I close the door to my house, I have a right to expect other people not to enter and look around.

      Here are some of the tools that allow you to exercise that right: Firewalls. Disk and file encryption. Encrypted password containers. Digital certificates. Intrusion detection software. Properly reviewed and tested open source operating systems, servers, and application software that securely stores and transmits your data.

      You don't have a practical right to privacy if you don't close the curtains.

    25. Re:Polite pretense by girlinatrainingbra · · Score: 2

      Right, like the Iran centrifuge blow-ups weren't caused by the USA and by Israel? Anyone who claims to know who's been doing what on the world stage is blowing smokes. Even our own country-men-and-women probably don't realize the extent of our own country's cyberwarriors and how the USA admitted to state-sponsored hacking of Iran's centrifuges, (srsly, Obama sed we didz it, lookitup) and how many other things are being done in our name or upon us. Bush admitted to the NSA hacking our own telcoms and spying on ALL usa-internet traffic.
      .
      So don't say that China's behind the majority of it. It's very likely that they are since they comprise the majority population of this planet, but it's equally likely that the USA and NATO elements are number one. (haha, I sound nationalistic and jingoistic, now, don't I? That wasn't my intent. My intent was to point out that anyone claiming definitive knowledge of the percentage responsibility couldn't possibly know the truth. They can only know about their own personal or own divisional involvement. Diplomacy and secrecy means that we don't ever truly know the capabilities and capacities of the other sides.)

    26. Re:Polite pretense by sgt_doom · · Score: 1

      Well, onyxruby, I'd say as long as China is supposed to be the next global superpower, which America can';t be for too much longer since the super-rich here have purposely decimated the middle class and financially overextended the American Empire.

    27. Re:Polite pretense by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 1

      If you enter somewhere you're not supposed to be, and exit with something you didn't have before, (and didn't produce somehow while you are there) that's theft. That's stealing things that don't belong to you. Why does that seem like such a radical interpretation?

      Because according to your interpretation, reading a book and remembering its contents after closing it would be theft as well.

      Further, it's a privacy issue as well. I have a right to keep some things on my computer apart from the public view, just as, when I close the door to my house, I have a right to expect other people not to enter and look around.

      Well, I won't dispute the issue of personal data. Although I'd like to remind you that you were first talking about "stealing industrial and defense secrets", and suddenly, you've shifted the topic to personal privacy. You're moving the goalposts here.

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    28. Re:Polite pretense by Darth+Snowshoe · · Score: 1

      "If you enter somewhere you're not supposed to be, and exit with something you didn't have before, (and didn't produce somehow while you are there) that's theft. That's stealing things that don't belong to you. Why does that seem like such a radical interpretation?"

      "Because according to your interpretation, reading a book and remembering its contents after closing it would be theft as well."

      No, because authors intend for you to read and remember what they write - that's the point of their writing books. Again, you're smart enough to know better, but being disingenuous because, because why? Trying to rationalize your own behavior somewhere?

      The intention of the owner is relevant in defining what is a giving, or sharing, or theft. If someone comes to your birthday party and gives you something wrapped in colored paper and you unwrap it and keep it, that's something clearly given to you. If someone builds a computer system with a lot of security mechanisms to keep you out, and you sureptitiously enter anyway and take something, and the owner would probably call the cops (or FBI, whatever) on you if they knew, then that is stealing.

      If you find a dollar bill on the sidewalk and no one else is around, that's an ambiguous case, but that is not what we are talking about here. Lots of American companies have been intentionally and thoroughly hacked, not accidentally, but using lots of time, manpower, effort, expertise. Spearphishing.

      Theft is theft. For someone who cites a biblical reference in your every post, you have a very shaky grasp of this very basic premise of morality. (Or maybe you're just trolling.) "Thou shalt not steal" is pretty prominent in the Bible and the concept is common most other religious texts as well.

    29. Re:Polite pretense by RespekMyAthorati · · Score: 1

      What I don't get is why is hacking so damn easy?
      Why would any computer with sensitive information on it be connected to the internet?

  3. Internet Dispute by WillgasM · · Score: 4, Funny

    This is an Internet dispute, so let's settle this in our tried-and-true method. I'll begin:
    Dear China,
    Do you even lift, bro?

  4. Not sure why this isn't a declaration of war? by Rougement · · Score: 2

    I understand that China is a trading partner but in so many other spheres (human rights, pollution, animal cruelty, IP theft, etc etc ) they're a disgrace and yet they always seem to get a pass, unlike some other countries the US has gone to war with over nothing. If the US blocked all Chinese IP addresses, what would be the worst that could happen? How about raising import tariffs?

    1. Re:Not sure why this isn't a declaration of war? by Rougement · · Score: 1

      How so? I'm not American.

    2. Re:Not sure why this isn't a declaration of war? by robmv · · Score: 1

      They will hack European computers to access US based ones

    3. Re:Not sure why this isn't a declaration of war? by Rougement · · Score: 1

      Good talk, thanks for sharing.

    4. Re:Not sure why this isn't a declaration of war? by aaaaaaargh! · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Why is it not a declaration of war. Hm, let me guess... because signals intelligence is not a declaration of war?

    5. Re:Not sure why this isn't a declaration of war? by GodfatherofSoul · · Score: 1

      Slippery slope. You don't want to set the bar for acts of war too low; especially if we engage in the same acts. That being said, maybe it's time for a grassroots counterattack?

      --
      I swear to God...I swear to God! That is NOT how you treat your human!
    6. Re:Not sure why this isn't a declaration of war? by Rougement · · Score: 1

      True. We're in unchartered waters here. At least if a nation physically attacks another there's precedent. How bad do cyber attacks have to get?

    7. Re:Not sure why this isn't a declaration of war? by gmuslera · · Score: 2

      I understand that China is a trading partner but in so many other spheres (human rights, pollution, animal cruelty, IP theft, etc etc ) they're a disgrace and yet they always seem to get a pass, unlike some other countries the US has gone to war with over nothing.

      In most of those spheres US is not far behind, if not ahead. If a foreing country with big oil reserves was doing what US is doing with Guantanamo would had been invaded by now (and thats the "over nothing" they do war lately, don't confuse the excuse for the real motivation). And US came second in pollution recently, and that was partly because most US companies do their pollution elsewhere now. And please, lets not touch real IP theft.

      If the US blocked all Chinese IP addresses, what would be the worst that could happen?

      US would not be able to monitor social activity of all china citizens, nor manage their botnets inside china borders/firewalls. How you expect to gather intelligence with all the doors closed?

    8. Re:Not sure why this isn't a declaration of war? by thoughtsatthemoment · · Score: 1

      So you want to declare war against a country that pollutes its land and exploits its labors in order to make products like the iPhone?

    9. Re:Not sure why this isn't a declaration of war? by thoughtsatthemoment · · Score: 1

      So you are not friendly to China and wanted to know why the US is friendly to China. Well, the short answer is the US capitalists and Chinese communists are in bed to exploit the Chinese people. If you want the US to exploit your country instead, either your country is not big enough or your people is not hard working enough.

    10. Re:Not sure why this isn't a declaration of war? by Rougement · · Score: 1

      No. I'm asking what it would take for a cyber attack to be comparable with a traditional act of war. I'm certainly in favor of looking at trade restrictions. If iPhones have to cost more and be made in the US, that's fine by me.

    11. Re:Not sure why this isn't a declaration of war? by thoughtsatthemoment · · Score: 1

      If iPhones cost more they won't be made anywhere.

  5. Government morons - just fix the problem by Indy1 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Null route all the Chinese networks, problem solved. Worked great on my mail server, amount of spam I got dropped massively.

    --
    Lawyers, MBA's, RIAA? A jedi fears not these things!
    1. Re:Government morons - just fix the problem by Jonner · · Score: 1

      Null route all the Chinese networks, problem solved. Worked great on my mail server, amount of spam I got dropped massively.

      The attackers aren't idiots. They'll just start using proxies.

    2. Re:Government morons - just fix the problem by Indy1 · · Score: 1

      true, but why make it easy for them?

      Of course, if fed.gov wasn't a giant pack of idiots, they wouldn't have this problem in the first place.

      --
      Lawyers, MBA's, RIAA? A jedi fears not these things!
    3. Re:Government morons - just fix the problem by Jonner · · Score: 1

      true, but why make it easy for them?

      Of course, if fed.gov wasn't a giant pack of idiots, they wouldn't have this problem in the first place.

      If it's currently easy to identify traffic from China by IP network, blocking those networks would make identifying traffic from Chinese attackers more difficult since it would never come from a known Chinese network. Also, are you saying the federal government should be running private companies' Internet security as well as their own? The fact that agencies have been penetrated does not necessarily mean they're idiots. Network security is hard and no computer is completely safe unless it's switched off and unplugged. Perhaps the mistake the Federal government made was creating the Internet in the first place.

    4. Re:Government morons - just fix the problem by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      I blocked the US and it worked even better.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
  6. So disconnect and quit using the fucking cloud... by gestalt_n_pepper · · Score: 1

    ..when dealing with anything you want to keep secret, and your problem is solved. Internet security has always been and always will be, sheer fantasy for gullible managers.

    Any questions?

    --
    Please do not read this sig. Thank you.
  7. Propaganda by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Accusations made by US gov towards foreign countries, especially powerful ones, should be taken with a whole lot of salt.

    1. Re:Propaganda by interval1066 · · Score: 1

      Especially when the US engages in wholesale spying on EVERYONE. Looking back in history we had the U2, SR71, secret spy sats, etc...

      The planes you mention (both) were specifially developed for spying on the Soviet Union during the cold war. If you want me to believe the Soviets were innocent bystanders during that period I have a bridge I would LOVE to sell you.

      --
      Python: 'And then suddenly you have a language which says "we're all stuck with whatever the whiniest coder wants".'
    2. Re:Propaganda by ebno-10db · · Score: 1

      we had the U2, SR71, secret spy sats

      And thanks to those we're not standing in a pile of radioactive rubble. It's ignorance of a potential adversary's military capability that's most likely to lead to instability and even more excessive than usual arms buildups. Eisenhower wanted the U-2 because it was ignorance of Soviet capability that lead to the "bomber gap" claim and an enormous US nuclear buildup. Eisenhower was later frustrated because the secret nature of the U-2 flights meant he couldn't tell the public that all the talk of a missile gap was nonsense. Earlier in his administration Eisenhower had even made an "open skies" proposal to the USSR that would have let reconnaissance planes fly over each others territory. As far as "secret" spy sats, the secrets were in the details of their capabilities, not their existence. Later on they were unabashedly used to verify arms treaties. For example, we agreed to chop the wings off of most of our B-52's during the time when Soviet sats were overhead and could verify it.

      However, what China is doing now has nothing to do with that sort of spying. They have their own spy sats and would know it if we were building up nuclear arms (or conventional ones for that matter). I'll also remind you that the USSR was an enemy country, whereas China is supposedly not. The amount and type of spying we're seeing is not the type you normally see from a friendly country. Yes, yes, the US and its allies do a little spying on each other, blah, blah, balh, but nothing approaching this level.

    3. Re:Propaganda by ebno-10db · · Score: 1

      No need to attempt to sell me a bridge, instead re-read where I stated "and pretend they are not doing the same to you".

      BTW, I listed those two plans for that explicit reason (cold war period).

      The point was the US has a long history of spying, and there is no reason why one should assume other nations are not dong the same.

      But the US is not "assum[ing] other nations are not dong the same". They're saying that China is! The difference is that the USSR was an enemy, and China is supposedly not.

  8. guess those by nimbius · · Score: 4, Insightful

    sequestration cuts are getting a little close.
    Seriously, terrorism or communism. I only have enough patience for one government-sponsored boogey man at a time.
    Schedule it between the mandatory monthly fiscal cliff panic and the gay marriage thing if you could...or if you can roll it into some weird freedom war that works too.

    --
    Good people go to bed earlier.
    1. Re:guess those by VortexCortex · · Score: 2

      The Terrorists are Funding Free and Open Source Software made by Cheap Chinese Labor in order to Devalue the sacred Intellectual Property made by American Industry! If we fall off the Fiscal Cliff there will be no Funds to Save us from the Armies of the Pot Smoking Freetardians and their legions of Homosexual Concubines! Do you want your children to live in a world where Child Porn is distributed by Slant-Eyed Ladyboys with Neckbeards to further the Terrorist agenda?!

      Act now! Vote Yes, on the LIBERTY Act to safe our great nation:
      Legislation to Insulate Babies Eyes and Reduce Terrorist Yiffing.

  9. why did sensitive networks get connected at all? by swschrad · · Score: 2

    answer: dumb bastards who have the sense of a paper clip. if you don't want to have your hard drives in the morning paper, you don't put them on the Wacky Wacky Webbiepoo. the old joke was you disconnected all cables to the computer, buried it 50 feet deep in concrete, and put crew-served weapons over it if you wanted security.

    turns out it isn't a joke, folks. total separation. anything you want scrubbed and publicly availiable, you sneakernet it over to the other machine room on the other side of the Pentagon.

    --
    if this is supposed to be a new economy, how come they still want my old fashioned money?
  10. Let's Troll 'em! by caspy7 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I say we request that businesses and government agencies (especially ones we know they've gone after) set up poorly secured areas with misinformation about "important" projects and such.
    Not only do we get them with misinformation, but try to bury them with gobs of data in the form of poorly scanned (un-OCRable) image files.

    (Yes, I know the plan probably has flaws, but a boy can dream.)

    1. Re:Let's Troll 'em! by VortexCortex · · Score: 1

      Congratulations. You just described the entire mortgage industry...

  11. proof not speculation by lkcl · · Score: 2

    what's interesting is that these people are claiming that the attacks *originate* from china, and that therefore, logically as well, it MUST be the chinese government that instigated these attacks. noooOoo: unless the U.S. has access to the entire world's internet traffic plus all communications globally including mobile phones, telephone lines and every single server and electronic device, there's absolutely NO WAY that they can prove that accusation - period.

    why not? because even if an attack "appears" to originate from within china, all that means is that the traffic is coming from an IP address that's inside the china boundaries. and that's *all* it means. it does *NOT* mean that there is not SOMEONE ELSE who is OUTSIDE of china who has compromised that machine and is using it as a DDOS hacking jump-point in order to deliberately mask their true location [and identity].

    the hacking could even be done through servers that are compromised and happen to have access to a telephone or a 3G dongle. dial in, initiate attack: you'd never be able to ascertain the identity of the attacker [unless you had access to china's telephone network records].

    for all we know, the hacking is actually being instigated by the CIA as a means to have an excuse to justify yet another war or yet another round of political maneuvring.

    even if it's random usage of compromised machines rather than intentional misdirection, the percentage of computers compromised by viruses world-wide is quite likely to have a disproportionate number of IP addresses originating from china simply through sheer numbers of people in china who have computers.

    there are plenty of foreign governments who would have an interest in the kind of information being claimed to have been sought. why does it *have* to be china that's doing the attacking?

    1. Re:proof not speculation by admdrew · · Score: 5, Informative

      why does it *have* to be china that's doing the attacking?

      The type of analysis used to reach this conclusion includes far more information than source IPs. Based on the wealth of attack data available to even some of the smallest security providers, it's not tough to eventually paint a pretty good picture of China (their military, especially) as a core of generally nefarious network activity. A single IP isn't enough to place blame, but billions of packets over years of activity are definitely enough to attribute a significant volume of the world's hacking directly to the Chinese.

      Source: I do a significant amount of network traffic analysis specifically for security.

    2. Re:proof not speculation by interval1066 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      unless the U.S. has access to the entire world's internet traffic plus all communications globally including mobile phones...

      Stop being an idiot. I set up a simple OpenBSD name server back in the mid 2000's, about 2008 I noticed an unusual amount of acitivity on it. It had been attacked and comprimised, and whomever did the attacking had re-purposed it to do name serving to asian servers. I easily tracked the trail back to China. Its not fucking rocket science, and secured in my mind that if the Chinese were willing to attack a small name server in a dusty corner they'll certainly attack US Gov. servers. Stop being an apologist for the Chinese you shill.

      --
      Python: 'And then suddenly you have a language which says "we're all stuck with whatever the whiniest coder wants".'
    3. Re:proof not speculation by ebno-10db · · Score: 2

      it does *NOT* mean that there is not SOMEONE ELSE who is OUTSIDE of china who has compromised that machine and is using it as a DDOS hacking jump-point in order to deliberately mask their true location [and identity]

      First, what the hell does this have to do w/ DDOS? We're talking about spying.

      Second, suppose Dr. Evil is hacking machines in China to hide the true source of the attacks. Why is he only using machines in China. Why not Russia or Canada or Elbonia? It would be much better for Dr. Evil to choose machines around the world so we couldn't just block Chinese IP addresses and be done with it. This is a case of Occam's razor: if the vast majority of the attacks come from China, then they're probably perpetrated by people in China. Given the authoritarian nature of the Chinese government, I find it hard to believe that this is done without their knowledge and approval. The alternative explanation is that people who can't read any news source that refers to Taiwan as an independent country, are at the same time launching massive penetration attacks without government approval.

    4. Re:proof not speculation by ebno-10db · · Score: 1

      I do a significant amount of network traffic analysis specifically for security.

      On Slashdot that will probably lead to accusations that you have no idea what you're talking about.

    5. Re:proof not speculation by kaatochacha · · Score: 1

      I dunno, sounds kinda cool and interesting to me.

  12. Re:why did sensitive networks get connected at all by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    anything you want scrubbed and publicly availiable, you sneakernet it over to the other machine room on the other side of the Pentagon.

    That's what the Iranians did (well, except for the Pentagon part) and even that didn't save them from Stuxnet.

  13. Re:You better watch your back bro.... by Jeremiah+Cornelius · · Score: 1, Funny

    US: We've upped our accusations, now up yours!

    --
    "Flyin' in just a sweet place,
    Never been known to fail..."
  14. Re:why did sensitive networks get connected at all by Loether · · Score: 2

    True, the user is always the weakest link.

      "Oh I just found a shiny thumb drive in the parking lot... I know, I'll plug it in to the PC I use to monitor the centrifuges."

    It's not hard to envision a government employee/military worker/civilian contractor here doing the same thing.

    --
    TODO create witty sig.
  15. What kind of a stupid statement is that anyways? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Of course China spies on the US, much like vice versa. It's hard to choose which of these countries deserves my sympathy less.

  16. Re:How dangerous is this spying? by interval1066 · · Score: 2

    ...China is not trying to actively harm America, but rather to upgrade its technology by cheating...

    China mowed down 2000 of its own students during Tienamen Square protests for free speech. They've also occupied Tibet since 1959, claiming a 1000 year-old country is a runaway province. They continually threaten Taiwan with invasion and strong-arm Japanese fishing boats all the time claiming they are fishing in Chinese waters, and are arguing with Japan now about some uninhabited islands Japan has administered for 1500 years. And they aren't trying to harm anyone? Good luck with that.

    --
    Python: 'And then suddenly you have a language which says "we're all stuck with whatever the whiniest coder wants".'
  17. Re:why did sensitive networks get connected at all by QRDeNameland · · Score: 1

    answer: dumb bastards who have the sense of a paper clip.

    tink...tink...tink...

    It looks like you're writing a diatribe. Would you like help, you insensitive clod?

    Sorry...that kind of just wrote itself. ;-)

    --
    Momentarily, the need for the construction of new light will no longer exist.
  18. Hypocrites by DancesWithWolves · · Score: 1

    Name one thing that other governments do that the US government hasn't already done. There is nothing. Torture? Check Indefinite detention of innocent people? Check Spying on own citizens? Check Lavish support and benefits for corporations at the expense of ordinary people? Check Americans need to get off their hypocritical high horse of "freedom", "liberty", "justice" and all that crap. They are no better than any of the dictatorships out there.

    1. Re:Hypocrites by admdrew · · Score: 1

      Hypocritical, sure, but the Chinese (far more so now than the Russians) are pretty well understood to be behind the bulk of the current hacking activity that occurs today.

  19. Simple solution: import tariffs. by Squidlips · · Score: 1

    Enough is enough; do the one thing that will get China's attention: import tariffs.

    1. Re:Simple solution: import tariffs. by real-modo · · Score: 1

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

      -- H. L. Mencken

      Import tariffs drive up the cost of goods to US consumers and reduce exports. An import tariff is an export tariff.

      Look. IP--patents--were invented in the 17th century "to promote the social interest": the purpose of IP is to provide incentives to innovate, because innovation benefits us all. In the 17th century a term of 15 years was thought adequate for an IP monopoly.

      The "metabolic rate" of business has increased considerably since the 17th century, so in business terms, fifteen years then is equivalent to about five years now. Has the term of patents dropped accordingly? No. Instead, there is a push to extend the term of patents, and alongside that a trend to making trivial changes to existing products and re-patenting them. Transparent rent-seeking, both practices.

      By stealing IP, the Chinese are forcing western corporations to undertake real innovation instead of endlessly re-patenting the same stuff, which of course those corporations hate. (Real innovation is costly, but most of all risky.) The Chinese are doing the consumers of the world a favour by reducing the value of economic rents.

      (Don't like my argument? Swap "Chinese" for "Americans" and "western" for "British and European", and it was made in exactly this way from the mid-19th century on. Did we get innovation and growth?)

  20. Re:How dangerous is this spying? by cheesybagel · · Score: 1

    There is also the Chinese invasion of Vietnam aka the Sino-Vietnamese War in the late 1970s.

  21. Re:You better watch your back bro.... by jellomizer · · Score: 3, Insightful

    [sarcasm]Yes, like forcing the United States into a real finical crisis is a good idea for China Self interest.[/sarcasm]

    China buys US Dollars to keep their own economy stable. Also the United States is their biggest buyer. Put all Americans in the poor house, you have lost your own economy.

    --
    If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
  22. Re:You better watch your back bro.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    Now get back to propping up our economy and owning most of our soverign debt.

    Care to back that up with a source? They are the largest foreign holder of debt but that is far from owning most of our debt. China owns about 8% of public debt.

  23. Re:How dangerous is this spying? by real-modo · · Score: 1

    While I understand that it feels bad to have your secrets copied, it seems to me that China is not trying to actively harm America, but rather to upgrade its technology by cheating - i.e. copying US technology for free.

    ... a method first perfected by the USA, and which Alexander Hamilton named "the American System".

  24. Re:You better watch your back bro.... by c0lo · · Score: 1

    Now get back to propping up our economy and owning most of our soverign debt.

    Care to back that up with a source? They are the largest foreign holder of debt but that is far from owning most of our debt. China owns about 8% of public debt.

    China's exports by country - US buys 20% from China.
    Also China runs an year-on-year positive trade balance

    US goods trade: total showing a deficit since at least 1989.
    Goods trade with China only - deficit again

    Gotta ask yourself the population of which country would suffer the most if the trade between the two would suddenly stop?

    --
    Questions raise, answers kill. Raise questions to stay alive.
  25. Re:Surprising? And more importantly.... by sgt_doom · · Score: 1

    ...who gives a rat's ass? It's like the halfwitted, demented stooges around my age, or older, who wear those "proud to be a Vietnam Vet" hats --- I always inquire which they are more proud of: That the USA killed at least 3 million Vietnamese by dropping bombs on their sovereign territory, or that the American-based multinationals routinely offshore many, many jobs to the totalitarian society of Vietnam?

    Since they shipped all the jobs, technology, investment, and much "defense tech" to China, who truly gives a rat's ass today?

    It's like China whining about handing over their OS source code to them, then being hacked by them --- no shit, Sherlock!!!!

  26. Re:Surprising? And more importantly.... by sgt_doom · · Score: 1

    Correction: on last sentence I meant to write, "It's like Microsoft whining......"

  27. Re:You better watch your back bro.... by Rinikusu · · Score: 1

    Minor nit:
    according to: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_the_largest_trading_partners_of_China
    The EU is actually their biggest partner, we're #2. Still, lose the US and that's nothing to sneeze at.

    --
    If you were me, you'd be good lookin'. - six string samurai
  28. Re:You better watch your back bro.... by mjwalshe · · Score: 1

    And at if the Chinese economy goes really bad some stage the mob might be coming for you and your comrades in the politburo have a date with a lamppost ala Mussolini or Ceausescu.

  29. Re:How dangerous is this spying? by interval1066 · · Score: 1

    Would Tibet be better, or worse off without China and why (curious, not that i have an opinion).

    Bravo, you just invalidated all of your previous points regarding my reply. Have a nice, blind, life.

    --
    Python: 'And then suddenly you have a language which says "we're all stuck with whatever the whiniest coder wants".'
  30. And the solution is .. by dgharmon · · Score: 1

    "the Pentagon .. believes China's cyber espionage is focused on .. attempts to target U.S. government computer networks, which could provide Beijing a better insight into America's policy deliberations and military capabilities"

    And the solution is not to host your critical and military capabilities on such a flakey OS ..

    --
    AccountKiller