Slashdot Mirror


Chinese Hackers Steal Top US Weapons Designs

n1ywb writes "Chinese hackers have gained access to the designs of many of the nation's most sensitive advanced weapons systems, according to a report prepared for the Defense Department and government and defense industry officials,The Washington Post reported Tuesday. The compromised weapons designs include, among others, the advanced Patriot missile system, the Navy's Aegis ballistic missile defense systems, the F/A-18 fighter jet, the V-22 Osprey, the Black Hawk helicopter and the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter." Also (with some more details and news-report round-up) at SlashBI.

61 of 395 comments (clear)

  1. Internet connection by Gutboy · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Why is information like this on computers that are connected to the internet?

    1. Re:Internet connection by drinkypoo · · Score: 5, Funny

      Why is information like this on computers that are connected to the internet?

      So that it can be leaked, justifying the costly production of a whole new generation of warmachines.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    2. Re:Internet connection by gstoddart · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Was thinking the same thing. Used to be you kept your secure stuff on a network with an air-gap between it and the rest of the world.

      Given how many stories we've been seeing about these hacking attempts, to have those machines accessible from the outside network means people haven't been paying attention.

      Given that you still can't export some software due to encryption, to have the plans for these kinds of things be something hackers can get into is a pretty stunning failure.

      --
      Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    3. Re: Internet connection by O('_')O_Bush · · Score: 5, Interesting

      It wasn't otherwise the whole internet would have become classified. The Chinese stole it off one of the classified networks (like SIPRNet), which the DoD has known to be compromised for quite some time. Because of this, really sensitive things aren't kept on it, only mildly sensitive things. If the article implies more, it is sensationalism.

      --
      while(1) attack(People.Sandy);
    4. Re:Internet connection by Novogrudok · · Score: 2

      So the guy in Tulsa who develops, say, rotor blades should have only the access to the relevant parts of the helicopter design. Why would this guy need to know the schematics for the targeting system, for example? Thus if a hacker gains access, he will only get rotor blade secrets, not the whole design's.

    5. Re:Internet connection by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 4, Funny

      Why is information like this on computers that are connected to the internet?

      So that it can be leaked, justifying the costly production of a whole new generation of warmachines.

      Even better, now we don't have to violate export restrictions in order to request cut-rate second source versions of annoyingly expensive gear! Never mind the communists, feel the everyday low prices!

    6. Re:Internet connection by tnk1 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Thing is... a lot of this is about performance. If they create, say, a fighter with the performance of the F-35, then it's a real problem.

      Granted, I do remember there being (supposedly) faulty plans during the Cold War that we intentionally allowed the Soviets to get, and when they used it in their pipelines, there were some catastrophic accidents.

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

    7. Re: Internet connection by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 2

      The Chinese stole it off one of the classified networks (like SIPRNet), which the DoD has known to be compromised for quite some time.

      You got a citation for that? Seems to me that if true, that information itself would be classified.

      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
    8. Re:Internet connection by cold+fjord · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Why is information like this on computers that are connected to the internet?

      So that it can be leaked, justifying the costly production of a whole new generation of warmachines.

      Because it isn't like China, Russia, Iran, North Korea, or various other countries would want to upgrade their military independently of the US, for their own purposes. None of their weapons designers ever had an original idea, or were the first ones to make a concept actually work in a weapon. And having US weapons data means their could either use the data to incorporate the technology into their own weapons, or use it to defeat American weapons, but they'll never do either because apparently they are lazy, or stupid, or something. None of their weapons are dangerous to US weapons systems, at all.

      --
      much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
    9. Re:Internet connection by Andy+Dodd · · Score: 3, Informative

      The question is - was the information really that sensitive, or was it the stuff not sensitive enough to be considered classified?

      To get anything more sensitive than FOUO, these "hackers" would have had to physically infiltrate a facility, break NSA Type 1 crypto protocols (in which case the DoD would be shitting their pants), or compromise someone with access to such information.

      --
      retrorocket.o not found, launch anyway?
    10. Re: Internet connection by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      I'm a British nobody and I knew that. It was all over the news a couple of months ago. Here we are.

      Which demonstrates further that almost all classification is about hiding secrets from ones own citizens.

    11. Re:Internet connection by meglon · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Actually, if they create a fighter with the performance of the F-35, it wouldn't be a problem at all... as the F-35 is massively expensive http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2013/03/f-35-the-most-expensive-fighter-jet-ever-built/, taking years longer to develop http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-03-27/lockheed-s-troubled-f-35-said-to-be-unscathed-in-budget.html, and still can barely get off the ground http://www.defense-aerospace.com/article-view/feature/135080/f_35-reality-check-10-years-on-(part-1).html. It is a heaping pile of shith that we didn't need, and don't need, and may never get, and is sucking taxpayer money down like a drunk sailor in Subic bay.

      On the other hand, maybe, just maybe, Chinese ingenuity will come up with a way to keep the Osprey from falling out of the sky and killing people (something we can't seem to be able to do). Once they fix that little glitch, maybe we can steal the plans back.

      --
      Fascism: An authoritarian and nationalistic right-wing system of government and social organization. See also: NAZI's
    12. Re:Internet connection by Savage-Rabbit · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Thing is... a lot of this is about performance. If they create, say, a fighter with the performance of the F-35, then it's a real problem.

      Granted, I do remember there being (supposedly) faulty plans during the Cold War that we intentionally allowed the Soviets to get, and when they used it in their pipelines, there were some catastrophic accidents.

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

      There were all sorts of games like that going on. For example that famous wiretapping coup the CIA/MI6 scored in Berlin. When this operation was eventually discovered by two East German telephone technicians the Soviet KGB was apparently pretty pissed off, something about them knowing about the tunnel and some other Soviet security service (GRU?) exposing it because of lack of inter-service cooperation. Turns out the Soviets already had a mole in that wiretapping project, George Blake. Although the CIA/MI6 claim to this day all the information they got was genuine, that assessment is based on cold war analysis with only limited access to Soviet sources. The KGB archives are still closed so it's entirely possible the Ivans were having a barrel of fun making fake phone calls to spread disinformation or that they simply deemed the information that the CIA/MI6 were gathering was of so little value they did not want to risk blowing Blake's cover by exposing the operation.

      Another one of my favorites is a trio of German KGB recruits who borrowed a fully functional AIM-9 Sidewinder missile and drove the thing out of a NATO base in Germany. They stuck the thing into in the back of a Mercedes, only to discover it wouldn't fit so they bashed in the rear window, threw a blanket over the protruding missile and drove it through the German countryside. They then crated the thing up and sent it to Moscow via air freight (freight costs came to a grand total of $79.25) where there were smiles all around at the Vympel NPO missile design bureau. This missile became the basis of the second/third generation Soviet Air force heat seeking missiles (the K13M and its descendants IIRC).

      Good times...

      --
      Only to idiots, are orders laws.
      -- Henning von Tresckow
    13. Re:Internet connection by MightyYar · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Think about all of the people that have access to these drawings in electronic form. You have the designers, the testing folks, the documentation people, the people who approve changes, the entire manufacturing operation, and anyone with authority to oversee the project. If any of those people view the document on a compromised computer or themselves are compromised, the drawing is in the wild.

      And "compromised" does not necessarily mean "internet". And you don't even need a compromise - people make mistakes, systems are imperfect. Someone could toss a server or workstation in the trash, screwing up the wipe. A leased computer could go back without getting cleaned up. They could even accidentally wire up the "secure" computer to the LAN/WAN, wireless could accidentally be left on, USB ports left active, bluetooth, etc.

      Spying has been going on for a long, long time and is a very difficult problem to solve. Hell, even a compromised cleaning crew could snatch stuff.

      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
    14. Re: Internet connection by MightyYar · · Score: 4, Funny

      You got a citation for that?

      I bet Bradley Manning does.

      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
    15. Re:Internet connection by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Maybe that's the real reason for the leaks- so the US can buy cheaper Chinese knockoffs and save money ;).

    16. Re:Internet connection by ebno-10db · · Score: 4, Informative

      It makes sanctions, import tariffs and laws like the Patriot Act II much easier to enable.

      How can you possibly equate tariffs w/ Patriot Act N? Last time I checked the federal government clearly has the power to levy tariffs, and in the last 200+ years nobody has come up with a decent argument for how they interfere w/ civil liberties. By contrast Patriot Act N is another step in turning that troublesome Bill of Rights into toilet paper.

    17. Re:Internet connection by gtall · · Score: 2

      Yes, but if you read the article, it isn't the Pentagon that's the problem. The problem is the defense contractors, those paradigms of free enterprise the conservative republicans are always honking on about. It seems they've been caught with their pants down.

      Now, one might argue they just managed to cost the American taxpayers billions. Do we see the conservative republicans complaining about it. Nope.

      Just to be fair, the liberal democrats wouldn't recognize a defense industry secret if it danced naked in front of them and they wouldn't be caught dead caring...unless that secret was from a defense contractor in their district. Somehow national defense is at stake when that happens to a company in their district but can be ignored when it is in some other congress critter's district.

    18. Re:Internet connection by ebno-10db · · Score: 2

      Because it isn't like China, Russia, Iran, North Korea, or various other countries would want to upgrade their military independently of the US, for their own purposes. None of their weapons designers ever had an original idea, or were the first ones to make a concept actually work in a weapon.

      That's utterly irrelevant, unless you believe that the same things are true of the US. You're the one who is making a ridiculous assumption about the Chinese (etc.) military and defense contractors, specifically that they suffer from NIH. I doubt they're that stupid. The US wasn't when after VE day it grabbed as many German rocket scientists as it could. You know, the folks who, in addition to their direct or indirect contributions to US military capability, were responsible for the first US satellite getting into orbit and the Apollo missions getting to the moon.

    19. Re:Internet connection by some+old+guy · · Score: 5, Funny

      As former Navy man who spent many a fine night with the ladies of Olongapo / Subic Bay, representing our great nation with honor and dignity, I deeply resent being compared to the F-35.

      --
      Scruting the inscrutable for over 50 years.
    20. Re:Internet connection by JDG1980 · · Score: 2

      If the government were smart, they'd use Linux instead of Windows, and in addition, they'd make their own custom version of Linux.

      They already did that: SE Linux. Obviously, in this case, it didn't help. Very few security procedures work if they aren't followed. Besides, even if everyone in the government was doing this, how can we be sure what the contractors were doing?

    21. Re:Internet connection by dywolf · · Score: 3

      Dont need?

      Harriers are approaching end of life.
      F18s are getting old.
      A10s are going away.
      These aircraft no longer have new made parts, any replacements we use in the squadrons come from the boneyards, from aircraft set into storage specifically so they could be parts sources to keep planes flying while techs, young sailors and airmen, try to fix the defective parts themselves (the training program for the military aircraft maintenence squadrons is phenomenal, and puts any civilian tech school to shame).

      Your articles are bullspit and your post is ignorant.

      --
      The guy who said the election was rigged won the presidency with the second-most votes.
    22. Re:Internet connection by lgw · · Score: 2

      America banks entierly on better intel, computers and electronics.

      That's what wins air combat today - if there is some range where you can get missile lock and he can't, you win.

      More importantly, as everything moves to drones and electronic warfare moves to the forefront, airframe performance is barely going to matter. I'm far more worried about this leak (if real) because of what is says about the US vs China in terms of "intel, computers and electronics" than because of some potential F35 clone.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    23. Re:Internet connection by dragon-file · · Score: 3, Funny

      Thurs-vectored. a conjunction of Thursday Vectoring. Example: Using Thursday vectoring to make sure you approach your Fridays at the correct velocity and angle.

      --
      Whenever a player quits EVE to go play WoW, the Average IQ of both games increase.
    24. Re:Internet connection by Rich0 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Actually, if they create a fighter with the performance of the F-35, it wouldn't be a problem at all... as the F-35 is massively expensive

      When a fighter jet costs $150M/plane it usually means that the plane takes $10M in materials and labor to build, and $140M goes towards paying off the costs of designing the thing in the first place. It is really a $10M plane with a $1T design phase (or whatever the figure is).

      Somebody copying the plane only needs to pay the $10M/plane - they don't have to redesign the whole thing from scratch. I'm sure it won't cost them nothing to start from the US blueprints, but overall it will be WAY cheaper.

      taking years longer to develop

      Not an issue for China. They'll just wait until we're done, and then roll out the copies after a year or two of reverse-engineering. In the meantime nobody is flying the thing.

      and still can barely get off the ground.

      Also not an issue for China. They'll just wait until we figure out all the problems and then copy the design that actually works.

      Copying is WAY cheaper than inventing. Even if all they had as a photo of the thing it would be much cheaper. How many overall designs were tossed because using thrust vectoring vs a lift fan was an unclear design decision? The US has to spend hundreds of millions on prototypes and testing to figure out which design is better. The Chinese just have to see what we picked. If the whole VTOL design turns out to be impractical and gets canceled then they get the same data point that we get but for zero cost.

      Today it is easy to point out what the design of the space shuttle was bad, even without the blueprints. Anybody who is interested in submarines knows that a 7-blade propeller is much quieter than a 4-blade one, but for many years this was a closely guarded secret that just a glance at a propeller would have leaked.

      When you're doing something that has never been done before most of the cost is only incurred by the first person to have to figure it out. That's the price of innovation. Followers can always do it much cheaper.

  2. Or so they think... by WOOFYGOOFY · · Score: 2

    heh. heh.

    1. Re:Or so they think... by GameboyRMH · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Maybe it was a honeypot attack by the US. V-22 Osprey? Flying those could thin out the Chinese ranks pretty quick. And the Chinese military could bleed itself dry trying to build F-35s.

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
  3. allies? by dontfearthereaper · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I hope this opens people's eyes... The Chinese are NOT our allies, and it has been this way for years. Goes to show that the large corporations have more power in this country than the gubbmint and sheeple combined.

    1. Re:allies? by dontfearthereaper · · Score: 2

      Whether or not they try to make cheap knock-offs is one thing. The Chinese government learning the designs and having their military's R&D use whatever weaknesses they find in our systems to 1, circumvent our defenses, 2, figure out how to take control of these weapons systems and either shut them down or turn them on us, and 3 - sell the information to our enemies. Our country has enough problems without having the blueprint to our defenses on the black market. People fail to remember that the absurd strength of our military is meant to be a deterrent in itself. We've just been duped into being the world police as of late....

    2. Re:allies? by HeckRuler · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Wut? The Chinese are just trying to make a living. Most are minnow farmers moving to city factory jobs. They're developing a middle class and as whole are going through a lot of changes very quickly. We've been through that rodeo before and we can foresee some of the stresses and strain they're going to go through, but by and far populations like that can

      China, the country, and more specifically the government running the show, is an ally. But they're not an altruistic beacon of good. They're really just in the game to help themselves. Just like all of our other allies. Great Britian, France, Japan, the Saudi family, Iraq, they are our allies, but don't give the term too much weight. Once it suits their intrests to stab us in the back they will. And, sadly, we would do the same. Because this isn't some utopian fantasy land where everyone plays nice. It's a competative game where we can increase our score by working together, so we do, for now. They're allies the same way that Wall Street, Hollywood, Monsanto, Texas, and Silicon Valley are our "allies". Sure, they're ostensibly working on our side, under our rules (mostly), and we get goods and taxes out of them (sometimes). But they're not in it for our own well being. They want cash and power. They have their own agenda and plans. We all do. And those fuckers on Wall Street have taken the whole economy hostage and demanded free money to clean up their shit.

      But yeah, some of our allies would suffer more if we got pissed at them. Those are closer allies than others. China isn't that close of an ally.

    3. Re:allies? by prefec2 · · Score: 2

      First, this is not suffice to discard them as allies (even though they are not). The USA was and is spying in Europe for various reasons including industry espionage, but they are still counted as allies by, let say France or Germany. Second, the USA is spying all around the world. Not only to murder suspects and protect its international position as overlords ehm I means, last remaining super-power and worlds policemen, but also for industrial purposes, like stealing technology or stealing trade secrets. Third, it has been reported that other nations do so as well.

      I think this furor is totally overstated.

  4. Okay, who's the moron? by patchouly · · Score: 5, Interesting

    What moron thought to himself that having sensitive blue prints to highly classified military equipment was best stored on a computer with Internet access?

    1. Re: Okay, who's the moron? by O('_')O_Bush · · Score: 2

      It wasn't otherwise the whole internet would have become classified. The Chinese stole it off one of the classified networks (like SIPRNet), which the DoD has known to be compromised for quite some time. Because of this, really sensitive things aren't kept on it.

      --
      while(1) attack(People.Sandy);
    2. Re:Okay, who's the moron? by camperdave · · Score: 2

      Who says they were on the internet? Maybe someone left their laptop at their local Lucky Dragon restaurant.

      --
      When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
  5. Joke's on them. by seven+of+five · · Score: 5, Funny

    The designs are in English.

    1. Re:Joke's on them. by Sez+Zero · · Score: 4, Funny

      The designs are in English.

      Not only that, but I hear the designs don't even use metric measurements. Good luck figuring them out!

    2. Re:Joke's on them. by Solandri · · Score: 3, Interesting

      That's actually been a factor before. The Soviets copied the B-29 to make the Tu-4. One of the enormous engineering difficulties they faced was that the specs were all in imperial units. They couldn't just substitute the closest metric equivalent. They had to test each and every part to see if a slightly smaller metric piece would be strong enough, or if they needed to use a slightly bigger metric part to achieve the necessary strength.

  6. All part of our diabolical plan... by msauve · · Score: 3, Insightful

    now let them build what's in those plans, and go into perpetual national debt, crippling their economy, too!

    --
    "National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
    1. Re:All part of our diabolical plan... by msauve · · Score: 3, Informative

      No, not defense spending. US military spending, which despite the Orwellian terminology used to describe it, has been predominately offensive in the past decade. The US spends about 4.8% of GDP on military spending, more than double the next largest (China), with about 2%.

      The US spends about 20% GDP on social programs (from here) - below the OECD member average.

      --
      "National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
  7. Re:Sooo . . . by camperdave · · Score: 3, Funny

    Now the Chinese government too can sink untold amounts of money on ultra-expensive gear? :P

    Not only that, but the plans call for Made In America(TM) parts, so this will boost the US economy.

    --
    When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
  8. Design != manufacture capability by intermodal · · Score: 5, Interesting

    China can steal all the designs they want, but without successfully implementing the designs, I'm honestly not that concerned. In the 1970s, China managed to kludge together a weak clone of Boeing's 20+-year-old 707, powered by what are believed to have been spare 707 engines. If you think China can manage to cobble together some F-35s that will be worth the effort, or some F/A-18s that can match US spec, you need to understand that it's easier and probably more cost-effective to place orders with Sukhoi Design Bureau for something that actually works than it is to duplicate the processes needed to actually create the American aircraft mentioned above.

    China doesn't have the best track record in building designs stolen aerospace designs from other countries, and has found better success in getting people to willingly hand them the capabilities and processes. China's MD-80 license production and the assistance they got from McDonnell-Douglas is the biggest factor in their current aerospace pushes being at least semi-feasible.

    --
    In SOVIET RUSSIA... erm...NSA AMERICA, the Internet logs onto YOU!
    1. Re:Design != manufacture capability by kbonin · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yes, but manufacturing processes are often also obtainable documents. Any company who has set up good process control around their manufacturing lines has probably documented almost if not everything needed to recreate their subset of the secret sauce. Due to subcontracting these constitute a more distributed set of targets, and probably have local IT staff better capable of locking down their small networks than a megacorp oursourcing model would, but its probably all still there...

    2. Re:Design != manufacture capability by aaaaaaargh! · · Score: 2

      North Korea buys from China. Are you scared now?

      Because North Korea so totally has the ability to build F-35 clones...

  9. Cheap F-35s! by splutty · · Score: 5, Funny

    This is all a conspiracy by the US government. They *say* they got hacked and the designs got stolen, but we all know that sneakilly they've just given them all to the Chinese.

    The reason for this is of course obvious: The Chinese can make these things much cheaper! So it's all about savings!

    (If you think this might be something with tongues and cheeks, you might possibly be somewhat right)

    --
    Coz eternity my friend, is a long *ing time.
    1. Re:Cheap F-35s! by serviscope_minor · · Score: 2

      The reason for this is of course obvious: The Chinese can make these things much cheaper!

      Yeah, but it would just be cheap knockoff crap that does weird things like flip upside down when it crosses the international date line.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
  10. What's the chance that this was intentional? by RogueWarrior65 · · Score: 2

    So here's a question: What if the leaking of these designs was intentional? There could be several motivations for doing this. One, maybe these aren't the actual designs and they are flawed in some subtle yet crucial way or perhaps multiple ways. Two, they aren't the actual designs but the goal was to lure the hackers in to determine their methods. Or three, that some peacenik thought that it was unfair that the US has all the cool toys and are attempting to achieve whirled peas by way of leveling the playing field.

  11. Re:Pwned by PolygamousRanchKid+ · · Score: 2

    So how was the Washington Post able to get a copy of the Confidential report from the Defense Science Board?

    . . . the Justice Department will obtain all the phone records and emails from Washington Post employees to find out . . .

    --
    Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
  12. For some lulz by sl4shd0rk · · Score: 2

    Now, put some new plans on the cracked network titled 'Top Secret: Strategic F17A Propulsion Update.doc' in which the engines are installed backwards, right in line with the fuel tanks. Wait for youtube vids.

    --
    Join the Slashcott! Feb 10 thru Feb 17!
  13. Most advanced? by Nidi62 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Patriot Missile: In service since 1981

    Aegis: In development since the 1980s, first test 1999

    F/A-18: Introduced in service in 1983

    V-22:First flew in 1989, entered service 2007, was unreliable for several years after that. It took us over 20 years to fully develop it

    Black Hawk: Introduced 1979

    F-35: An expensive piece of crap that can do a lot of different things not so well (a couple gems from a 2011 Pentagon study: The fuel dump subsystem poses a fire hazard, The airframe is unlikely to last through the required lifespan, The aircraft is in danger of going overweight or, for the F-35B, not properly balanced for VTOL operations, There are multiple thermal management problems. The air conditioner fails to keep the pilot and controls cool enough, the roll posts on the F-35B overheat, and using the afterburner damages the aircraft.) Would be a waste of money to try and reproduce.

    I am 26 years old, and most of these systems were in development or introduced before I was born. The 2 most recent technologies have been fraught with problems in development, production, and deployment. Maybe they should just go ahead and give the Chinese the F-22 plans as well, so half of their pilots will asphyxiate. I'm not worried about the Chinese gaining access to equipment that has been in use for decades: once something is out in the open and being used in combat/training operations, their capabilities are easily discerned and easy to copy. I would be more concerned if they got access to anything in development that we don't know about, the stuff the government is working on that they haven't revealed.

    --
    The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
    1. Re:Most advanced? by Actually,+I+do+RTFA · · Score: 2

      V-22:First flew in 1989, entered service 2007, was unreliable for several years after that. It took us over 20 years to fully develop it

      You seem to think that the plans are somehow the first drafts created in 1989, as opposed to the versions created in 2007. If that's the case, not only did they get the plans for a warplane, but also the end result of an 18-year R&D project. The worst-case isn't that they can build the V-22. It's that the plans illustrate some principle/solution they haven't discovered that's preventing them from building their latest-and-greatest weapons system. And what they started in 2008 skips the 18-years of R&D and jumps straight into production.

      . I'm not worried about the Chinese gaining access to equipment that has been in use for decades: once something is out in the open and being used in combat/training operations, their capabilities are easily discerned and easy to copy.

      It's not like the military doesn't take great pains to ensure that they don't use systems to the absolute limit, so that it's hard to observe their characteristics. And it certainly isn't like knowing what the practical limits are doesn't give you a blueprint for reproducing it. Look, a lot of things are easy to describe and hard to do. For instance, a hyper-sonic jet (Mach 5+). Is the hard part the specification: must go Mach 5+? No, it's actually building the damn thing, and dealing with all the little issues.

      I am 26 years old

      Let me offer an analogy from something you have experienced: Iron Man (the first movie). Observing the specs is what Obadiah does. It works pretty well. But if he had the blueprints, he would have seen the change commented "icing solution", and would have known a) that he had to fix that, and b) one solution

      --
      Your ad here. Ask me how!
  14. This explains the constant delays of such projects by wvmarle · · Score: 3, Funny

    If you keep on losing the design drawings, then no wonder they're running into delays! They really should be keeping copies of them, so in case someone steals the originals, they don't have to draw them all over again.

  15. Consequence of outsourcing IT and development... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Big companies tend to misclassify IT as a cost center, and apply brilliant programs like Six Sigma and Virtual Workforces to cut expenses. I've seen plenty of dangerously unqualified people assigned to set firewall and router rules on networks that contain corporate crown jewels, or open NAT paths to offshore contracting houses brought in to help make a schedule after attrition and 'rightsizing' have made it impossible to stick to the schedule handed down from above.

    In the old days this stuff would be kept on airgapped networks. Today we have 'globalized workforces' and companies are run by MBAs who don't really understand or care about things the military does. Patriotism? Doesn't appear in my mission statement...

    Posted as AC as I work for a figurehead of this problem, and waste time keeping networks I'm responsible for clear of the APTs I see continually from other parts of the companies network that NOBODY wants to talk about. You can get fired for pointing out they've cut the budgets too far. So frustrating...

  16. But it was by dutchwhizzman · · Score: 2

    These plans are littered all over the world. Every supplier of even a single part has lots of specifications and details of parts they have to interact with on their systems. If you hack just a few of those, you essentially get all the plans you need to build your own, or to find the weak spots in the design and adapt your own weapons on that. DOD may not have these plans on computers that are connected to the internet, but most suppliers do. It's a public secret these are the companies that get hacked and that is the way the plans get leaked or stolen.

    --
    I was promised a flying car. Where is my flying car?
  17. this all smacks of politics. by nimbius · · Score: 4, Interesting

    while other agencies are struggling to react to the sequester, the pentagon has clearly seen the benefit of using sensationalism, fear, uncertainty, and doubt to secure its funding.

    the DoD keeps the red-menace ready to repackage and sell at a moments notice for good reason. Recently the president vocally and publically criticized the 'war on terror' and his intent to close guantanamo bay. for whatever thats worth to us its apparently enough to get the DoD to shuffle aside its 'terrorist' brand for a 'communist' model in the congressional windowsill. add a dash of "cyber" and a pinch of "hacker" and bobs your uncle, bills start to de-emphasize defence cuts a little more each week.

    to dial back the crazy just a bit on this article its worth putting our interation with the chinese into perspective. we've schitzophrenically insisted china is both a major international trade partner as well as some sort of enemy communist nation. we're more than willing to buy practically every major modern convenience from toothpaste to cellphones without a concern for safety or security, however strangely enough we're also willing to denigrate and lambast the country on everything from civil rights, to working conditions. We are a walking contradiction of 80's cold war rhetoric and modern day milton friedman hand-over-fist greed that somehow has managed for thirty years to avoid the uncomfortable truth that china is in actuality a capitalist dictatorship.

    what the DoD doesnt exactly recommend is the precise thing that would secure us from this manufactured menace: reduce the amount of off-shored and outsourced manufacturing to China.

    --
    Good people go to bed earlier.
    1. Re:this all smacks of politics. by ebno-10db · · Score: 2

      what the DoD doesnt exactly recommend is the precise thing that would secure us from this manufactured menace: reduce the amount of off-shored and outsourced manufacturing to China.

      The DoD has nothing more powerful than nuclear weapons, but the outsourcers are listed on the stock exchanges.

  18. England v. Washington by Bob9113 · · Score: 2

    I can't help but get an image of the English soldiers in the American Revolution, standing out in the field in ranks, getting shot by George Washingtons troops, thinking, "WTF, man, you're not allowed to hide behind stuff!" Washington thinking, "Well, yeah, but... we're winning."

    American diplomats in China saying, "Like, what the fuck, guys? We're not at war, why are you stealing our stuff?" Chinese guy just completely baffled thinking, "Ummm, because we're trying to win? You fuckers have been twisting our nuts in a global economic vise for half a century because you can't get over your own propaganda from the 1950s, and you don't get what we're doing? Idiots."

    Strip away the right/wrong of it and just look at the realpolitik, it's kind of funny.

  19. Disinformation by Zamphatta · · Score: 2

    I can't help but wonder if this is all just disinformation. See, it would be to the U.S's great advantage to let the Chinese steal stuff & make them think that what they're stealing is genuine. Why else would they actually go public about something like this? Why would they want to admit publicly that this was real, when they redact so many less sensitive things in FOIA requests? This is either warmongering or an attempt to convince the spies that something extremely valuable was really stolen, and I highly doubt the U.S. military is interested in going to war against China.

  20. Re:Act of war. by nedlohs · · Score: 2

    Because the world would be one big radioactive crater if each and every act of espionage was treated as an "ok then war it is" moment.

  21. I deal with this everyday by EW87 · · Score: 2

    I have several clients that are architectural firms, and weekly there is a new chinese rootkit trying to get into the system. They bury themselves into AutoCAD files and steal all drawing and design data and send it back to China. It's such a headache.

  22. Re:Act of war. by JDG1980 · · Score: 2

    Sounds like an act of war. Why are we not fighting the Chinese yet?

    All countries spy on each other, all the time. If this were considered a valid reason to start a shooting war, the entire planet would be a glowing, smoking crater.

  23. Only the dead have seen the end of war by XcepticZP · · Score: 2

    Can't we just have peace? I'm really really tired of having this constant looming cloud of impending war. Is peace really too much to ask for? I understand most countries have political problems, I understand we have economic ones.

    But moving into my prime years, and thinking about the long term well being of myself and the ones I love is really causing me to look passed all the details. I couldn't care less if the Chinese have some fancy toys, i couldn't care less if some ass hole across the world beats his chest and threatens the rest of us, I couldn't care less if some ass-backward country doesn't have ALL the human rights the rest of us enjoy. Just leave it alone, and don't involve yourselves with them; to hell with globalization. Quit being patriotic, quit thinking you have to police the world, quit meddling with all of our lives.

    You all do realize that if any sort of conflict between two super-powers erupts, the entire world will be severely involved and/or affected? If such a thing happens, we're all royally screwed. There would be no hiding from it, no economic shelter, nothing. Please, think about that the next time you want to "support the troops", or complain about other governments' actions like a lot of people are on this thread. Nip this war-talk in the bud. That applies to the other side as well; it applies to all sides.

    </incoherent_rant>

    "Only the dead have seen the end of war" - Plato