Slashdot Mirror


China Criticizes US For Making Weapon Plans Steal-able, Alleges Attacks From US

Etherwalk writes "Huang Chengqing, China's top internet security official, alleged that cyberattacks on China from people in the U.S. are as serious as those from China on the U.S. 'We have mountains of data, if we wanted to accuse the U.S., but it's not helpful in solving the problem.' Huang, however, does not necessarily attribute them to the U.S. government just because they came from U.S. soil, and he thinks Washington should extend the same courtesy. 'They advocated cases that they never let us know about. Some cases can be addressed if they had talked to us, why not let us know? It is not a constructive train of thought to solve problems.' In response to the recent theft of U.S. military designs, he replied with an observation whose obviousness is worthy of Captain Hammer: 'Even following the general principle of secret-keeping, it should not have been linked to the Internet.'" A few experts think China's more cooperative attitude has come about precisely because the U.S. government has gone public with hacking allegations.

138 of 209 comments (clear)

  1. Oh FFS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "This is what I was wearing when China stole my weapons schematics. Tell me I asked for it."

    Fuck off with your victim blaming, China. Pricks.

    1. Re:Oh FFS by hawguy · · Score: 1, Troll

      "This is what I was wearing when China stole my weapons schematics. Tell me I asked for it."

      Fuck off with your victim blaming, China. Pricks.

      Sometimes blaming the victim is warranted. If I park my Ferrari in a bad part of town with the windows open and a buck full of cash on the front seat, I don't have much room to complain when someone steals the cash (and maybe the car).

      Likewise, if I have top secret military blueprints that not even an average US citizen is allowed to view, if I don't lock up the data securely, then I really shouldn't whine when someone steals it. I knew the data was valuable, I knew people would want to steal it, so I should have locked it up more securely and the data certainly shouldn't have been available through the internet. Why wasn't the data air-gapped away from the public internet?

    2. Re:Oh FFS by nhat11 · · Score: 2

      Still doesn't justify stealing it.

    3. Re:Oh FFS by skywire · · Score: 4, Insightful

      They didn't steal it; they copied it.

      --
      Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.
    4. Re:Oh FFS by Sique · · Score: 1

      If they copied it, the original would still be there.

      --
      .sig: Sique *sigh*
    5. Re:Oh FFS by hawguy · · Score: 2

      Still doesn't justify stealing it.

      Entire divisions of intelligence agencies are devoted to stealing secrets from other countries (including "friendly" countries and allies). If the data was readily available, they wouldn't be doing their jobs if they ignored it.

      Or are you advocating disbanding all foreign intelligence agencies because no one should be "stealing" any data that's not been made public through official channels?

    6. Re:Oh FFS by naoursla · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You have lots of room to complain. If you take away the expectation to complain it give criminals an excuse to commit the crime.

      If you saw a Ferrari parked somewhere with a bunch of cash in the front seat, would YOU feel okay stealing it or the car? I would hope not. Stealing is wrong regardless of how easy it is. Why do you give others a pass for something you wouldn't do?

    7. Re:Oh FFS by LordLimecat · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The world is complex enough that multiple people can be at fault. If the Ferrari gets broken into, you are at fault for being naieve and foolish, and the thief is at fault for being a leech on society.

      Who gets the blame? Both of them. Is the thief the bigger part of the problem? Sure he is, and the largest portion of the blame goes to him. But you still are responsible insofar as your foolishness left you wide open to being victimized and creating an opportunity for a crime that any reasonable individual could have predicted.

    8. Re:Oh FFS by NatasRevol · · Score: 2

      You can complain all you want.

      It's still fucking stupid to park the car there.

      Someone is going to steal the car. Right or wrong has nothing to do with it.

      --
      There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
    9. Re:Oh FFS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Still doesn't justify stealing it.

      He didn't say a thing about justification. Jesus h Christ man, did you not even read what the hell he said?

    10. Re:Oh FFS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Entire divisions of intelligence agencies are devoted to stealing secrets from other countries (including "friendly" countries and allies). If the data was readily available, they wouldn't be doing their jobs if they ignored it.

      Very true. However they're not supposed to get caught doing it. That's historically been considered a casus belli.

    11. Re:Oh FFS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Blaming the victim does not absolve the perpetrator. I don't understand why people think that blaming the victim in any way justifies the crime.

      Guilt is not some finite quantity that must be taken away from one party in order to be applied to another.

      The perpetrator is still just as guilty whether the victim was asking for it or not. But the victim is also guilty of something (negligence, for example) if the victim was asking for it. nothing is justified, both are 100% guilty, of different things.

    12. Re:Oh FFS by losfromla · · Score: 1

      Furthermore, if the rich prick is in a bad part part of town, he's either slumming behind his wife's back, or snorting crack(yes I know, unusual but we already know he's a moron for leaving his windows down and cash in the car), so he deserves whatever he gets. Worse he could be a slumlord visiting his victims which means not only should you steal his car, you should beat his ass, steal his keys and empty his house.

      --
      Only I can judge you.
    13. Re:Oh FFS by hawguy · · Score: 1

      They obviously have far too much cash, if they leave it lying about like that. Perhaps they will learn not to keep cash in their front seat.

      What if the cash was used to buy bread for my starving family? not so easy of a choice now is it.

      What if the stolen secrets are to be used to protect against an unjustified attack against their country? Still not so easy of a choice.

      People can come up with all sorts of justifications for stealing things - I suppose whether or not they are valid justifications depends on which side of the fence you're on.

    14. Re:Oh FFS by mjwalshe · · Score: 1

      obviously America was wearing a mini skirt and stripper heels and hanging out in sleazy bars obviously asking for it :-)

    15. Re:Oh FFS by clonehappy · · Score: 1

      What the hell has happened to the Slashdot that I once knew and loved? Someone posts something which is common sense and it gets modded down to -1, Troll? Of course, we SHOULD be able to leave a pile of cash sitting around unguarded, but everyone knows you can't. Just like everyone knows if something is on the Internet, unsecured, someone is going to access it.

      So, when someone accesses some private information by changing a URL or some other trivial means, it's OK to blame the victim, as everyone on here does. But someone steals from the loving, mother government, they should be hanged from the highest tree in town, correct?

    16. Re:Oh FFS by Intropy · · Score: 1

      I agree, but I think that the blame associated with each individual is also qualitatively different. The owner's blame is related to his good judgment in a practical matter. He didn't think things through or didn't take obvious actions that could have drastically reduced the chances of the loss. But the thief's blame is moral. He took explicit immoral actions that directly harmed another. They both have characteristics in common and fit the word "blame," but there is a real distinction between the cases beyond just a matter of degree.

      I wonder if other languages use different words for these two concepts.

    17. Re:Oh FFS by gr8_phk · · Score: 1

      Still doesn't justify stealing it.

      How naive. We're talking about government espionage. You know, stuff governments do. The reason you don't hear foreign countries talking about the US stealing military tech secrets is because at the moment our stuff is better than anyone elses. But we did hear about Stuxnet. China has been playing catch-up for a while now and they've made tons of progress - by innovating, buying, copying, and probably by stealing. When you're inventing you have no choice. When you're playing catch-up you have all these other options to get there faster, and with over a billion people someone is going to try each of those options.

      They are correct. And should some country or group that hates the US cause major havoc because critical infrastructure is connected to the internet what is your response going to be? that's not fair? How about if you're dead and they're not? Then what's your response? You gonna cry foul?

      Unfortunately international relations aren't just a game played by some rule book. It's for real in a world of limited resources, and when all else fails we actually resort to military force and fucking kill people. That's why every country has an army. In such a world espionage is a reality and your sensitive shit has no business being attached to the internet no mater how much software security you put in front of it. There is also the possibility that they got exactly what someone wanted them to get - remember that Russian pipeline explosion? Gotta be careful when you steal secrets...

    18. Re:Oh FFS by LateArthurDent · · Score: 1

      If you saw a Ferrari parked somewhere with a bunch of cash in the front seat, would YOU feel okay stealing it or the car? I would hope not. Stealing is wrong regardless of how easy it is. Why do you give others a pass for something you wouldn't do?

      I would not. That said, if you parked that Ferrari with the windows rolled down and the cash in the front seat, would you expect your insurance company to cover the theft?

      The actions of the victim don't justify the crime, but the mere fact that they are victims don't absolve them of responsibility for their actions.

    19. Re:Oh FFS by hawguy · · Score: 1

      Entire divisions of intelligence agencies are devoted to stealing secrets from other countries (including "friendly" countries and allies). If the data was readily available, they wouldn't be doing their jobs if they ignored it.

      Very true. However they're not supposed to get caught doing it. That's historically been considered a casus belli.

      I don't believe anyone has been "caught" - the thefts may have been traced back to Chinese IP addresses, but everyone here knows that the source IP address of an attack means nothing (despite what RIAA may tell the courts). And even if it was a Chinese citizen that executed the attack(s), in a country of a billion people, it's hard to prove that it was an officially sanctioned theft.

    20. Re:Oh FFS by hawguy · · Score: 2

      Depends on the neighborhood...

      The data was stolen through the internet -- the worst neighborhood imaginable.

    21. Re:Oh FFS by tibman · · Score: 1

      The copied Ferrari is improved and one day they both meet in an intentional head-on collision. The copied version wins and the original Ferrari's owner is left dead on the side of the road. The owner of the copied Ferrari moves into the original's house, eats all the food, leaves dirty dishes and clothes everywhere, and then leaves when he's tired of the place. There was no one left alive who could stop him.

      --
      http://soylentnews.org/~tibman
    22. Re:Oh FFS by flayzernax · · Score: 1

      No she was in a drug induced coma bent over a park bench where prostitutes work with cum dripping out of her well used vagina. And some homeless guy walked by and just plugged her. Were not sure who that homeless guy was but he had a shirt with the Chinese flag on.

    23. Re:Oh FFS by flayzernax · · Score: 1

      By the way the coma was self induced.

    24. Re:Oh FFS by s.petry · · Score: 1

      I have seen a similar trend lately, where comments questioning or blaming our Government are modded troll or flamebait. Dice has been infiltrated so /. is no longer safe? Either that, or shitty people have been getting mod points at which Dice should remove them from the receipt list.

      --

      -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

    25. Re:Oh FFS by quenda · · Score: 1

      In this case, the guy with the Ferrari has been stealing money from the druggies.

      China's top Internet security official says he has "mountains of data" pointing to extensive U.S. hacking aimed at China

      and their source is reliable - they got the evidence directly from the NSA computers.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spy_vs._Spy

    26. Re:Oh FFS by arkane1234 · · Score: 1

      theft is still theft.

      --
      -- This space for lease, low setup fee, inquire within!
    27. Re:Oh FFS by NFN_NLN · · Score: 1

      Furthermore, if the rich prick is in a bad part part of town, he's either slumming behind his wife's back, or snorting crack...

      Even people, literally ON DRUGS, don't snort crack. You smoke crack and you snort cocaine.

      Unless you were referring to the slumee's crack as a new type of sexual fetish... in which case carry-on.

    28. Re:Oh FFS by losfromla · · Score: 1

      A friend's uncle (way back in the day) actually did snort crack, just once. You just haven't had exposure to a varied enough segment of the population, apparently. Also, you must have missed my parenthetical statement that started with "yes I know, unusual..."

      --
      Only I can judge you.
    29. Re:Oh FFS by DMJC · · Score: 1

      Actually I'm paying you to build my weapons and defend me with them. I'm also paying you to keep those weapons locked up away from my enemies. When my enemies steal my weapons you get fired. That's the better analogy. Only we can't easily fire the government ven when they're being grossly incompetent which is what's happening. The government should be doing their job better.

    30. Re:Oh FFS by khallow · · Score: 1

      I have seen a similar trend lately, where comments questioning or blaming our Government are modded troll or flamebait.

      Let me guess. "Our government" is the US, right?

      I'm surprised it's taken so long. There have been many articles about China or other relatively unpopular governments over the years and it seems to me that almost every one of those stories has in the comments an anti-US bash in it, often coupled with the claim that somehow the US is equivalent in behavior.

      So you think this downmodding is a result of some insidious groupthink. I think rather that it's that enough moderators have gotten sick and tired of the pollution.

    31. Re:Oh FFS by khallow · · Score: 1

      And anyone willing to get in a shooting war with China over espionage can manufacture whatever pretext they need.

    32. Re:Oh FFS by NatasRevol · · Score: 1

      Then why was this on the public internet?

      --
      There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
    33. Re:Oh FFS by s.petry · · Score: 1

      By your reasoning then, there should be no issues when a Russian or Chines person gets censored by their government. There should be no issues with governments pulling phone records to silence dissent, or Twitter records, or anything else that would allow them to silence dissent.

      The truth however, is that you most likely do have issue with those things. You probably hold a double standard for your government because of either ignorance, or more likely being delusional. This is where I will plug Plato's Allegory of the Cave, knowing full well that you won't read it.

      The fact is that Governments do not improve without criticism for what they are doing wrong, and dialogue on how to make correction to better society. You can deny that the Government is trying to silence not only citizens, but any journalist that seeks to publish the truth. In doing so, you deny facts that are fully available for you to review. Denying facts to maintain a belief is delusion, and does not benefit society in any way.

      You may be happy in your delusion, but nothing improves while members of society live in something other than reality.

      As a side note, there is such a thing as trolling or flaiming when it comes to political discussion. If the person had called a politician a name in ad-hominem, I would agree that it's trolling or flaming. The person did not present an ad hominem attack, they pointed out a different opinion on results of US Political policies. Your reaction exactly matches a statement in "The Allegory of the Cave" by the way.

      --

      -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

    34. Re:Oh FFS by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      If my bank told me that all my money was stolen because they didn't lock the doors anymore because "people shouldn't steal", I'd still be angry with the bank, and not particularly with the robber, because if it wasn't them, it would have been someone else.

    35. Re:Oh FFS by khallow · · Score: 1

      By your reasoning

      "By your reasoning", invisible pink unicorns thrive on green moon cheese. Arguments are so much more interesting when you don't even remotely consider the other person's side of the argument.

      For your information, that is not my reasoning. The rest of your post is a complete waste of your time.

    36. Re:Oh FFS by s.petry · · Score: 1

      Awe, someone has a head hurt due to reality. Please stay in the cave you happy little slave.

      --

      -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

    37. Re:Oh FFS by khallow · · Score: 1

      Your words would sting, if you knew how to argue. When you start a discussion by making up stuff about what other people say and believe, you immediately become irrelevant

    38. Re:Oh FFS by khallow · · Score: 1

      This is where I will plug Plato's Allegory of the Cave, knowing full well that you won't read it.

      I already have. Here, the idea is that everyone is in a cave looking at shadows on the wall. Someone realizes, "hey, we're looking at shadows on a cave wall." I guess he then goes strolling out of the cave into the sunlight. It's supposed to be an allegory for how knowledge can enlighten us.

      But I see this story, as you use it now, as a fantasy to enforce your delusions. It also places more weight on the power of knowledge than it deserves. For the implementation of such knowledge is as important as the knowledge itself. For example, what would be the point of realizing you are in this allegorical cave, if say, you couldn't do anything about it? Watching shadows on the wall becomes the only game in town whether you're aware of it or not.

      Your reaction exactly matches a statement in "The Allegory of the Cave" by the way.

      You do realize that Plato was something of a dick, don't you? Of course, it's very similar because it's a response to the same sort of rhetorical games that are being played here. People get tired of these obsessed rants.

      Here, I, being trapped in the "Cave", can't determine if you have some special perception or knowledge. But I can see that you can't argue your way out of a paper bag unless you get to pick the paper bag ahead of time (here, your rant about my "delusions" and imaginary double standards rather than a discussion of the actual post I made). That indicates to me that you probably don't have any special grasp of reality or knowledge to share with me.

    39. Re:Oh FFS by s.petry · · Score: 1

      The thread is very easy to follow, you know. At no point was there an argument or debate. I stated that you were wrong and gave some rough facts and opinion to show how. Of course I also stated that you seemed to be rather delusional. Your claims of argument are good indicators that I am correct about you having delusions.

      An argument would require you to say something other than an ad hominem or denials. You provided no fact or opinion to counter any of my statements.

      I'd say "get well soon" or some such, but that would require that you actually want to leave the cave. As mentioned, I doubt you would read or attempt to understand the Allegory. I'll waste no more time on a trolling delusional person.

      --

      -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

  2. um? by etash · · Score: 1, Redundant

    Why are such important files internet accessible ? I mean that's security 101 for top secret stuff

    1. Re:um? by SJHillman · · Score: 5, Funny

      At least we're not Britain. I mean, seriously, what kind of permissions is 007 for a spy?

    2. Re:um? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      As long as the low-order bit is set, he has execute permission.

      What's the problem?

    3. Re:um? by camperdave · · Score: 4, Funny

      At least we're not Britain. I mean, seriously, what kind of permissions is 007 for a spy?

      Plausible deniability?

      --
      When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
    4. Re:um? by blane.bramble · · Score: 5, Funny

      Sounds like perfect ones to me - read, write and execute everyone except himself and his group.

    5. Re:um? by Nerdfest · · Score: 2

      Well, he does have execute permission for *everyone*.

    6. Re:um? by Z00L00K · · Score: 2

      The world is not enough.

      --
      If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
    7. Re:um? by chuckinator · · Score: 1

      That's a umask, not a permission.

    8. Re:um? by Etherwalk · · Score: 1

      At least we're not Britain. I mean, seriously, what kind of permissions is 007 for a spy?

      Plausible deniability?

      Plausible!!

      >cat .bash_history

      chmod 007 F22-plans-really-secret

    9. Re:um? by Intropy · · Score: 1

      Or is it everyone has permissions to execute him?

  3. Re:Blah blah blah by Shortguy881 · · Score: 1

    But it does put us in the midst of a second cold war

    --
    Brilliance without wisdom, power without conscience. Ours is a world of nuclear giants and ethical infants.
  4. Can't fault China on this one by Xest · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Whilst I'm not saying China doesn't do any state sponsored hacking I've pointed out before that China has the largest online population of any nation and has about 1/6th of the world's population. Statistically if you get non-state sponsored hackers in every nation it makes sense that you're going to see more from China than anywhere else.

    It's quite possible that it's nothing to do with the US "going public" and everything to do with the fact that a large number of hack attacks from China against the US is pretty much a statistical certainty regardless of state actors being behind it or not.

    I think all governments do state sponsored hacking, I certainly think China does, to what extent is unclear but I do think at least the claims against China are probably overhyped.

    Which may not inherently be a bad thing anyway though I guess if it gets Western firms to take security a bit more seriously so maybe there's a silver lining regardless.

    1. Re:Can't fault China on this one by c · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Statistically if you get non-state sponsored hackers in every nation it makes sense that you're going to see more from China than anywhere else.

      Yeah, but China has a firewall. Surely you're not suggesting that non-state sponsored Chinese hackers have figured out how to get around the national firewall?

      Heh... actually, that wouldn't be a bad official response. Puts the Chinese in the position of either accepting responsibility for hacking, or admitting that their state firewall is actually pretty porous.

      --
      Log in or piss off.
    2. Re:Can't fault China on this one by ranton · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Heh... actually, that wouldn't be a bad official response. Puts the Chinese in the position of either accepting responsibility for hacking, or admitting that their state firewall is actually pretty porous.

      I doubt they care very much that there firewall can be compromised by people skilled enough to hack into government and corporate computers. The main point of the firewall is to assert control over the general population.

      --
      -- All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. -- Edmund Burke
    3. Re:Can't fault China on this one by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Do you know what the "state firewall" is for?

      By your logic, even if it was a firewall its facing the wrong way (preventing OUTBOUND hack attempts).

      Its more a content filter, not really a "firewall".

    4. Re:Can't fault China on this one by fredprado · · Score: 1

      As there is no Chinese mafia, no crime, and nothing outside of the government's control. Please... We are talking about a country whose population is 1.3 billion people. Total control is impossible no matter how bully you are.

    5. Re:Can't fault China on this one by Zontar_Thing_From_Ve · · Score: 2

      Heh... actually, that wouldn't be a bad official response. Puts the Chinese in the position of either accepting responsibility for hacking, or admitting that their state firewall is actually pretty porous.

      Not really. They can do any of the following, including perhaps more than one of these.
      1) The Beavis and Butthead defense - "Those were some other kids, sir" meaning non-Chinese people leaving a trail pointing back to China to deflect blame to there.
      2) The Bart Simpson defense (denial) - "I didn't do it. Nobody saw me do it. You can't prove anything."
      3) "Evil Chinese hackers did do it and yes, they got around our precious firewall. But we won't admit it to our own citizens. That's for external knowledge only."
      4) "The Chinese military did it, but unfortunately they operate without our oversight." I guarantee you that no government person in the US or China wants that to be true. The Chinese military is a bit of a loose canon and the fear on the US side is that the civilian government in China may be not be as much in control of them as they would like. The Chinese government probably fears that they don't control them as much as they are supposed to either. The problem is that according to the Chinese constitution, the PLA (People's Liberation Army) swears allegiance not to China or the government but to the Chinese Communist Party. That's a really important distinction. The government is a subset of the CCP so in theory it could be possible that the government's interests could run counter to the CCP's interests if the CCP was under the control of some non-government whack job.

    6. Re:Can't fault China on this one by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      It's not that kind of firewall. It isn't design to keep stuff out or in, only to block people inside China from accessing certain foreign sites. There isn't one big server handling it all, they just require ISPs and search engines to implement the blocks for them.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    7. Re:Can't fault China on this one by dunkindave · · Score: 2

      China has implemented the Great Firewall of China, both to monitor and control their citizens, as well as to limit the ingress points into China (three major ones if my memory is right) so they can more easily monitor and cut the lines if attacked. Compare that to the United States which has so many major lines running into/out of the country that it would be nearly impossible to block an attack from outside (not that inside versus outside is truly a big difference). Since these attacks are coming from behind the firewall, and little or nothing is being done to stop them, it is easy to conclude that the government is choosing to allow them to happen. Compare this to the news stories of Chinese citizens being arrested, tried and executed for hacking internal Chinese companies.

      Now consider the philosophy difference between the Chinese and Americans, where the Chinese people are raised to believe they have a duty to perform actions to help their country. The government doesn't have to tell people to hack into systems in other countries to collect useful information (which they also do), they just have to make it known that the information is desirable, then not block the attempts by the "non-government" hackers (see my first paragraph). If a citizen later has come into possession of valuable information which they choose to share with the government, then they are just being a good citizen. We call it hacking, China calls it patriotism.

      So why does China now respond? Because they are walking a tightrope. They are seeing how far they can push things before it has an unacceptable consequence. That is also why I think we chose to speak up this time, because to always remain silent just lets China continue doing their antics with no real consequences. So why this time and not others? Because if you keep telling the attacker what you saw, and by implication what you didn't, you give him valuable information that can make him more effective and more stealthy.

      It may not be the classic form or war, but it follows a lot of the same rules. And because of the difference of philosophies, it is a somewhat asymmetric war.

    8. Re:Can't fault China on this one by sydneyfong · · Score: 1

      Surely you're not suggesting that non-state sponsored Chinese hackers have figured out how to get around the national firewall?

      Getting around the GFW is a national pastime.

      So, yes.

      --
      Don't quote me on this.
    9. Re:Can't fault China on this one by c · · Score: 1

      Ah, yeah, that was sarcasm. Everyone knows the GFW is crap in practice. But that fact that the government persists in using it implies that they might be a bit sensitive about being mocked by foreign governments about it...

      --
      Log in or piss off.
    10. Re:Can't fault China on this one by steelfood · · Score: 1

      Not to mention that "their" firewall is actually a set of regional firewalls with differing rules. And even the firewall with the strictest rules leak like a sieve.

      The purpose of the firewall (and associated software) is twofold: 1) to prevent casual encounters with subversive information and 2) to provide sufficient evidence on persons of interest for a conviction.

      The second purpose is actually largely the same as the monitoring situation in the U.S. The government isn't out to get you specifically, but if it is, then it has a ton of evidence it can use to send you to jail.

      --
      "If a nation expects to be ignorant and free in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be."
    11. Re:Can't fault China on this one by CHIT2ME · · Score: 1

      The silver lining in this could just be the old Trojan Horse. With all the Chinese hacking in the last decade, I refuse to believe that high tech companies just put their highly secret plans for planes, missiles, etc. out there to be easily plucked from the internet. It would be a good idea, though, to put plans with subtle well hidden flaws in them which would be disastrous to the Chinese if they just built a plane etc. straight from the stolen plans. We did this with the Soviet Union back in the cold war. What makes you believe we are not doing it now and using the hacks to track where they are coming from in China?

      --
      My karma is bad. Don't get too close!!!
    12. Re:Can't fault China on this one by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      The firewall is an inbound HTTP filter, nothing more. It isn't designed to stop outbound traffic. Why can something get to +5 insightful when it is factually incorrect and useless?

    13. Re:Can't fault China on this one by c · · Score: 1

      The firewall is an inbound HTTP filter, nothing more. It isn't designed to stop outbound traffic.

      I know. And it's not even a very good HTTP filter. That's not relevant.

      In the context of international relations, how (or even if) it works is irrelevant. In this context, we start from the assumption that it accomplishes the goals that the Chinese government publicly says it does, which is to control the Chinese portion of the Internet for the purposes of computer security, preventing dissemination of "illegal" information, etc.

      This makes the significance of the Chinese government blaming attacks on uncontrolled criminal elements operating from the Chinese network space a bit more interesting. Rather than the flat-out denial that one would normally expect from the sort of regime that gets pissy about appearances, it's an official admission that the Great Firewall pretty much can't stop those in China that really want to get around it.

      --
      Log in or piss off.
    14. Re:Can't fault China on this one by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      China has never claimed it was for security of systems. It's not even officially for tracking, though everyone unofficially assumes it does. It's officially for information filtering, with no "control" exerted over the unfiltered Internet. If we assume the firewall is perfect at doing its stated goal, it wouldn't stop or even log the attacks, in or out.

  5. Re:Blah blah blah by hawguy · · Score: 2

    Whatever, its not like its going to start WW3... moving on.

    If the Chinese use the data appropriately, it can stop WW3 from ever starting by giving them the chance to disable our defenses through software without firing a single shot. They just need to get a Chinese Jeff Goldblum to upload a virus to our mother ship with his Chinese made Macbook.

  6. Another Cold War Almost As Bad by ranton · · Score: 1

    It isn't likely that this would start a full out war, but it has the possibility of starting another cold war between the US and China. Not nearly as many lives are lost, except perhaps people dying in hospitals because the governments are spending more money on defense than on medicare.

    Even if all this rhetoric does is give both countries a reason to waste trillions on excessive defense spending, that is already pretty bad.

    --
    -- All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. -- Edmund Burke
    1. Re:Another Cold War Almost As Bad by dbIII · · Score: 1

      That's the wet dream of the people that made a fortune on things that never had to work in the last cold war, but they don't have the same lobbying pull as those that are making shitloads of money trading with China. I can't see it happening even if China starts getting agressive.

  7. Well someone has to be demonized. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    We've got a lot of more tech to buy and dollars to spend and need an enemy to justify it. The middle east isn't a viable technological terrorist...China is.

    So they are the new corner stone of the next Axis of Evil. I'm not saying China isn't trying to pentest our stuff. I'm sure they are, and we are reciprocating. I just know we are going to exagerate to subsidize the raytheon's and bae systems et al.

    1. Re:Well someone has to be demonized. by prefec2 · · Score: 1

      Yes, and they are not that menial that they can be overrun with the army, like Iraq. They are even better than the Russians, as they do not collapse after some decades. Instead they grow and they are big and they are investing in new weapons. All this allows to increase the military funds again. Who cares for health care or any other shit as long as we have BIG guns. Great!

  8. Economic collapse. by Ungrounded+Lightning · · Score: 1

    Whatever, its not like its going to start WW3... moving on.

    If relations sour enough that China stops rolling over and buying more US T-bills and starts selling off its holdings, the collapse of the Dollar will drastically exacerbate the US economic collapse. This could easily lead to a WW III situation.

    --
    Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
    1. Re:Economic collapse. by elsuperjefe · · Score: 2

      I don't think China's holdings have that kind of power. If they sell prices would fall, rates would rise. I suspect these events might entice additional demand from other investors causing prices to rise and rates to drop. Also, the U.S. economy is currently growing, not collapsing so there is currently nothing to exacerbate. I would hold off on the bomb shelter for now.

    2. Re:Economic collapse. by hawguy · · Score: 1

      I don't think China's holdings have that kind of power. If they sell prices would fall, rates would rise. I suspect these events might entice additional demand from other investors causing prices to rise and rates to drop. Also, the U.S. economy is currently growing, not collapsing so there is currently nothing to exacerbate. I would hold off on the bomb shelter for now.

      China "owns more about $1.2 trillion in bills, notes and bonds" -- so even if investors wanted to snap up China's holdings as they sell, they'd have to sell other holdings so it would still have a large effect on the world economy.

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

      If relations sour enough that China stops rolling over and buying more US T-bills and starts selling off its holdings

      You really think China is going to do us that favor? A declining dollar (China doesn't have enough Treasuries to crash it) would make our exports more competitive and improve our economy, while making their exports less competitive and destroy their economy. Why do you think China bought those Treasuries in the first place?

    4. Re:Economic collapse. by Ungrounded+Lightning · · Score: 1

      What makes you think a declining dollar is GOOD for us (except maybe for the government)?

        - It sucks the value out of anything you own that is denominated in dollars. That includes your savings, bonds, and contracted payments (insurance, pensions, wages/salaries).
        - It also sucks the value out of your investments that AREN'T denominated in dollars: When you finally liquidate them, the government includes the inflation component of the sale price as increased profit or decreased loss, and taxes it.

      Especially, inflation affects your wages or salary, which won't be inflated to compensate (and you'll fight just as hard for every cent of compensation you DO get as you would for a raise.) It's the lower payments to workers that CAUSE the "increased competitiveness" of the country's products.

      Sure the country's businesses sell more - for less actual value. They could have done that by lowering the price, instead, if the maximum profit for them and their workers was at the lower price. They don't need central planners second-guessing them, tilting the whole playing field, and using it as an excuse to rip off more value from the private sector - which means YOU - for the government's coffers.

      --
      Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
  9. I don't get this. by wcrowe · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I always thought it was a rule from Espionage 101 that you don't let the other side know when your side has been compromised. You use it as an opportunity to start sending out false information, and to learn their tactics and precisely who is involved. I don't understand why we are telling everyone in the world that the Chinese have stolen our information. It just makes us look inept in all sorts of ways.

    --
    Proverbs 21:19
    1. Re:I don't get this. by SuricouRaven · · Score: 4, Insightful

      To harm China diplomatically and economically. If they get a reputation for underhanded spy games then businesses will be more reluctant to do business there for fear of having their designs shamelessly copied and research stolen, and nations will be less willing to allow free trade if it is known that China seeks to favor domestic industry by impeding the operations of overseas competition.

    2. Re:I don't get this. by Maxo-Texas · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The problem with this position is that they have HAD a bad reputation for stealing IP for over 20 years now. And it hasn't changed anything.

      People still do business with them. People still ship designs and formulas to them to produce.

      What will reduce IP Theft is higher chinese labor costs which make local manufacturing a better solution than offshoring. And we've probably got another 8 years before chinese wages + fuel transportation costs == local labor costs.

      --
      She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
    3. Re:I don't get this. by erice · · Score: 2

      I always thought it was a rule from Espionage 101 that you don't let the other side know when your side has been compromised. You use it as an opportunity to start sending out false information, and to learn their tactics and precisely who is involved.>/p>

      I think this has already happened. They traced the attacks to a specific building in Shanghai operated by the Chinese military and learned a great deal about the operations taking place there.

      I don't understand why we are telling everyone in the world that the Chinese have stolen our information. It just makes us look inept in all sorts of ways.

      Probably because all the useful counter-espionage plays have been done. Now the biggest payoff is from using the information for political leverage.

    4. Re:I don't get this. by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1, Interesting

      It's to gain political currency. Make China out to be the bad guy, try to rally international sympathy for the US. Part of an ongoing narrative.

      The US loves bad guys. They justify spending and fear. The USSR fell apart, Iraq has been dealt with, Bin Laden is dead and his organization seems to be ineffectual these days. China is the new bad.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    5. Re:I don't get this. by rahvin112 · · Score: 2

      The problem with this position is that they have HAD a bad reputation for stealing IP for over 20 years now. And it hasn't changed anything.

      Hasn't changed anything? Are you insane. One small example is Russia won't sell the Chinese ANY advanced weapons. After the Chinese copied some older model Soviet weapons the Russians refused to sell them ANY advanced weapon systems. This little detail has crippled Chinese weapon advancement for more than a decade, and only recently after realizing they can't create the same 50 years of Russian innovation on their own they are only now at the point of a new arms deal with the Russians with guarantees that the designs will not be copied. Even with firm contractual guarantees the Russians are still not sure they want to execute the contract because they don't trust them. I'd wager the contract is about 50/50 that it will ever happen.

      Wholesale theft of IP has harmed China in almost as many ways as it has helped them and they have started to realize the damage they've done.

    6. Re:I don't get this. by DMUTPeregrine · · Score: 1

      They already got the plans for the F-35. That's a terrible plane that it a horrifically expensive money sink and under performs on almost every aspect.If we give them the F-22 plans too we can watch their pilots die from hypoxia!

      --
      Not a sentence!
    7. Re:I don't get this. by dj245 · · Score: 1

      The problem with this position is that they have HAD a bad reputation for stealing IP for over 20 years now. And it hasn't changed anything.

      Hasn't changed anything? Are you insane. One small example is Russia won't sell the Chinese ANY advanced weapons. After the Chinese copied some older model Soviet weapons the Russians refused to sell them ANY advanced weapon systems. This little detail has crippled Chinese weapon advancement for more than a decade, and only recently after realizing they can't create the same 50 years of Russian innovation on their own they are only now at the point of a new arms deal with the Russians with guarantees that the designs will not be copied. Even with firm contractual guarantees the Russians are still not sure they want to execute the contract because they don't trust them. I'd wager the contract is about 50/50 that it will ever happen.

      Wholesale theft of IP has harmed China in almost as many ways as it has helped them and they have started to realize the damage they've done.

      And yet companies keep coming back. Even Toshiba is giving IP to China for their latest design nuclear reactor. Toshiba, a company which obtained much of their steam turbine knowledge from licensing deals from GE in the 1970's and has come to have near-domination of new large steam turbines in the US. Toshiba took GE's steam turbine knowledge and used their weak currency to move in on the market. GE was seriously weakened in the steam turbine market from the IP deals, and has nearly given up trying to sell new steam turbines. Toshiba knows this history well, and yet they repeat it. The allure of a market of a billion people is too strong. Executives will always hop on these licensing deals for quick cash. By the time it all crashes down the executive has moved on or moved up.

      Even if a company learns their lesson, there will always be another company to step into their place for a quick buck. Even if they are selling China the rope which will be used to hang them.

      The only blowback from China's policies I see is that their quality is known to be suspect. I see plenty of specs which specifically require that NO parts come from China. Full stop. Chinese supply used to be acceptable if the factory was certified, inspected, etc., but corruption is so rampant that these papers are known to mean nothing now. By the time you do your diligence and make sure that the factory is OK, you might as well have bought from a more reliable country. And you still can't be 100% sure that the chinese part is OK since they might completely change as soon as you are satisfied with your samples and the inspector is out the door.

      --
      Even those who arrange and design shrubberies are under considerable economic stress at this period in history.
    8. Re:I don't get this. by ebno-10db · · Score: 1

      I see plenty of specs which specifically require that NO parts come from China.

      Specs for what kind of stuff? I'm curious.

    9. Re:I don't get this. by steelfood · · Score: 1

      In 8 years, China will be shipping their designs out to Africa.

      Not that it matters. China will always have a ton more people than the U.S. They will always have a collective competitive advantage, if only because of economies of scale.

      --
      "If a nation expects to be ignorant and free in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be."
  10. VPN by MotoRyan · · Score: 2

    Also, how do we know that the IP address from the US is not just a VPN endpoint?

  11. China acting responsibly by skywire · · Score: 1

    Any nation-state that does no espionage is irresponsible. They all do it. It's a game, and someone on the US side made a poor move.

    --
    Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.
    1. Re:China acting responsibly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      It's a propaganda move, it has nothing to do with responsibility.

      It's all about reinforcing the idea that you can't trust the Chinese.

      The reality is you can't trust any government.

      But we mustn't say that.

  12. "sophisticated weapon design" by beefoot · · Score: 1

    You think US would allow their most sophisticated weapon design to be stolen by kids in China? No. I think what's really happening behind the scene are: a) the designs are faked -- it wants to drain Chinese resources on building something that never works b) US government wants to introduce a legislature to curb on internet activity. They put out this type of news to support their intent. c) all the above

    1. Re:"sophisticated weapon design" by gstoddart · · Score: 1

      Well, b) might be incidentally true ... but I'm more inclined to believe they really were incompetent enough to let this stuff get broken into and stolen.

      Some elaborate conspiracy to appear incompetent while fooling the Chinese hackers is a little harder to believe.

      --
      Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    2. Re:"sophisticated weapon design" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I remember reading a story about how the US basically let the USSR steal a piece of 'important' software and the software started reporting back to the US gov with the USSR's secrets. I'd love to think this was happening here but I have a hard time believe any politician in the last 10-20 years is that competent or forward thinking.

    3. Re:"sophisticated weapon design" by fredprado · · Score: 1

      Yes, because the Chinese government wouldn't ever identify a fake design. You overestimate your country and underestimate your enemies too much.... It is much more likely that someone in management messed up and left classified information where it shouldn't be.

    4. Re:"sophisticated weapon design" by Nidi62 · · Score: 2

      Some elaborate conspiracy to appear incompetent while fooling the Chinese hackers is a little harder to believe.

      If there is anything that government as a rule is good at, it is incompetency.

      --
      The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
    5. Re:"sophisticated weapon design" by ColdWetDog · · Score: 1

      Exactly. And why do you a think that the US plans actually work?

      If the Chinese stole the entire plans for the F-35, do you think they could actually make it fly? What they could do is whack out the bad parts, make it simpler and cheaper.

      And then we can buy it from them.

      Win. Win.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    6. Re:"sophisticated weapon design" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Some elaborate conspiracy to appear incompetent while fooling the Chinese hackers is a little harder to believe.

      If there is anything that government as a rule is good at, it is incompetency.

      Exactly. Never attribute to malice what can otherwise be attributed to incompetence. Incompetence wins every time.

    7. Re:"sophisticated weapon design" by DMUTPeregrine · · Score: 1

      Well, it's the F-35, of course the plans don't make a working plane! Maybe they can figure out how to get one to perform to spec.

      --
      Not a sentence!
    8. Re:"sophisticated weapon design" by Atomic+Fro · · Score: 1
      --

      ==================
      Hippie Logger Jock
      ==================
    9. Re:"sophisticated weapon design" by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      Only if they buy UK engines for it.

  13. Re:China is America by michael_rendier · · Score: 1

    I spend most of my time NOT being in debt up to my eyeballs. No credit cards, no loans, no student debt, no insurance, no drivers license, no mortgage... I can tell you as a casual observer of the world media, and a former soldier, that war is profitable...and if it's not, cleaning up the mess is. Ask Halliburton, and look into their purchase of Boots and Coots bout a week or so before the Big Oozy (gulf oil spill). Ask the schools that they are building in Iraq that fall over in a nominal wind storm. Ask Ray Nagin bout how he helped to spend the Katrina Relief funds on things like a house in Dallas. Most of this world is pissy right now about the inordinate amount of debt in the world, and how everyone is now paying the price for bad business at the top. 40% of the debt in the US is student loans. Who owns you...that is, how much money do you owe to banks, and what can they take from you if you don't toe the line?

    --
    There are three kinds of people in the world. Those that can count, and those that can't.
  14. Re:Blah blah blah by SuricouRaven · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I do hope that means a second space race. If China seriously looked like they were about to set the first man on Mars, or establish a long-term moon base, I think America would have to devote billions of dollars to doing it first just to defend their national ego. Again.

  15. Re:Blah blah blah by interval1066 · · Score: 2

    But it does put us in the midst of a second cold war

    Not even. China can get all butt-hurt if they want, but they'll NEVER put themselves in a position where they can't trade with the US, that would be suicide. China is acting all butt-hurt when we all know they have far more to gain by spying on us than we have to gain by spying on them, economically. We gain by spying on their military strategy, foriegn policy, and disposition of forces.

    --
    Python: 'And then suddenly you have a language which says "we're all stuck with whatever the whiniest coder wants".'
  16. Then sic the RIAA on them by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    According to the RIAA, that's worse.

    1. Re:Then sic the RIAA on them by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 2

      I am sure that the Russian Internet Armament Acquisition agency would disagree.

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
  17. We have mountains of data by mhesd · · Score: 1

    The obviously count every single automatic attack on the sshd port, made from millions hacked zombie computers from all over the world, as 'data'. Not serious.

  18. I'm American and So Am I... by ilikenwf · · Score: 1

    These machines shouldn't have been connected to the internet... They also shouldn't have been running OSX or Windows. From there, freaking use LUKS to prevent physical threat and otherwise don't allow Chinese nationals to come into rooms with sensitive data.

    I wish my country would come up with a decent security policy...of course, this could've all been a trick, and they could have potentially placed these in a convenient location with compromised plans designed to just cost money and explode...but I don't give the bureaucrats that much credit.

  19. Yeah, whatever China. by CreamyG31337 · · Score: 1

    The Mandiant report was pretty damning.
    "In over 97% of the 1,905 times Mandiant observed APT1 intruders connecting to their attack infrastructure, APT1 used IP addresses registered in Shanghai and systems set to use the Simplified Chinese language."
    Oh, sure, it's probably just random hackers that really like that network...

    Here's an update:
    https://www.mandiant.com/blog/apt1-months-significantly-impacted-active-rebuilding/

    1. Re:Yeah, whatever China. by flayzernax · · Score: 1

      If I was a Chinese government payed hacker I just use some fairly Anonymous or hard to follow accounts to just purchase access to U.S. hosted servers. Or the U.S.s favorite enemies of the day, which don't really have good internet access.

      This is pure political bullshit to keep the masses confused. It is unlikely really anything more. Probably equally participated in by both sides.

  20. Making them stealable? by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 1

    Holy crap! Even more reason to ensure my car doors are locked, lest it end up in China.
    [ and a car analogy to boot :-) ]

    --
    It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
  21. Re:China is America by Maxo-Texas · · Score: 2

    And by the same virtue the Democratic Party is the Republican Party and the Republican Party is the Democratic Party in America.

    Both serve the corporations.

    If it's any help- I think it's too late to do anything about it.

    --
    She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
  22. Let them steal the plans by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Let them steal the plans, but use a honeypot of plans that when implemented don't work or leave traces that they were stolen.

  23. Outsourced R&D by Scot+Seese · · Score: 5, Insightful

    WalMart has outsourced the production of plastic flower pots and patio furniture to China for decades - the Chinese are simply reversing the process! By letting U.S. taxpayers fund the billions of dollars per year we pour into military R&D, they save massive amounts of money and man hours, and are guaranteed the best designs that 17 year old Chinese Red-Bull & Cheetos-fuelled hax0rs can steal.

    Take a copy-catted F22 Raptor, paint a Chinese air force insignia on it, and * VOILA! * Fifth generation air superiority fighter MINUS the 20 years of research and testing.
    What you say? Their copy is only 85% as good as ours because they made shortcuts in the radar, or avionics, or missile systems? That's OK, our congress will keep paring down the final platform order until our air force ends up only getting 200 F22s, while the Chinese will manufacture 1,150 of theirs.

    The current US military philosophy is starting to look more and more like WW2 era Germany, with absolute faith placed in a relatively small number of extremely expensive, extremely high quality weapons systems, which ultimately were smothered and overrun by a developing nation (the U.S.) with phenomenal industrial capacity capable of running M4 tanks, jeeps, B17 bombers, and numerous other things off assembly lines faster than the Germans could destroy them.

    The comparative ironies to today's military situation are incredible.

    --
    THIS SPACE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK.
    1. Re:Outsourced R&D by rahvin112 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Arm chair generals. Although the information they stole is valuable they haven't stolen information that's going to have them building Raptors. China has been trying to copy SU-27 jets for about a decade now, they can't get the engines built right and are at the point of having to go back to a Russia that vowed never to sell to them again to beg them for rights to purchase more advanced systems.

      Even though they have working Russian built engines to compare against they weren't able to duplicate the engines. Any Engineer can tell you why, even with detailed schematics, if you don't understand the design you don't know where the critical sections of the design are or what processes to use during assembly that prevent catastrophic failure later. Most of these highly advanced weapon systems have decades of incremental experience built into the design. Even small differences in manufacturing can render parts unusable and it's experience that teaches you that, not schematics and working samples. Though the design information and working samples accelerate learning they don't do away with it.

    2. Re:Outsourced R&D by dj245 · · Score: 3, Informative

      Can you be more specific? I thought designs and schematics would detail all of these things to make sure someone else knows what to do. It's a bad idea to let critical information get stuck in the heads of your scientists and engineers in case they, you know, die.

      Here's one.

      My company sells gas turbines for generating electricity. These are based on a standard design which is analyzed to death and then built full-scale to make sure it performs. There is one main package (the gas turbine) and then small little modules which resemble small shipping containers (10x10ft, 15x20ft, etc) with equipment inside. The piping and electricals is run between the packages and the little modules.

      Even if you had all the blueprints and design documents, you could easilly fall into the trap of thinking that "modular" implies a similarity to LEGOs and you can lay out the modules wherever you want, changing the placement to suit the site conditions. Maybe you want to move Module X from the left side of the machine to the right side of the machine, or move Module Y by 20 feet in order to try to hide a noisy piece of equipment from a residential area.

      On the surface, this sounds quite easy! Just make sure your pipefitters have a little extra pipe, and the electricians have a little extra wiring so they can connect it up. The problem is that the system is completely and tightly integrated-

      The piping has been analyzed in the standard design for friction losses and thermal stress. Move the module without considering this, and maybe the system doesn't get quite the pressure it was expecting. Maybe the pipes crack because of thermal expansion.

      The Hazardous area classification has been studied in the standard design. Pressurized, airtight, explosion-proof electrical junction boxes are expensive, so they don't get used if they aren't needed. You use a regular one instead. Not a problem at all if you aren't in a hazardous area. Move that module 20 feet, however, and maybe you have put it in a dangerous location.

      The entire layout has been planned for maintenance and construction. There is enough room to take everything apart and put it back together again. If you move a module to the wrong spot, maybe you can't remove Part Y from the machine. Or maybe you don't have enough room to put a wrench on equipment Z, so you can't install it in the first place.

      The electricals have been designed as an integrated system too, and optimized to use the smallest wire possible while still being reliable and safe. If you make the length longer, however, maybe the resistance loss is high enough that the signal is unreliable.

      As the GP said, if you are stealing plans for complicated equipment, you basically have to get to know the design as well as the original designer. If you don't, it is very easy to make a small change for reasons of improvement or localization which completely breaks the design. This can happen even if you have every drawing and document ever made for the thing. Inevitably you will have to change something, especially if you are stealing from the US since we use imperial measurements. It can be as simple as using 26mm thick steel plate instead of 1 inch thick steel plate.

      --
      Even those who arrange and design shrubberies are under considerable economic stress at this period in history.
    3. Re:Outsourced R&D by Scot+Seese · · Score: 1

      I prefer this old gem:

      "World War 2 was won with American manufacturing, British intelligence, and Soviet blood."

      Some statistics:

      B17 Flying Fortress: 12,731 units produced - 14 to 16 units per day
              http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_B-17_Flying_Fortress
      B24 Liberators: 18,400+ units produced
            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consolidated_B-24_Liberator#cite_ref-Ethell_1995.2C_p._214_6-0
      P51 Mustangs, all variants: 15,486 units (1 per 24 minutes)
        Willys Jeep: 640,000 units
              http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeep#World_War_II_Jeeps
      M4 Sherman Tank, all variants: 53,362 units
              http://www.wwiivehicles.com/usa/tanks-medium/m4-production.asp

      --
      THIS SPACE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK.
    4. Re:Outsourced R&D by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      China has no ability to project power. They are close to having their first carrier, but couldn't attack the US with a force that wouldn't be repelled by the police force in any US mainland town. One square block in LA has more guns and manpower than China could land on the US mainland. Unless they walk over in winter across Alaska, the US military could decide to not fight (they only fight outside the US), and the civilian population would have more firepower than China could point at the US. China is at least 20 years away from a military that could take down the US (again presuming no military resistance). If the population knew the actual odds of anyone invading (somewhere between zero and less than zero), the military industrial complex might take a hit in income, so we must make the Chinese out to sound much more capable. Not that they aren't, but the war they are expecting to fight is against Russia or India. And they have nothing that could touch the US, nor would they want to.

    5. Re:Outsourced R&D by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      So, the schematics don't work? What's the point of schematics if you can't take them to a factory and have them make the widget for you?

  24. Re:China is America by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Satanic lizard demons

    And by Satanic lizard demons you mean "the Joooooos".

  25. Is__el by gary_7vn · · Score: 1

    Israel has been caught, many times, stealing and spying. Yet, I have never seen a US President complain about this. Why?

    The next enemy for America is China. Right now the US is in cold war with them. But it's going to get hot soon. Much of what is happening in the Middle East is about controlling the oil and thus, China.

    The next battlespace will be Africa.

    America is sleep walking, as usual, into a war with China.

  26. Re:hacking into US infrastructure is an act of war by gary_7vn · · Score: 2

    What a brilliant idea.

    Or you could put them in camps and gas them.

    People like you are the reason we are fucked.

  27. Africa by LeadSongDog · · Score: 1

    The next battlespace will be Africa

    Next? WTF do you call what is going on there now?

    --
    Oh, I'm sorry sir, I thought you were referring to me, Mr. Wensleydale.
  28. US Infosec Incompetence summed up in one sentence! by endus · · Score: 4, Funny

    'Even following the general principle of secret-keeping, it should not have been linked to the Internet.'"

    You think so??? Really? This is a novel concept to our American Information Security Industry, please, tell us more! Surely you don't mean that power plants and water treatment facilities and power grids and other sensitive facilities should not be linked to the internet...HOW THE FUCK ARE THE OPERATORS GOING TO GET TO FACEBOOK IF WE DISCONNECT THEM!?!?!?!?

  29. Re:Blah blah blah by flayzernax · · Score: 1

    Perhaps not. If Chinese officials and U.S. Officials all pay lip service to the same corporations, people, dynasties, or whatever...

  30. I have little sympathy for the US government by Karmashock · · Score: 1

    Listen. I am an American citizen and I do not want our secret whatever weapons plans stolen by ANYONE. We paid good tax money for those space lasers and trained velociraptor dragoons. I'd like to think we could actually go to war without all our wonderful toys being obsolete.

    So why is the US government putting our top secret hush hush designs ON THE F"ING INTERNET LIKE DRUNKEN COEDS POSTING THEIR BOOBS ON FACEBOOK!

    From here on out... lets just make a rule. If you're just straight up illiterate of computer science then do the universe a favor and don't get put in charge of computer ANYTHING. The degree of ignorance and incompetence out of government lately seems almost comical. Its as if the point is to illistrate that you're stupid. Is that what I'm to take from these events? I should hope not. Because if you can't be trusted with something as basic as keeping a few weapons plans secret then you're not capable of actually doing anything. Keeping a couple secrets is fundamental. Do it or its time to just dissolve the whole thing and start over.

    You are embarrassing yourself and us by extension. Stop it. Are the Chinese spying on you? Do men look at a women that runs naked through a park? Put your damn clothes on.

    --
    I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
    1. Re:I have little sympathy for the US government by thoth · · Score: 1

      So why is the US government putting our top secret hush hush designs ON THE F"ING INTERNET

      The U.S. Government? Every incident I've read of has been some kind of intrusion at a defense contractor. Meaning, corporate America is dropping the ball on security. But that's because corporations are all about profits and security is just an expense...

      Anyway, has there been any published info about an intrusion at an actual U.S. Government facility, not a private company? Honestly, I haven't seen any press about that, maybe I missed it.

    2. Re:I have little sympathy for the US government by Karmashock · · Score: 1

      Actually, I've seen quite a few leaks from the Department of energy... just nuclear bomb plans. Nothing to worry about folks. Move alone.

      --
      I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
    3. Re:I have little sympathy for the US government by thoth · · Score: 1

      Sorry, but leaks and hacks aren't the same thing.
      If by leaks you mean some employee took info out, well that's espionage and unfortunately not 100% preventable without mind reading.

    4. Re:I have little sympathy for the US government by Karmashock · · Score: 1

      I get you, its okay if the government leaks horribly but if a private corp drops the ball its a sign of their inherent evil.

      Gotcha.

      Sorry if that's rude but I have a low tolerance for double standards.

      How about this, sport... How about neither leaks or is hacked or otherwise reveals state secrets? Does that work for you?

      The level of incompetence we've seen from multiple parties within our society as regards computer security has been pathetic. Something needs to be done about it.

      Here is my fix: Have the government hack its own systems and the systems of contractors to test security. Task the NSA with it. Part of the need for that is that we can't set universal standards because not everyone is using the same technology. So forget about universal standards. Make it empirical. Hack our own systems and then have the hackers explain to the security people how they got in. Incentive network penetrations so we don't get one department effectively paying off another to get a pass.

      Is that the perfect solution? Probably not. But its the best I've got.

      --
      I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
  31. Quantity Advantage by Tablizer · · Score: 1

    China has about 3 times our population, which means they have about 3 times as many skilled hackers (or will soon). This doesn't bode well for US in a cyberwar.

    Immigration amnesty is starting to look more attractive.

  32. Re:Blah blah blah by NeverVotedBush · · Score: 1

    You would really agree to fly to Mars for 6-7 months in the cold vacuum of space in a spaceship with a big "Made in China" sticker on it?

  33. Pretty much. by John+Pfeiffer · · Score: 1, Insightful

    My father does a good job of capturing the sheer absurdity, I think.

    Me: So, apparently China says that not only are we just as guilty of attacking them, but it's our own damn fault they were able to get at the data.
    Him: Let me get this straight, China's response to our accusations of cyber-espionage is basically "I know I am, but what are you?" ... I need a moment.

    --

    Friend: "The NIC is misconfigured..." Me: "No prob, I'll just telnet in and fix it." *Silence*
  34. New Cold War... by Oil_Tan · · Score: 1

    The US Gov allowed this to happen. How else will the US GOV fleece the tax payers for billions more for weapons development? This is a healthy ongoing event for the United States. When a country quits making history, they tend to die out. I just hope there is a few trojans in the plans the Chinese acquired. Anyone remember the Russian Trans Siberian pipeline explosion? There just might be a "chink" in the Great Wall of China.....courtesy of the CIA.

  35. Real World Scripting by pubwvj · · Score: 1

    China: "It's your fault, you wore a red dress!"

    USA: "Oo... You big bad boy... I love your money!"

    These two need couple's counseling.

  36. Re:Blah blah blah by ebno-10db · · Score: 1

    they'll NEVER put themselves in a position where they can't trade with the US, that would be suicide

    Before 1914 the economic importance of "free trade" was used to explain why WWI would never happen.

  37. Escalation via counterattack is in our playbook by BubbaDave · · Score: 1

    Hell, there was a topic here just in the last week that counterattacking was SOP, whether it was objectively useful or not.

    We can't allow an intrusion gap to develop!

  38. Re:China is America by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

    No car, no license, complaining about mortgages. Do you rent, or did you have a mortgage previously? Do you even have a job, or do you live off of handouts (government disability or such)?

    Some of us manage to pay down our house at a reasonable rate, and not owe any more than necessary for the life we want to live. No, I've never had a car payment, but that doesn't mean I have no car, or no license. And yes, I have insurance, to make sure my stuff is replaced if something bad happens. I can't be bothered to carry all my belongings with me at all times in a shopping cart.

  39. Re:Blah blah blah by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

    We never ended the first. We have always been at war with eastasia. When the USSR fell and abandoned communism, we adopted a new communism to hate, one that was always on the list, just a little lower on the list.

  40. Re:Blah blah blah by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

    Yes, the highest quality stuff comes from China. The problem is that the US manufacturers outsourced to China and asked for lowest build quality possible, then complained when they got what they asked for.