Slashdot Mirror


NSA Hacked Huawei, Stole Source Code

Charliemopps (1157495) writes "New documents from Snowden indicate that the NSA hacked into and stole documents, including source code, from the Chinese networking firm Huawei. Ironically, this is the same firm that the U.S. government has argued in the past was a threat due to China's possible use of the same sort of attacks."

153 of 287 comments (clear)

  1. No irony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    That's probably how the US govt knows Huawei is a threat...

    1. Re:No irony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The US Gov has never articulated exactly how Huawei is a threat with any specificity. The NSA slides don't give any information either. Nothing released to the public has shown that Huawei was ever guilty of any of the things said about them, but on the other hand, the US Gov itself is guilty as hell as far as engaging in the sort of tactics we've accused Huawei of.

    2. Re:No irony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      and the rest of the world is learning how untrustworthy the USA is.

    3. Re:No irony by MrBigInThePants · · Score: 1, Funny

      If you needed to learn that by now then you have not been paying attention....

    4. Re:No irony by Jmc23 · · Score: 4, Interesting
      No, that's how the US government found out huawei was too hard to hack so they tried to discredit them publicly to get companies to buy equipment to which they had easy access to.

      You know, just like trying to discredit PGP.

      --
      Don't complain about syntax, grammar, or spelling. There is no.hell like input on android.
    5. Re:No irony by MrBigInThePants · · Score: 2

      I totally agree with your statement but in this context "the rest of the world" was mainly referring to the leaders of other countries.

      The couch vegetables don't count when discussing these issues. What they think only ever matters once every few years at voting time and what they think can be easily installed with scandal, BS and appealing to their bias - so not that much at all really.

      Those that are not the vege type are too small in number to matter as a group.

      You can call me a foolish cynic all you want but I will hold up the entirety of the global political sphere as a counter example and we shall see who is the more foolish! :)

    6. Re:No irony by pathological+liar · · Score: 4, Informative
    7. Re:No irony by hackus · · Score: 1

      You ar ecorrect.

      Without Industrial Espionage, the Elite can never hold on to their power.

      Threats must be identified and neutralized, primarily through the stealing of industrial secrets to insure the Federal Reserve note is secure world wide.

      --
      Got Geometrodynamics? Awe, too hard to figure out? Too bad.
    8. Re:No irony by The+Grim+Reefer · · Score: 5, Interesting

      and the rest of the world is learning how untrustworthy the USA is.

      Which country of any consequence is trustworthy? Russia? China? In the EU, Great Britain, France, Spain, Germany, etc. don't exactly have spotless histories. Anyone in South or Central America?

      Places like Denmark, Iceland and New Zealand seem to be pretty trustworthy to me. But for some reason this just doesn't scale very well. From what I can see, and I very well may be wrong, there is some kind of tipping point when a country's population crosses over the 10-20 million mark. Obviously there are exceptions. Perhaps government simply gets too large to manage at that point and it is no longer possible to maintain oversight on everything.

    9. Re:No irony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      well this kind of thing is actually kind of the NSA's job, rather than spying on american's for their political overlords they spied on a foreign powers government controlled telecom company that was trying to sell to the us military and government.

    10. Re:No irony by real-modo · · Score: 4, Insightful

      UM, does anyone else feel like saying F--- Snowden at this point?

      No.

    11. Re:No irony by erikkemperman · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Nope. Most of the rest if the world is dirt poor, and yet many of these dirt poor folks have the common sense to understand that this is not entirely unrelated to the West being filthy rich. Wealth distribution is pretty much the opposite of what you'd expect looking at natural resource distribution.

      Similarly, even though we in the privileged comfort of our Western sofas like to pretend we're mostly a force for Good in the world, those at the receiving end somehow tend to remember who is propping up the violent and corrupt regimes whose boot rests on their faces.

      --
      Gosh, thanks. That must be why the other ships call me Meatfucker -- GCU Grey Area (Eccentric)
    12. Re:No irony by erikkemperman · · Score: 5, Insightful

      UM, does anyone else feel like saying F--- Snowden at this point?

      Free Snowden? Yeah I'll second that.

      --
      Gosh, thanks. That must be why the other ships call me Meatfucker -- GCU Grey Area (Eccentric)
    13. Re:No irony by MrBigInThePants · · Score: 1

      Yeah...

      While I empathise with their plight and wish it was different I really cannot agree with the rose coloured glasses people view those in poorer countries with. The motivations will be a form of jealously and lack of exposure to the PR machine that people who can afford a TV are exposed to.

      It works like this:

      - An impoverished person is just a poor person without the basic means for survival
      - A poor person is just a middle-class person without sufficient income
      - A middle-class person is just a rich person without the surplus cash
      - A rich person is just a millionaire without the millions
      - A millionaire is just a billionaire.....

      See where I am going with this?

      There are exceptions, as there always are, but they are rare enough to be considered outliers.

    14. Re:No irony by 1s44c · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I've heard that belief that the US is rich and the rest of the world is poor very many times. I've travelled to a few countries and can tell you without a doubt that although there are plenty of poorer places there are plenty of richer places too. There are lots of countries with better infrastructure and better standards of living.

      The US has a very positive self-image. That's a great thing. But sometimes it can cover up things that are wrong and could be fixed.

    15. Re: No irony by Sepodati · · Score: 1

      Yes.

    16. Re:No irony by erikkemperman · · Score: 2

      The motivations will be a form of jealously and lack of exposure to the PR machine that people who can afford a TV are exposed to.

      It seems to me these are consequences, not causes (or motivations as you put it).

      It works like this:

      - An impoverished person is just a poor person without the basic means for survival
      - A poor person is just a middle-class person without sufficient income
      - A middle-class person is just a rich person without the surplus cash
      - A rich person is just a millionaire without the millions
      - A millionaire is just a billionaire.....

      You are describing how it is very difficult to hide "upwards" class differences (everyone is acutely aware of the things that are just out of their reach) because so much wealth is spent on advertising same. Conversely it seems this is easy in the other direction (wealthy individuals tend to spend much of it on "downward" insulation, gated communities, exclusive social occasions).

      --
      Gosh, thanks. That must be why the other ships call me Meatfucker -- GCU Grey Area (Eccentric)
    17. Re:No irony by ganjadude · · Score: 3, Interesting

      actually the majority of the world doesnt pay attention because they are living on pennies a day

      --
      have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
    18. Re: No irony by caveqat101 · · Score: 1

      Do you maybe mean,lack of education about what a government does? About the leaders in the government, who sell out the responsibility of the government to profit themselves over liberating the people from tryanical leaders? Being the leaders they flavor the operations of the outcomes to their wishes rather then the choice of the majority of the people? Therefore only select styles of leaders appear, that are sponsored by the minorities of the political process? And appear as majorities? Hmmmm, sounds familiar.

    19. Re: No irony by tysonedwards · · Score: 1

      Whole economy, evenly distributed
      14 Trillion Dollars / 7 Billion People = 2 Thousand Dollars.

      Whole economy, distributed to one billion people
      14 Trillion Dollars / 1 Billion People = 14 Thousand Dollars.

      --
      Thirty four characters live here.
    20. Re:No irony by MrBigInThePants · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Yes, I agree. My point was that those poor people, should they find themselves wealthy, would most likely move up into a gated community and pull the ladder up behind them.

      This is what tends to happen...

    21. Re:No irony by MrBigInThePants · · Score: 1

      The only basic stats measure that is EVER relevant when talking about wages is the median. (There are better complicated ones or sets of data of course)

      The fact that there is wealth in your country does not imply you are a rich country overall.

      Personally I feel that any wealthy country that have slums filled with poor is not a very good country at all. (and yes that means the US fails this measure)

      Just my personal opinion...

    22. Re:No irony by Jack+Griffin · · Score: 1

      And this point is so often missed on the great unwashed. It isn't even just restricted to human nature, it is the nature of all life to compete and protect your physical/social position/security. This is why I'm a bit blaise on the whole NSA drama. Sure it sounds bad on the surface, but better that it's us doing it to them and not the other way around (as it surely would be given the chance).

  2. Personal Liberty! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Wait,... isn't this the purpose of the NSA?

    1. Re:Personal Liberty! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Wait,... isn't this the purpose of the NSA?

      Yep, if Snowden continues along this path he is moving into 'Traitor" territory. I only support him because he releases information on Domestic spying - this is completely within the realm of a FIA.

    2. Re:Personal Liberty! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Just as much as it is the job of the army to invade foreign countries and kill their people. Unless we're actively at war with that country, then no, they shouldn't be doing it, and it is an illegal act of aggression. That, and I'm not really sure how a company that isn't involved in anything military should be considered any different from a civilian; NSA doesn't give a fuck about any boundaries.

      Plus, might I remind you, the NSA is also attacking American citizens.

    3. Re:Personal Liberty! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Last time I checked, we are not at war with china. Spying on our trading partners like this hurts the whole nation.

    4. Re:Personal Liberty! by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 5, Informative

      Snowden isn't releasing anything. He just dumped what he had on some journalists; they are the ones doing these slow staged releases.

    5. Re:Personal Liberty! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Y'know what? Fuck you. This whole 'outrage over domenstic activity, but foreign-spying is a-ok' attitude has got to stop.

      I'm not American. The notion a foreign power can root through my data, without my or my governments consent, with no repercussions and the full support of people like you, is abhorrent to me.

      Traitor? The man becomes more of a hero with every tidbit like this he releases. A Hero to the rest of us. Because you no longer count.

    6. Re:Personal Liberty! by Charliemopps · · Score: 1

      That all depends on what you want your government to be doing. You could just as easily argue the Vietnam war was the purpose of the military.

    7. Re:Personal Liberty! by cold+fjord · · Score: 2

      In this case to the benefit of China.

      Snowden claimed to be an expert about China and espionage. When do you think we'll see some information about that? Or will the trend of only releasing information the compromises intelligence methods and activities of the US, UK, Australia, Canada, New Zealand, and their allies continue?

      He is indeed the rarest of "patriots," exposing only the intelligence plans of his own country and its allies, and not those of its adversaries.

      --
      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
    8. Re:Personal Liberty! by symbolset · · Score: 2

      Which is why you do due diligence on the background checks on temporary sysadmin subcontractors you trust with the NSA's crown jewels. Wouldn't want to be responsible for empowering some crackpot to let the entire herd of cats out of the bag, eh?

      --
      Help stamp out iliturcy.
    9. Re:Personal Liberty! by symbolset · · Score: 1

      Oh Jeebus. Anybody who didn't already know NSA was spying on Huawei before this was published still doesn't know it. They are in a coma.

      --
      Help stamp out iliturcy.
    10. Re:Personal Liberty! by cold+fjord · · Score: 1

      There is a meaningful difference between a general idea of it and specific knowledge of what happened or was accessed.

      Think of the difference between, "somebody in the city doesn't like you," and "your neighbor Bob plans to burn down your house while you are asleep at 11:30 PM tomorrow using a case of Molotov cocktails that are already prepared and are sitting in his garage." Do you think there is a difference in the action you could take based on those two scenarios?

      --
      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
    11. Re:Personal Liberty! by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 1

      Ah, it is refreshing to, at last, hear the "it's OK when we do it, but not OK when America does it" spoken out loud. More honesty like this, please!

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    12. Re:Personal Liberty! by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      My point is that if you want to judge Snowden, you already have all the facts necessary to do so. There's no "continuing along this path" here - he already walked all the way, like it or not.

    13. Re:Personal Liberty! by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 2, Interesting

      To reiterate: Snowden is not releasing anything. He took what he got from the NSA internal networks, and handed that over. The way it gets released is subject only to the whim of the journalists who have the dump now. I would imagine that NSA significantly more information about how they spy on everyone, including China, than they have on how China is spying on them. For the latter, we'd need a Chinese Snowden equivalent.

      By the way, why are you guys still on this? Every time one of you NSA assholes opens your mouth, you only make it worse for yourself. Not that there is much worse to go - aside from all the trodding on the Constitution, the entire Snowden affair has also shown just how lame and incompetent NSA actually is. A contractor admin taking a dump of most of your internal network resources, including top secret / classified stuff, without even hiding much, and you only find out about that from the newspapers? In any sane country, an intelligence agency so inept would be disbanded on the next day, not even as a punishment, but simply because God knows how many actual Russian/Chinese/Iranian/... spies are inside, doing what Snowden did, except for that whole going to the journalists part. In any authoritarian country, the entire top management team would already be shot for criminal negligence (if not sabotage).

    14. Re:Personal Liberty! by jma05 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      This is the most BS I have seen in this article. I almost want to think you get paid for this.

      > In this case to the benefit of China.

      The point of the article is not whether it benefits China. The point is that US has been accusing other countries of doing things that it itself does many times over... things that it implied that it would find so abhorrent that it would never consider doing. This news would have been a lot less depressing if it was found that China broke into Cisco... because China does not lecture the world on digital principles.

      As a non-american, I actually want US to be the bearer of high values in cyber space so that we have someone to point to and say - that is how things are supposed to be done. It has been incredibly disappointing to follow these revelations. Fortunately, the US tech community still holds high values, even if the corporates clearly don't.

      The case of Huawei isn't just about China. It's products are used the world over. Attacking them is an attack on the communications of the world in general, not an attack on someone you can conveniently label as a communist enemy. There is no cold war here.

      > Snowden claimed to be an expert about China and espionage. When do you think we'll see some information about that?

      Snowden is a counter-intel guy on China. He does not have policy documents on China. Why is this even hard for you to grasp?
      What you are demanding is like China asking when Ai Weiwei and Chen Guangcheng will criticize US, rather than just China. That's not their responsibility.

      > Or will the trend of only releasing information the compromises intelligence methods and activities of the US, UK, Australia, Canada, New Zealand, and their allies continue?

      First, he can only disclose what he had direct access to. If you want China docs, get a Chinese whistleblower.

      Second, none of the disclosures are considered “methods”. The journalists have been cautious to not disclose them.

      > He is indeed the rarest of "patriots," exposing only the intelligence plans of his own country and its allies, and not those of its adversaries.

      Please provide a list of these non-rare patriots that expose intelligence plans on both sides.

    15. Re:Personal Liberty! by sumdumass · · Score: 1

      You don't need to be at war with another nation in order to spy on them or their companies.

      I agree that it hurts the whole country but not because it happened, because it was disclosed that it happened.

    16. Re:Personal Liberty! by sumdumass · · Score: 1

      The guy said it hurts to be spied; you are the one implying war and spying are unrelated, not him... which is a way to sidestep the problem. And then you say...

      No, the guy said we are not at war with China implying that was was necessary for spying. You are damn straight that I made the point they are unrelated because they are no dependent on each other.

      o if someone does the same to the USA and doesn't tell anyone, is it ok? If you don't want it done to your country, do not do it to others.

      lol.. what? Of course I don't want others to know what my country is doing. I won't be upset to find out they are doing their best to determine what we are doing or that they succeeded, However, I want to know what other countries are doing and do expect my country to find that out. For all the problems my country has, I trust it enough. All the other countries, I do not.

      Like I said, it hurts the whole country only because it is exposed. Retaliation in the forms of lost business, trade agreements and so on can happen because it was exposed not to mention step being taken to separate us from our abilities to gather intelligence on other countries.

      You know what, I'm beginning to think Mr. Snowden just got fed up with the kind of hypocrisy you are displaying.

      I really don't care why he decided to become a traitor. I'm not sure why you should either. He is a traitor BTW and deserves a traitors end.

    17. Re:Personal Liberty! by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I know that there are plenty of misguided people who are not really affiliated with the organization that they effectively propagandize for, but in your case I'm having serious doubts about that. You're always in very early on any story that even tangentially mentions any US security agency, and particularly NSA, or on any comment along those lines even in otherwise unrelated stories. It's almost as if you had an RSS filter for those keywords.

      Mind you, I'm not saying that your boss at NSA is paying you for it. You're likely some kind of very small fish there anyway (not menial work, though - you have to be actually doing something relevant to the core mission of the organization to feel personally offended about Snowden and what he represents). And the only reason why you're posting here is some kind of perverted esprit de corps, where your employer being ridiculed automatically translates to some personal butthurt for yourself, and an itch to post all these "rebuttals" of yours.

    18. Re:Personal Liberty! by torsmo · · Score: 1

      Well said, and you're quite correct in your analysis. He also likes to subtly intimidate posters who call him out for his BS.

    19. Re:Personal Liberty! by cold+fjord · · Score: 1

      There is no useful "analysis" in that post. Your "BS" detector apparently needs calibration since the post you responded to is almost entirely BS and you didn't detect that.

      --
      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
    20. Re:Personal Liberty! by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      He doesn't have enough credibility to be intimidating, to be honest, so it just comes off even more ridiculous. And, of course, by now any sensible person with modpoints just mods down everything "cold fjord" as Flamebait on sight, so you only see those posts if you jump on the article early, or have a habit of reading at -1 as I do.

    21. Re:Personal Liberty! by erikkemperman · · Score: 4, Informative

      American companies have been hurt to the tune of billions of dollars. US intelligent efforts overseas have been crippled.

      And before they profited to the tune of billions thanks to trade secrets that just happened to find their way from NSA into their spotless hands.

      I understand your point about the difference of revealing domestic vs foreign spying, but even the latter category of leaks has demonstrated that NSA are operating way beyond it's stated purpose (which is security not economic superiority) at a huge cost to US taxpayers. In other words, still bona fide whistleblowing as far as I'm concerned.

      --
      Gosh, thanks. That must be why the other ships call me Meatfucker -- GCU Grey Area (Eccentric)
    22. Re:Personal Liberty! by jma05 · · Score: 1

      > As to being an "NSA asshole," I truly hope that you someday break the conditioning of your Soviet youth to realize that not everyone thinks alike in the West. Some of us are actually right even if we are not a member of "the party," an apparatchik, or a member of the "dark forces."

      For someone who is neither from a communist country nor was a subject of cold war era, anti-communist conditioning in the West, I must say that after JTRIG revelations, it is getting kinda hard to distinguish NSA ethos from communist ethos.

      https://firstlook.org/theinter...

      It always makes one wonder what NSA calls its clearly more sophisticated equivalent of the 50 cent army... no doubt much better paid.

    23. Re:Personal Liberty! by Bite+The+Pillow · · Score: 1

      You completely missed the real point, however. Americans can object to this, though it will take time. They will draw a line at some point and say this is legit, that's not. From a foreign perspective you can be angry all you want, but this is not something that Americans will get angry about.

      Your opinion does not matter, unless you happen to be a policy maker in China. And then it does not matter to the Americans who object to the NSA, and are deciding whether the next revelation us a big deal.

      If there were not a huge domestic surveillance thing going on, Americans might object. But in context, they are not going to care. And you can't make then, as angry as you get. So be mad, or just understand that your concerns are in line behind tens of complaints regarding its own citizens.

      You still don't like it, I don't expect you to. Because your perspective is different. Add "compared with everything else" to each comment and suddenly it makes sense, no?

    24. Re:Personal Liberty! by 1s44c · · Score: 1

      Why do you thing the NSA wants to crack huawei?

      1) Because the want to find out of there are deliberate holes left by the Chinese in their equipment that they should warn their own people about.

      2) Because they want a head start on cracking the equipment to spy on everyone, foreign and domestic.

    25. Re:Personal Liberty! by 1s44c · · Score: 1

      The thing that pains me is that we can't trust journalists either. They will outright lie to get a good story and their motivations are always suspect.

      The only way to get information out is to torrent it and let the world dig though it.

    26. Re:Personal Liberty! by 1s44c · · Score: 1

      That sounds like a play on US anti-communism brainwashing. It just sounds like deranged ranting to someone who doesn't support communism but actually knows what it is. You have no argument, rational or not.

    27. Re:Personal Liberty! by thetoadwarrior · · Score: 1

      Don't steal from other countries then if you don't want it disclosed. While you might not ave any problem with your government helping conduct industrial espionage it shouldn't be done.

    28. Re:Personal Liberty! by thetoadwarrior · · Score: 1

      Some people find it hard to accept their own government is an awful entity and they are the sole reason the government gets away all the shit it does.

    29. Re: Personal Liberty! by BitZtream · · Score: 1

      things that it implied that it would find so abhorrent that it would never consider doing

      We have two official agencies who's charter is defined as spying on other nations ... And a third that does it under the flag of immigration.

      I'm not sure who you've been listening to but if you think the US pretends not to spy you really are unaware of the world around you.

      --
      Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
    30. Re: Personal Liberty! by BitZtream · · Score: 1

      No, and neither do you, because no one that matters ever said anything like that.

      --
      Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
    31. Re:Personal Liberty! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      > lol.. what? Of course I don't want others to know what my country is doing. I won't be upset to find out they are doing their best to determine what we are doing or that they succeeded, However, I want to know what other countries are doing and do expect my country to find that out. For all the problems my country has, I trust it enough. All the other countries, I do not.

      This "however" of yours is there because you have two standards: your country can do it but others cannot spy you. That's pretty much unfair; and before you say "life is unfair, deal with it", I point you to karma and how great a bitch it is. When it comes around to collect your pay for any evil done, don't start complaining, ok?

      > Like I said, it hurts the whole country only because it is exposed. Retaliation in the forms of lost business, trade agreements and so on can happen because it was exposed not to mention step being taken to separate us from our abilities to gather intelligence on other countries.

      You're kidding me, right? Do you think other countries are stupid? Do you have any idea of how harder it became to do business since the USA adopted its aggressive stance? That was way before Snowden even _entered_ the NSA.

      Don't do wrong things and then start complaining that someone leaked about it... this is a criminal's way of thinking. Instead, don't do things which will offend friendly countries and not so friendly ones will take as an aggression. Be a good neighbor and demand others to be good, too. Don't sneak into their houses to see their personal belongings.

      Also, you have to start thinking we are just a single species. If you value your country above the Earth, would you complain if one State started to act only in its own interests instead of caring about what's good for the entire country?

    32. Re:Personal Liberty! by mjwalshe · · Score: 1

      It's interesting that most of the leaks from GCHQ and the NSA have been from young and naive low level entrants from a millatery background.

    33. Re:Personal Liberty! by ganjadude · · Score: 3

      I dont agree with that tactic, When I mod, I dont even look at user names i mod based on the content of the post. I cant stand when people start to mod down people because of who said it, rather than what was said

      --
      have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
    34. Re:Personal Liberty! by davecb · · Score: 1

      And this wasn't from him, anyway: see https://firstlook.org/theinter...

      --
      davecb@spamcop.net
    35. Re: Personal Liberty! by jma05 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      > I'm not sure who you've been listening to but if you think the US pretends not to spy you really are unaware of the world around you.

      Are you dense? Where do you think the outrage in the world is coming from if this was all understood as typical espionage activity.

      Let me answer that for you. This isn't simple foreign spying. No one expected NSA to be spying on entire populations of the world. There is no spy agency in the world that does that. It is legitimate to do targeted espionage. Every country does that. This is not about nabbing a foreign terrorist or spying on diplomats.

      People simply expected US to do a better job at targeted espionage than anyone else. No one also expected NSA to be engaged in character assassinations of conspiracy theorists and social manipulations of hactivists. US always promoted the rhetoric that these things as abhorrent and incompatible with its values and for the rest of the world.

      And don't answer with an attitude that US can do what it wants and that it is up to foreign governments to protect their civilians either. US purports itself to be the leader of the free world and these actions are incompatible with that role. If it wants to simply be an imperial power - fine. Unless US addresses these issues, the world will reconfigure itself to such an implicit declaration in time.

    36. Re:Personal Liberty! by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      I doubt Snowden would live long (outside of a solitary cell, anyway) if he were discovered before he could run. We know how it went for Manning.

      No, the fact that there hasn't been a Chinese Snowden would indicate that Chinese intelligence services are not quite as lame, and can actually detect an intrusion of this scale on their internal networks.

    37. Re:Personal Liberty! by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      I generally agree, but there are accounts that are used only to troll/flamebait - the various APK clones are one good example. At that point, it doesn't really matter - if you mod them down based on the content you end up in exact same situation, consistently modding down every post.

    38. Re: Personal Liberty! by jma05 · · Score: 2

      Read all that. We all know our Chomsky. I know how to pick my media, thank you.
      The CIA adventurism was supposed to have been largely reined in by the congress in the 70s. The Internet stuff is new. Again, where do you think the new outrage is coming from. The world knows the history of US spy agencies.

    39. Re: Personal Liberty! by jma05 · · Score: 1

      I should say 80s.

    40. Re:Personal Liberty! by tragedy · · Score: 1

      Seconded. I'd mod you up if I didn't already comment.

      Which makes one wonder why you're posting AC here.

  3. pot/kettle storyline by turkeydance · · Score: 1

    but include the little teapot.

  4. New TED with ED by Dj+Stingray · · Score: 1

    ... on the youtube. It's going to be hard to find, for obvious reasons. Here is a link.

    Edward Snowden: Here's how we take back the Internet
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yVwAodrjZMY

  5. Re:Good for NSA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    The job of the NSA is to gack foreign companies and steal their source code?
    Interesting to say the least, do you have a source for this information, as I'm sure several governments would be interested.

  6. NSA validated in their concerns? by saps1e · · Score: 5, Interesting

    So if they have access to the source code, does this mean that the NSA is speaking authoritatively when they say Huawei's routers do have backdoors for the Chinese govt?

    1. Re:NSA validated in their concerns? by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      More like the NSA did not want kit on the open market that was not as easy as US and EU products for next gen DISCOROUTE, QUANTUM like options.
      "NSA targets sysadmin personal accounts to exploit networks" (March 21, 2014)
      http://www.zdnet.com/nsa-targe...
      i.e. a long list of ways in shared with 5+ other nations, their contractors, ex staff, former staff.
      Anyone able to afford contractors, ex staff, former staff for the methods gets in too :)
      Thats the problem with weak global security in any networking product - too many people know too much via gov and contracting work over the installed lifetime of any telco product.

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
  7. Re:Good for NSA by khasim · · Score: 5, Insightful

    No. Huawei is a commercial company. Not a government.

    This is our government engaging in corporate espionage.

  8. Retaliation is fair game by hessian · · Score: 1, Interesting

    The Chinese have been hacking American military stuff since the 1980s.

    Not only that, they were the source of the vast majority of the weapons used against us in the Vietnam war, and fought directly against us in Korea.

    They're bad guys.

    1. Re:Retaliation is fair game by Jmc23 · · Score: 2
      Remind us again why the US was there in the first place.

      Fucking kool-aid drinkers.

      --
      Don't complain about syntax, grammar, or spelling. There is no.hell like input on android.
    2. Re:Retaliation is fair game by YukariHirai · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Merely fighting against America does not necessarily make them bad guys, in a reasonably objective sense. If you are American, then anyone fighting against you would seem to be bad guys from your point of view, but from an outsider's point of view, it's just "these guys" and "these other guys".

      Some might argue that them hacking makes them bad guys by some measure, but the US has been doing the same thing, so I'd consider that inconclusive at best and hypocrisy at worst. Others might argue that the stuff done to Americans during the Vietnam War makes them bad guys, but given everything done by the Americans during the Vietnam War... well, same conclusion.

      With that said of course, the Chinese government has had a history of doing some very shitty things to a lot of people. On the other hand, so has the US government...

    3. Re:Retaliation is fair game by AHuxley · · Score: 2

      Why was "military stuff" near any vast fast public networks? What contractor or gov worker would connect a site, factory, base, supply system to a public network for anyone to 'try' for from some competing or hostile distant nation? Thats why most wealthy nations had dedicated hardened networks and very skilled staff. Only poor nations used their own low quality civilian like telco systems for encoded mill use.
      i.e. you get into a typing pool or low security mil network or its a massive well crafted honeypot.
      i.e. after the first few attempts by other nations to 'look' at the more secret networks - would steps be taken to remove or not connect military stuff from easy public networks with suspect international access?
      If the US was so good on the offensive part as we are now understanding via whistleblowers and the US press the hardened/secure parts would have been as impressive over decades?
      So expect the stories of mass 'military stuff' been lost via huge open fast public networks interfacing with fast not secure mil networks to be propaganda, a domestic recruiting tool (get a smart well paying mil job to help save the nations networks), extra funding stories of local political leaders (boondoggles) or junk science that could be lost with no risk.
      The US had a total mastery of getting into other nations networks globally but much less understanding in not connecting its own real data to the same fast open junk public/academic/telco networks?
      Expect honeypots, ended projects, altered work and disinformation to have been found at the end of most "hacking military stuff" - good enough to keep another nation best occupied/spending for years and follow back the hackers networks but not anything too useful.

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    4. Re:Retaliation is fair game by the+eric+conspiracy · · Score: 2

      Right.

      However I have some Chinese friends who aren't too happy with the history of their government. The remember things like relatives being bundled off to the provinces to never be seen again.

      Remember the empty chair.

      http://www.economist.com/blogs...

      America has plenty of problems but....

    5. Re:Retaliation is fair game by frist · · Score: 2

      There is no comparison my friend. You need to read about the glorious peoples' revolution in china. You need to read about 30 million people dying to famine because of Mao. When people compare the USA with China or the Soviet Union, it just shows how ignorant they are of history.

    6. Re:Retaliation is fair game by Alomex · · Score: 1

      Vietnam was fighting for its independence. In fact had it been granted after WWII as France had promised they would have likely become a capitalist country like the rest of Indochina.

      Instead we cornered them into a communist corner by bombing them and their children with napalm and they are the "bad guys" because the Chinese gave them some rifles?

  9. Huawei source code, take 2 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    #include "cisco.h"

    sigh...

  10. The jokes on you NSA by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 4, Informative

    Huawei had stolen the code from Cisco. So it is no big loss for them. They are laughing at NSA for not getting the source from the source.

    --
    sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
  11. Re:Good for NSA by cold+fjord · · Score: 2

    That's what they were paid for. Good job, NSA.

    Yes, but that sort of thing tends to be more valuable when it isn't publicized.

    --
    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
  12. Re:Good for NSA by fustakrakich · · Score: 1

    The job of the NSA is to gack foreign companies and steal their source code?

    Many of the "jobs" of the NSA are classified. It is perfectly plausible that this would be one of them. Since there is no oversight, we should always assume the worse. Chances are they will have gone well beyond whatever you can possibly dream up.

    --
    “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
  13. No he did the right thing by future+assassin · · Score: 2

    He releases in between Dancing With the Starts to catch people attention before they go back to the next reality tv show.

    --
    by TheSpoom (715771) Uncaring Linux user here. I have nothing to add to this but please continue. *munches popcorn*
  14. Re:Good for NSA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I guess you missed the part where it's in China. Communist/fascist regimes don't have distinctions like that.

    Neither do US corporations either... Microsoft, Google, Apple, Yahoo, RSA & others all collect data for the NSA.

  15. Round and round we go by grub · · Score: 1


    So, in essence, the NSA stole the stuff Huawei originally stole from Canada's Nortel.

    --
    Trolling is a art,
  16. Re:Good for NSA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    The US government and the big US commercial companies behaves as one giant blob of corruption though.
    The richest and most powerful 1% in china wants exactly the same as the 1% in the US. Same shit.

  17. Re:Good for NSA by jovius · · Score: 3

    So NSA does its job by stealing documents from China. Chinese do their job by stealing documents from the US. Snowden as a whistleblower does his job by exposing the documents. Its win-win-win for all.

  18. Re:Wow !! by binarylarry · · Score: 5, Funny

    Huawei so serious?

    --
    Mod me down, my New Earth Global Warmingist friends!
  19. NSA validates the right to steal source code by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    That's not the only joke on the NSA.

    An even bigger one is that they have now validated and condoned stealing source code as an acceptable activity. The legal ramifications of this are immense. The comedy value is just icing on the cake.

    1. Re:NSA validates the right to steal source code by Jmc23 · · Score: 1

      and IP doesn't matter!!

      --
      Don't complain about syntax, grammar, or spelling. There is no.hell like input on android.
    2. Re:NSA validates the right to steal source code by sconeu · · Score: 4, Funny

      IPv4 or IPv6?

      --
      General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
    3. Re:NSA validates the right to steal source code by Jmc23 · · Score: 1

      You're in the wrong namespace. Try and focus on the thread.

      --
      Don't complain about syntax, grammar, or spelling. There is no.hell like input on android.
    4. Re:NSA validates the right to steal source code by sconeu · · Score: 1

      Whoosh.

      Also, remember, we're talking about routers. I'm well aware of what IP meant in context.

      --
      General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
    5. Re:NSA validates the right to steal source code by Jmc23 · · Score: 1
      Oh, you actually thought that was funny?

      OMG the socially inept troglodytes agree with you.

      --
      Don't complain about syntax, grammar, or spelling. There is no.hell like input on android.
  20. Re:Good for NSA by AmiMoJo · · Score: 5, Insightful

    That's what they were paid for. Good job, NSA.

    Except that they just undermined their government's protests and Chinese hacking. Unlike US allegations against China which are pretty thin the Chinese now have concrete evidence of international law-breaking and industrial espionage against them. Expect it to be used against the US at the WTO and whenever the US tries to make any complaints about hacking in the future.

    It will be interesting to see how the US government tries to spin this. They said in the past that hacking could be considered an act of war, retaliated against with conventional weapons as well as cyberattacks. It's pretty much open season on the US now, and you can expect to see virus attacks on US infrastructure in the future. All thanks to the NSA.

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

    That is not humor. We are dangerous and we accept no threat to exist.

  22. Re:Wow !! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Yes. The NSA does no do this for entertainment or commercial purpose. This is the force of a major power being used to augment the industrial military might. This is just one facet of what really goes on not what you think goes on.

  23. Re:Wow !! by MobSwatter · · Score: 1

    Anyone seeing here why the TPP trade deal might not be such a good idea after all? Then again over the last 20 years you've all see the dollar that was with 5 Canadian to 1 US go 1 for 1. Your paying 5 bucks a gallon for gas and almost as much for milk. Warning signs? What warning signs..? We'll be having are dollar even with the peso in the middle of a zombie apocalypse, and the news will still be telling everyone that everything is okay...

  24. Re:Good for NSA by plover · · Score: 2

    When China engages in spying on corporate America, they spy on companies like Valspar for the formula the US Navy uses to protect warships from rust. They then give that information to Chinese firms to make durable paint for their own navy, and to turn a huge profit.

    When the NSA spies on Huawei, they use the information to discover vulnerabilities they then go on to internally use to exploit the infrastructure of those who use them. They do not give the information to Cisco in order to make more efficient American routers (that are then made in China.).

    So China uses industrial espionage to strengthen their military and economy. The NSA uses industrial espionage to weaken the security of everyone equally.

    See the difference? Me neither.

    --
    John
  25. Re:Wow !! by Jmc23 · · Score: 1

    Um, nice revisionist history there. Unfortunately reality and the internet disagree with you.

    --
    Don't complain about syntax, grammar, or spelling. There is no.hell like input on android.
  26. Re:Wow !! by MobSwatter · · Score: 1

    Well at least someone stands up and takes credit for all that.

  27. NSA by giorgist · · Score: 1

    Tell us what you know !!! Information wants to be free

  28. Re:Good for NSA by TheOldestGit · · Score: 1

    Well thanks for that NSA - keeping the new network where I live properly security vetted ;-) [I happen to live in the Isle of Man where the the new LTE stuff is being done with these (invisible) guys] NB We had the first 3G network in Europe & the Japanese engineers were everywhere for development

    --
    Having Leeched on /. for years I thought Hmmmmm-Subscribe!
  29. Entertaining quote by phantomfive · · Score: 1
    From the article:

    NSA workers not only succeeded in accessing the email archive, but also the secret source code of individual Huwaei products. Software source code is the holy grail of computer companies.

    --
    "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    1. Re:Entertaining quote by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      Thats the big question - how did the NSA get in...
      China faced years of efforts from the USA, UK and Soviet Union to try and understand its nuclear tests and later rapid mil advances via help from diverse private EU/US/Canadian contractors.
      China knew every longer range radio transmission of any kind was been saved by sites in surrounding nations and via sat efforts.
      China knew to harden all communications surrounding is nuclear tests.
      i.e. British sigint in Hong Kong was a massive undertaking even with the 1997 handover (Chung Hom Kok/Demos-I), later moved to Australia.
      China was well aware of the efforts going back decades and the constant signals attention their embassies got.
      So for the NSA just to get into some "email archive" seems a bit too lucky both from a networking aspect in China or what China expects to flow in from outside networks.
      i.e. staff been turned or hardware changes vs accessing a network all the way in and out to move the data?

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    2. Re:Entertaining quote by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      Thats the big question - how did the NSA get in...

      Through the holes in the source code that Huawei stole from Cisco? (which were placed there by the NSA in the first place?)

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    3. Re:Entertaining quote by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      You would think the Russian advisors would have warned them about complex US hardware and software exported via no questions asked US front companies :)

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    4. Re:Entertaining quote by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      The Russian advisors are probably over there snickering in the corner

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
  30. Re:Good for NSA by ark1 · · Score: 5, Funny

    It will be interesting to see how the US government tries to spin this.

    "It was not theft, it was copyright infringement."

  31. Re:Good for NSA by oldhack · · Score: 1

    Right, "commercial company" in the commie CPC empire. What planet do you live on?

    --
    Fuck systemd. Fuck Redhat. Fuck Soylent, too. Wait, scratch the last one.
  32. Re:Wow !! by thebigmacd · · Score: 1

    Uh...yeah...no

    The lowest the Canadian dollar has ever been was 61.79 cents US.

  33. Re:Too slow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    You're still paying attention, though, I see.

  34. China vs NSA. by porky_pig_jr · · Score: 1

    Repeat after me: China = bad! NSA = good!

  35. Act of war... according to US by jma05 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    > Wait,... isn't this the purpose of the NSA?

    According to US government, hacking communication infrastructure of a country by another government is an "act of war", not regular espionage. They said this very loudly just before Snowden revelations began. So NO. They are not supposed to be doing that.

    1. Re:Act of war... according to US by cold+fjord · · Score: 1

      "Act of war" is not a catchall for all hacking, only certain acts.

      --
      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
    2. Re:Act of war... according to US by jma05 · · Score: 1

      Why don't you go ahead and define what is and what isn't an "act of war", exclusively using statements by US officials on this matter, rather than your personal opinions that suit your worldview.

    3. Re:Act of war... according to US by sumdumass · · Score: 1

      Actually, it was the Pentagon who claimed hacking was an act of war. I can't seem to find any law maker, presidential statement, or law making it so.

      Granted, the Pentagon is a government agency, but they cannot act lawfully without the civilian government giving them permission. So obviously, an act of war is subject to interpretation.

    4. Re:Act of war... according to US by ignavus · · Score: 2

      > Wait,... isn't this the purpose of the NSA?

      According to US government, hacking communication infrastructure of a country by another government is an "act of war", not regular espionage. They said this very loudly just before Snowden revelations began. So NO. They are not supposed to be doing that.

      Ah, but when we do it, it is a glorious action undertaken for freedom, truth, and to protect innocent children.

      But when those foreigners do the same thing, it is because they are mean, slinking, low scoundrels.

      There's a world of difference. Anyone can see that!

      --
      I am anarch of all I survey.
    5. Re:Act of war... according to US by jma05 · · Score: 1

      I am not sure what you are disagreeing with.

      - Pentagon officials are US officials.
      - I did not say that an act of war isn't subject to interpretation, although I fail to see how you reached that conclusion, given your prior propositions.
      - Nor does it make sense for cold fjord to insinuate that I implied that all hacking falls under acts of war. He was making a strawman argument.

      But I am asking what is it that was an "act of war" about Chinese hacking of US that wasn't the same about US hacking of Chinese. That it was that China did it, vs. US did it? Is that what you are referring to as "subject to interpretation".

    6. Re:Act of war... according to US by sumdumass · · Score: 1

      I am not sure what you are disagreeing with.

      I'm not really in disagreement with anything, just stating that different people have different opinions about it and the one you seem to be relying on is an underling of the people with the power to actually decide what is and what isn't an act of war against the US. This means they can say a lot of things and it doesn't make it so.

      Pentagon officials are US officials.

      Yes, and they are under higher up officials who make those decisions. They also administrate the military so you could say they might have been posturing to justify budgetary wants. Either way, they do not have the power to decide what is or isn't an act of war unless the entire civilian government is taken out first.

      I did not say that an act of war isn't subject to interpretation, although I fail to see how you reached that conclusion, given your prior propositions.

      I never said you did say it. I said that an entity without the power to make the claim made it and until you hear it from those who can make the determination, it is all opinion. We have government entities and employees on bother the pro and denial side of global warming, some of which state certain things have to happen. But we don't take their comments as the official position of the US because the US often ignores their recommendations or does the opposite. So taking the wording of a department without clear authority doesn't seem as set in stone as you pretend it is.

      But I am asking what is it that was an "act of war" about Chinese hacking of US that wasn't the same about US hacking of Chinese. That it was that China did it, vs. US did it? Is that what you are referring to as "subject to interpretation".

      The difference is that the claim of an act of war was made by an underling organization within the US government that doesn't have the power to establish what is or is not an act of war. When you hear congress passing a resolution declaring it an act of war or the president who has constitutional authority creating an executive order declaring it then going to congress, it can be clearly understood as an act of war. Until then, its a department completely incapable of making the determination as a matter of policy that made a statement.

      In other words, no one with the authority to declare so has declared hacking as an act of war nor has any established treaty. Your question and reasoning doesn't stand scrutiny when examined in the light of facts. The entire concept of it being an act of war was only the subject of someone's interpretation or opinion about hacking that was going on.

    7. Re:Act of war... according to US by jma05 · · Score: 1

      I think you argued for your position quite well here. It just did not connect in the earlier post since I cannot read your mind.

    8. Re:Act of war... according to US by jma05 · · Score: 1

      > Did we even read the article

      From NYT:
      "But the plans went further: to exploit Huawei’s technology so that when the company sold equipment to other countries — including both allies and nations that avoid buying American products — the N.S.A. could roam through their computer and telephone networks to conduct surveillance and, if ordered by the president, offensive cyberoperations."

    9. Re:Act of war... according to US by sumdumass · · Score: 1

      Well, despite there being a long history of morons and hypocrites working for the government, i wasn't saying that at all. I basically said someone made a statement about something above their pay grade and you should not take it as an official policy statement.

      As for idiots or morons running the country, just like any other country, we have quite a few of them in the civilian population too. So the answer will be the same as last year or 50 years ago. NOTHING.

  36. Re:Wow !! by MobSwatter · · Score: 1

    Yep, my bad, you are right. That was the exchange I got at a store up there for a pack of smokes while on vacation paying with US dollars, nice to have made out like a bandit at one point. Still even at that, it was 1.62CAN/1.00US, now it's 1.12CAN/1.00US.

  37. The USSR was fail by hessian · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It led to some controversial things such as the Vietnam war, but it was effective at stopping the Soviet Union from conquering more territory.

    Which, given what a social, political, environmental and cultural wasteland the Communists left behind wherever they gained authority, was a justifiable and in fact laudable goal.

  38. I'm not sure "ironically" is the right word.. by issicus · · Score: 1

    Isn't that why they hacked huawei?

  39. Re:Good for NSA by EuclideanSilence · · Score: 1

    It's pretty much open season on the US now, and you can expect to see virus attacks on US infrastructure in the future. All thanks to the NSA.

    I wouldn't mind getting some new infrastructure. Burn it all down.

  40. well... by Connie_Lingus · · Score: 1

    ...isn't that kinda what we pay them to do?

    seriously, the last time i checked China was a communist country with no rule of law and no true free elections...isn't it then part of the national security interests of the United States to do what they can to keep tabs on all sorts of stuff?

    don't we know that Chinese hackers have infiltrated *our* corporations? do you really think microsoft has never been hacked or the windows source code downloaded and sold to players all over the globe?

    i mean, really...is what everyone here shooting for is the US just closing up all security agencies and saying to its citizens "well, game over...lets hope we never need protection against bad actors on the world stage....breath mint anyone?"

    --
    never bring a twinkie to a food fight.
  41. Huawei to judge... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    That is how you do it folks :)

  42. Nothing ironic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    When NSA went into it, they found backdoors in the code designed to look for things. Snowden is such a traitor that he is only giving part of the data that he found. Had he wanted to be half way decent, he would have shown what the NSA found.

  43. Re:Wow !! by noh8rz10 · · Score: 1

    Um, nice revisionist history there. Unfortunately reality and the internet disagree with you.

    he's pretty much right. gas and milk are $4/gal. if the dollar were even with the peso and there were a zombie apocalypse, fox news would be blaming obama and illegal immigrants.

  44. Re:Wow !! by ComputersKai · · Score: 1

    change that to "Armed Robbery"

  45. Re:Wow !! by MobSwatter · · Score: 1

    Yeah, but folks are on the status quo only recognition mode, seems it's the same crap that preceded the fall of the soviet union. "Oh look there's a problem we can't solve because it will effect our paychecks and piss off the corporations, lets ignore it and move to the next one while the unsolved one compounds."

  46. Here we go again by dbIII · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Q: Why is Snowden a traitor and North not?
    Please show your working.


    I'll bet it's an amusing little bit that skates around some view that Snowden was betraying a King for his country and North betraying his country in the way he served his King. I really don't get why people like you want to spit in the face of George Washington and go back to King George.

    1. Re:Here we go again by dbIII · · Score: 1

      I'm still not sure why he would be a traitor

      There's my answer then - King before country and fuck the constitution. So why do you make so much noise about being a patriot?

    2. Re:Here we go again by dbIII · · Score: 1

      He stole secretes that went past anything about domestic spying and gave them to foreign nations

      Is a newspaper a foreign nation now?

    3. Re:Here we go again by sumdumass · · Score: 1

      Like I said, all in your mind. Now please go take your meds and call your shrink before posting any more.

    4. Re:Here we go again by dbIII · · Score: 3, Insightful

      So supplying weapons to a terrorist group less than a year after they killed over a hundred US marines is not treason but leaking to a newspaper is? If you are being serious then you are not in a position to be lecturing others on mental illness.

    5. Re:Here we go again by dbIII · · Score: 3, Insightful
      So there we go - interests of a corrupt few and a terrorist group before a nation. Now at least the readers here know where you are coming from when you call Snowden a traitor.

      But I never said anything about Treason, I said traitor

      What a pathetic attempt to weasel out and not take responsibility for your own words.

    6. Re:Here we go again by dbIII · · Score: 1

      Please stop playing stupid.

      I'd have to be to believe a lie like that "gave them to foreign nations" trash you are trying to sell.

    7. Re:Here we go again by sumdumass · · Score: 1

      Still playing stupid or are you outtigjy trolling now?

  47. Re:Good for NSA by dbIII · · Score: 3, Interesting

    They do not give the information to Cisco in order to make more efficient American routers

    Maybe they do. One odd thing to come out was taxpayer funded industrial espionage of Indonesian clove cigarettes for "US commercial clients". I wonder how much commercial spying is going on and what the kickbacks to the intelligence agencies or those issuing the orders are.

  48. Why prent to be that stupid? by dbIII · · Score: 2

    So you want us to bring up slavery?
    Now do you understand how STUPID your attempted goalpost shift above is.

  49. Re:Good for NSA by lennier1 · · Score: 1

    A company deliberately installing back doors to the world wide Internet.

    So, we're now talking about the NSA backdoors in routers made by US companies?

  50. No - Korea was a draw by Bruce66423 · · Score: 1

    And they lost in Malaya, the forgotten episode of the Cold War. Actually the CHINESE lost in Vietnam; by the end the North was aligned with Moscow and actually fought a war with China in 1979. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

  51. Re:Good for NSA by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

    The NSA certainly does spy for commercial advantage. Remember when they spied on Airbus so that Boeing could win some contracts?

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

    in 1999 1 US dollar went for 1.30 canadian.(i only know this because I worked on the NYS thruway and we had to know this being that we would deal with canadians) not quite 5-1, and in the past few years the canadian dollar was actually stronger than ours.

    --
    have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
  53. New York Times, not Snowden by davecb · · Score: 1
    --
    davecb@spamcop.net
  54. Not really ironic . . . by Kimomaru · · Score: 1

    What's tally ironic is that iPhones are manufactured in China. That's the kind of irony that makes my ears fall off. I think, at some point we're going to have to make these devices in the US.

  55. #include "cisco.h" by phitsanu · · Score: 2

    #include "cisco.h"

  56. Re:Good for NSA by dunkindave · · Score: 1

    Except that they just undermined their government's protests and Chinese hacking. Unlike US allegations against China which are pretty thin the Chinese now have concrete evidence of international law-breaking and industrial espionage against them. Expect it to be used against the US at the WTO and whenever the US tries to make any complaints about hacking in the future.

    And you just expressed why the one sided leaks of Snowden have done so much damage to the US and the west, not helped them as is often claimed. Snowden has handed the ammo to the very people who have waged the largest hacking campaign against the west for them to continue doing what they have been while allowing them to play the victim. The US has proof of the allegations against China, and others, but revealing them would compromise its ability to continue stopping them (namely reveal what they can detect versus what they didn't), so the US doesn't reveal it unless it is a very major event. I find it very hard to believe that with the documents Snowden had access to he did not also uncover ones documenting the known attacks by actors like the Chinese against the US, yet he has chosen NOT to release THOSE. And of the attacks and breakins the US knows about, there are many fold more that were done against the US that the US doesn't know about (unless of course you buy the theory that the US is all powerful and everyone else is incompetent).

    And the argument that it was the journalists that release the docs, not Snowden, is a strawman. Snowden chose which documents to give to the journalists. Claiming it was just a large dump of unreviewed documents that he gave to foreigners, even if he believed they were journalist, is not a responsible act.

  57. Re:Good for NSA by Alarash · · Score: 1

    I thought any company in China has to be owned at 51% by the government?

  58. Re:Wow !! by arglebargle_xiv · · Score: 1

    I wonder if the NSA was surprised to find Cisco copyright notices in the "Huawei" code they took? And wouldn't this be repossession rather than theft?

  59. Some useful perspective by hessian · · Score: 1

    http://www.americanthinker.com...

    Stalin was not the first and not the only Russian tyrant who was ready to turn the whole nation into âoecamp dust.â You may be interested to know that after the Crimean War of 1854â"56, the government of Tsar Nicholas I sold at auction for fertilizer the bleached bones of 38,000 Russian soldiers who fell in the battle of Sevastopol.

    Today the world is threatened with a second Crimean War. The troops under the command of the new tsar of Russia are on alert.