Slashdot Mirror


What Federal Employees Really Need To Worry About After the Chinese Hack

HughPickens.com writes: Lisa Rein writes in the Washington Post that a new government review of what the Chinese hack of sensitive security clearance files of 21 million people means for national security is in — and some of the implications are quite grave. According to the Congressional Research Service, covert intelligence officers and their operations could be exposed and high-resolution fingerprints could be copied by criminals. Some suspect that the Chinese government may build a database of U.S. government employees that could help identify U.S. officials and their roles or that could help target individuals to gain access to additional systems or information. National security concerns include whether hackers could have obtained information that could help them identify clandestine and covert officers and operations (PDF).

CRS says that if the fingerprints in the background investigation files are of high enough quality, "depending on whose hands the fingerprints come into, they could be used for criminal or counterintelligence purposes." Fingerprints also could be trafficked on the black market for profit — or used to blow the covers of spies and other covert and clandestine officers, the research service found. And if they're compromised, fingerprints can't be reissued like a new credit card, the report says, making "recovery from the breach more challenging for some."
vivaoporto Also points out that these same hackers are believed to be responsible for hacking United Airlines.

123 comments

  1. So you made this giant database of sensitive info by weilawei · · Score: 4, Insightful

    And then expected it would never be hacked?

    Bravo.

  2. well, it might help China by turkeydance · · Score: 1

    in a bid to buy /.

  3. No problem! by Qzukk · · Score: 4, Funny

    Just issue everyone a new set of fingerprints.

    --
    If I have been able to see further than others, it is because I bought a pair of binoculars.
    1. Re:No problem! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Just issue everyone a new set of fingerprints.

      I thought so too, but did you read the summary? It says "fingerprints can't be reissued like a new credit card." There's probably too much red tape involved.

    2. Re:No problem! by fustakrakich · · Score: 1

      "Red", but not "tape".

      Anyway, the Q branch knows how to get around this

      --
      “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
    3. Re:No problem! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or more likely, too many pink fingers involved.

    4. Re:No problem! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And this is exactly why biometrics are bullshit (at least when used as a replacement for passwords).

    5. Re: No problem! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They just did! http://m.slashdot.org/story/297431

  4. spying: good when we do it, bad when they do it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    build a database of U.S. government employees

    So waitaminnit... let me get this straight.

    Is this the same US government that has built a database of virtually every internet-using person in the world, including all their private communication, all their personal associations, the contents of their phone calls, where they are at any given moment in time, and every shred of information that can possibly be obtained?

    Would it be that same US government that has the unmitigated gall to complain about a tiny, tiny fraction of that being done to them in return?

    I just want to make sure it's the same one. Because it doesn't seem like a government that spies on everyone in the world to a scale never before seen in history has ANY FUCKING right to complain. Good for the goose, good for the gander, after all.

  5. Fingerprints can't be reissued by grumpy_old_grandpa · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Fingerprints can't be reissued

    No shit sherlock.

    At least this makes it obvious that fingerprint databases are ripe for abuse. I guess we can only hope this will lower the popularity of collecting it in the first place.

    1. Re:Fingerprints can't be reissued by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 1

      Fingerprints should never be available, and only as a query/response data store with id links that have no further info on the subject they belong to.

      Just because you "want" to see it doesn't mean you "should" see it.

      --
      -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
    2. Re:Fingerprints can't be reissued by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's a reason biometrics are a bad idea, and breaches like this one are it.

    3. Re:Fingerprints can't be reissued by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 1

      Technically, we can regrow fingerprints, but it's very expensive, and we have to alter the pattern.

      Biometrics are frequently a lazy method that creates just as many problems as they solve. Most security breaches involve people spacing out. And if you make things too difficult, they subvert them, making them even more useless.

      --
      -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
    4. Re:Fingerprints can't be reissued by olterman · · Score: 1

      So someone can be sued when having conjectural evidence at best against that person and fingerprints "are highly unlikely" to be planted by somebody else. Let's say somebody walked near the crime scene and that persons's fingerprints were found from the murder weapon. They just found the killer.

      The problem is not the fingerprints but missing evidence and false claims.

  6. Wrong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And if they're compromised, fingerprints can't be reissued like a new credit card, the report says, making "recovery from the breach more challenging for some."

    Fingerprints can so be reissued. You just need a hand transplant.

  7. The NSA likely hacked the USG to frame China by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Interesting

    This is a great way to ensure a budget increase and change the subject from illegal mass surveillance. So, there's nothing to worry about!

  8. Multi-factor is the only right way by grilled-cheese · · Score: 3, Insightful
    Proper authentication is made up of at least two of the following:
    • Something you know (Password)
    • Something you have (Smartcard)
    • Something you are (Fingerprints)
    1. Re:Multi-factor is the only right way by johnwallace123 · · Score: 3, Informative

      NO! A million times no!

      Proper multi-factor authentication is ALWAYS "something you have" and "something you know". The idea is that if someone steals the thing you know (i.e. password), then they have to also steal something you have (i.e. hardware token / smartcard / phone, you name it). The hope is that even if you don't notice that your password is compromised, you'll notice when you lose your phone. Similarly, if someone copies the smartcard you have, they still don't know the PIN to access your account.

      The hack of fingerprint databases illustrates this. For example, someone with access to the hacked OPM databse can steal/copy your smartcard and can now impersonate you at will if you've relied on Smartcard + Fingerprints. Now, "something you have" could certainly be your fingerprint, but 2-factor auth is NOT "something you have" and "something else you have." Just like the bank's "security questions" are not two-factor auth, because they're "something you know" and "something else you know."

    2. Re:Multi-factor is the only right way by Reason58 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Going to have to disagree. Fingerprints (all biometrics) are identification, not authentication. Just like a SSN, if you cannot change it then it is not a secret.

    3. Re:Multi-factor is the only right way by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 4, Funny

      Proper authentication is made up of at least two of the following:

      Something you know

      I have a big Dick

      Something you have

      A big Dick

      Something you are

      A big Dick

      Huh - didn't know it would be so easy......

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    4. Re:Multi-factor is the only right way by Required+Snark · · Score: 4, Funny

      Being a Bid Dick and all, you are a perfect candidate to be in charge of security at OMB. Being a Dick seems to be the only qualification you need.

      --
      Why is Snark Required?
    5. Re:Multi-factor is the only right way by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      These are the three facets of access control, not just authentication.

      You first identify. That's "something you are". You are you. Your name is how people know you. Your fingerprint can identify you just as well as (and no better than) your name or your SSN (or other government-issued identifier).

      Next, you authenticate. That's "something you know". You keep a secret that I accept as an answer to believe you are who you have been identified to be. That's all a password is. Other methods of authentication are private details. Just make sure they're actually private. Things like "mother's maiden name" are not private but are often mistakenly used for this process, with obviously bad results.

      Last, you authorize. That's "something you have". You keep a token that provides proof that, not only are you who you say you are, but you are also authorized to take certain actions in behalf of yourself or others. This can be something as simple as a paper (or brass!) badge or as complicated as an RFID card.

      Identification is vulnerable to outright lying. Authentication is vulnerable to espionage. Authorization is vulnerable to counterfeiting. Protect against all three for the best results.

    6. Re:Multi-factor is the only right way by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Interestingly, the DoD Common Access Cards (CACs) have all three of these. It's something you have (a tangible physical object) that requires a PIN to use (something you know). It has your photo on the front (something you are) and getting a new one issued or changing your PIN requires scanning your fingerprints into the system (again, something you are.)

      Source: 5 years in the military

    7. Re: Multi-factor is the only right way by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So are passwords and smart cards. Identification is what drives the authentication.

    8. Re:Multi-factor is the only right way by olterman · · Score: 1

      "Something you are" = Somebody can verify the fingerprints came from you. It is an authentication process in case of fingerprints. If not, they are just a password, i.e. something you know.

    9. Re:Multi-factor is the only right way by ebvwfbw · · Score: 1

      Being a Bid Dick and all, you are a perfect candidate to be in charge of security at OMB. Being a Dick seems to be the only qualification you need.

      Don't be so silly. You have to also be a really big asshole.

    10. Re:Multi-factor is the only right way by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is that you, Cheney?

  9. What about NYSE shutting down? "unrelated" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Shanghai and Shenzen were both in massive sell-off mode the morning that NYSE went down, but that was "unrelated" - or was it actually?

  10. Re:So you made this giant database of sensitive in by xxxJonBoyxxx · · Score: 4, Interesting

    >> giant database...never be hacked

    "Data warehouses" and "big data" have all these problems. I remember a big data security talk where the conclusion was basically "well there's a handful of half-baked solutions for the biggest platforms, but no one actually uses them."

    In my corporate experience, data warehouse and big data projects happen when an executive gets annoyed with the slow progress of IT and basically dumps out the contents of a few databases into an almost-impossible-to-secure bowl of soup. As a resident security guru I frequently developed a blind spot for these executive disasters: reporting or trying to audit them usually led to career pain.

  11. Leverage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    What this breach really does is give Chinese agents leverage over U.S. citizens in sensitive positions. It completely destroys the ability of the U.S. Government to keep secrets... any secrets... away from a determined probe, because a Chinese agent WILL have information that gives sufficient leverage to conduct black mail against a person close to the secret.

    1. Re:Leverage by Fire_Wraith · · Score: 1

      Guess there's going to be a lot of openings for new clandestine services agents. Let's just hope they guard the information better next time.

    2. Re:Leverage by ScentCone · · Score: 1

      This. No fooling.

      --
      Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
    3. Re:Leverage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I expect the Chinese will be able to use this to find anyone in sensitive positions with family in China and then blackmail them. It's an obvious tactic that they have used before.
      Another possibility is for them to get the stolen Ashley Madison data and cross-reference it with the stolen OPM data. Hilarity ensues!

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

      The real issue isn't blackmail. After all, part of the point of the investigation is to make sure you can't easily be blackmailed, it's much scarier than that - now they know all your relatives (souse and children included) address, birthday, ssn, place of business, etc. it's easy for a Chinese agent to approach you and threaten to kidnap your children or kill your parents or whatever is most likely to motivate you. It also means they have a big data warehouse to use to figure out - based on relationships between people and companies - who is (or has) worked on what, hence on who they should be interested in approaching/exploiting. The government has been FAR to slow to acknowledge this problem (in fact they haven't officially) which tells me they have no plan to deal with it. They are offering "feel good" crap in place of anything resembling an actual solution to the real problem. I am not worried that anyone will steal my identity, I am worried that someone might snatch one of my brothers or sisters or kids next time they leave the country and then give me a call demanding information. What the hell am I supposed to do? Report it to an incompetent bunch of morons who won't even admit the possibility this is a problem?

    5. Re:Leverage by DrStrangluv · · Score: 1

      This is about more than just overseas spies. This is about people working in sensitive positions with the pentagon, the capitol, at langley, the nsa, embassies, etc, and gaining access to anything to which those people can get access. Perhaps one of the first things a hypothetical Chinese operation might do with this leverage is use it to discover the location and ID of any agents working in their borders. However, the real danger here isn't just for current operatives. The danger is that we can't also just recruit and place new operatives, because this gives anyone with that leverage the ability to continue to discover new operatives over time. It's not about the data they already have. It's about their ability to use this to continue to gather new data.

  12. It's the beauty, and the bane of high technology by fustakrakich · · Score: 1

    Secrets are harder to keep. Personally I see it as a bit of an equalizer, and makes warfare a bit more symmetrical, thus less effective in gaining supremacy.

    --
    “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
  13. Three takeaways by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 4, Interesting

    As a former regional acting Security Officer, this whole thing brings three conclusions, which we all knew in the 80s when we set up security priniciples:

    1. Full data should never be fully available on any external or easily linked database. It is far better to have a query/response system that does not have full details.

    2. You don't need the full security clearance information unless you're looking for potential spies. Only the CIA internal agency and FBI internal agency data should have been internally available. Ever.

    3. Linking position to clearance data (other than NEEDED level of clearance) is never a good idea. We used to keep that on locked laptops (yes, a decade before you civvies got them) in removable locked hard drives for that exact reason. In a safe that was fire proof. And EMP safe.

    --
    -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
  14. More Money? by MarkvW · · Score: 1

    "Intelligence" yields a pathetically low return on investment. If past history is any indicator (Philby, for example), the world is NOT going to collapse, things are NOT that grave, and except for the damage to the intelligence community, things are going to go on pretty much the same as always.

  15. Can you tell me something? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Does everyone else who's been hacked by the US government ALSO have these grave and severe problems to look out for? Or is the concern only if "the wrong people" do it? Or only not a problem if "the right people" do it? If so, who decides?

    TIA, 98% Of The World

  16. So where is the rending of garments? by sjames · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Snowden hands over evidence that the NSA has been illegally spying on U.S. citizens and Allies (not to mention perjuring itself before Congress) to an American journalist resulting in a careful release of some data to prove the allegation and the feds call for his head on a platter, even risking an international incident or two to try to disappear him.

    The OPM fumbles and hands over 4.2 million very detailed dossiers on federal employees and 21 million others with security clearance to China and the feds say "no worries, we'll give you a year of credit monitoring.....eventually.".

    1. Re:So where is the rending of garments? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What I want to know is how is it that the US national security state apparatus is characterized as being the most pervasive and powerful organization of its type in the history of the world, and yet when these type of breaches occur it seems like its amateur hour everywhere. Nobody secured the network, their systems, and the NSA thinks China probably did it, but isn't certain.

    2. Re:So where is the rending of garments? by Coren22 · · Score: 1

      OPM =/= NSA/CIA

      The Office of Personnel Management is not the same organization as NSA/CIA.

      So you compare the IRS to the State Department just because they both ha sleazy employees?

      --
      APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
    3. Re:So where is the rending of garments? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, except the OPM has data on NSA/CIA employees, which you would assume should be classified for those working in sensitive areas. That's what I mean by amateur hour everywhere.

    4. Re:So where is the rending of garments? by Coren22 · · Score: 1

      It is considered confidential and PII, and should be controlled in that manner. I agree fully that they screwed up, but unfortunately, the gov organization in charge of information security (NSA - communcations, DISA - computers) isn't allowed to tell them to get their act together.

      As far as I know, the NSA isn't involved too much in the investigation. I do expect heads will roll over this though, it is just a matter of getting to the bottom of it.

      --
      APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
    5. Re:So where is the rending of garments? by sjames · · Score: 1

      It's pervasive and powerful all right. It's just that it has the Competence of the Three Stooges and the level headedness of the Queen of Hearts.

    6. Re:So where is the rending of garments? by sjames · · Score: 1

      True, but unlike all of the domestic spying going on, securing American networks and government systems from foreign attack is very much part of their charter. They blew it big time.

    7. Re:So where is the rending of garments? by Gryle · · Score: 1

      Snowden and OPMI are not an exact apples-to-apples comparison. Snowden disclosed classified information pertaining to technical methods, programs, and capabilities of the intelligence community. The OMPI data isn't classified and most of it, excluding medical records and probably certain financials, could be obtained by a determined and patient private investigator. That's the difference.

      In anticipation of counterarguments: I'm not saying the government has reacted appropriately to the OPMI breach. No, I wouldn't want my personal information out there in the open for all to see. I know the OPMI breach risks the exposure of clandestine operatives

      --
      Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not entirely sure about the universe - Einstein
    8. Re:So where is the rending of garments? by sjames · · Score: 3, Insightful

      And meanwhile, Snowden's release had a strong element of public interest to it. There is no public interest in OPM's screw up.

    9. Re:So where is the rending of garments? by Gryle · · Score: 1

      That's a good point. Most of the American populace aren't directly affected by the OPM breach so it doesn't register with them.

      --
      Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not entirely sure about the universe - Einstein
    10. Re:So where is the rending of garments? by sjames · · Score: 1

      Actually, I meant in the other sense. The American public has a right to know that an agency of it's government is illegally spying on them. The public has no such overriding interest in the personal details of federal employees.

    11. Re:So where is the rending of garments? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The American public does have an interest in the personal details of federal employees--specifically looking out for their privacy just like we would any citizen. This sort of thing drastically increased the probability and magnitude of a breach occurring (and thus risk). There never should have been this giant database, and definitely not full-text accessible all over the place.

    12. Re:So where is the rending of garments? by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      Yes NSA and CIA are globally active with their own staff from other nations working on shared projects, cleared for NSA and CIA work, vaults, papers, files, networks.
      The NSA has it collection systems, the CIA has its own vast duplicated networks.
      That is not on some open, random, unencrypted, English searchable database in the USA waiting for any internal or external search request.
      Very few nations keep any data in any readable form that can walk. East Germany lost its list of trusted staff to the West and ensured it never had an easy to find list until it went digital and the CIA got the final staff list. Switzerland lost its under mountain project/location of structures list.
      The only searchable, English, plain text list that exist are bait, traps, honeypot, limited hangouts. Or lists of staff that are understood to have been in public, are are listed in other roles, front companies, web 2.0 stories, fake SS numbers, fake histories.

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
  17. Not hacked... it was sanctioned by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You remember those "Backdoors" you want for government to be able to access everyones data..... Well China thought that was a great idea and created one for themselves.

    Just think of this as being the same as what the US has done to the rest of the world, including their Allies.

    What goes about, comes about.

  18. Re:spying: good when we do it, bad when they do it by chipschap · · Score: 0

    Would it be that same US government that has the unmitigated gall to complain about a tiny, tiny fraction of that being done to them in return?

    I understand your point and I see where you're coming from, but consider: with the breach that took place, people can die. This isn't some sort of political theory or a matter of taking a stand. Real people may die because of this.

  19. Re:spying: good when we do it, bad when they do it by stackOVFL · · Score: 1

    Yes, by gosh. You've hit the nail squarely on the head. It IS the very same US government!

  20. My eye doctor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Is a chinese hack.

  21. Non-issue by StikyPad · · Score: 2

    This is a non-issue for several reasons, among them:

    1) Covert officers travel under diplomatic cover, and most diplomats have security clearances. This will not stand out.
    2) It's already trivial for a nation-state to identify spies under diplomatic cover. We know who theirs are, and they know who ours are. Diplomatic cover is not about cover; it's about *diplomatic immunity*, so if they get pissed at our spies, all they can do is kick them out, and vice versa.
    3) Non-official cover employees are harder to detect, but they generally only hide their present employment, not their past employment, and usually have cover stories, not cover identities/jobs. See: Valerie Plame. At best, you can use fingerprints to confirm that they are who they say they are, which they're not lying about anyway, so...

    The real danger is blackmail. The employer already knows what infractions are listed on the SF86, of course, but the general public may not. Affairs, drug usage, and to a lesser degree, expunged criminal history, arrest record, financial issues, etc. Just download an SF86 and look it over. Depending on the individual, it could be a scandal that they'd rather avoid, and/or that the employer would rather avoid. e.g., "Why would you hire someone who smoked crack?"

    1. Re:Non-issue by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Covert officers do not travel under diplomatic cover. You're thinking of non-covert officers, i.e. the "official" spies with diplomatic immunity. The only thing covert, if at all, is that they nominally hold some official position with the embassy. Although often it's an intelligence-related position.

      Covert officers have their status as an officer of the U.S. government classified, and they enter countries as tourists or under some other cover. And when arrested they get to sit in prison. Thus, if you have access to the classified database of all government officers, you'll be able to identify a large number of covert officers.

      Which part of "covert" or "cover" was confusing? Maybe you were associating cover with diplomatic immunity. You should be watching The Americans.

      Note that officer and agent are not the same thing. It would be kind of stupid to use as a deep cover spy anybody who actually worked for the U.S. government. But then again, our HUMINT programs are pretty poorly run these days.

    2. Re:Non-issue by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Im more interested if they were able to add fraulent data... seems to me a much more useful purpose would be essentially to create fake records and use them to attempt to insert operatives into higher level positions

    3. Re:Non-issue by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      HUMINT is difficult in that part of the world for the USA for obvious reasons. It is a classic case wherein the racists were right all along.

  22. I'm from the Chinese Government by Bodhammer · · Score: 1

    And I'm here to help!

    --
    "I say we take off, nuke the site from orbit. It's the only way to be sure."
    1. Re:I'm from the Chinese Government by Fire_Wraith · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Great! Since you already have admin access to my network, can you fix up the issues from our last server migration? Outlook keeps cutting in and out during the day, and we'd really appreciate it if you could fix that while you're busy copying all our files.

      Also, can we contact you later if we need copies of your copies as backups? Thanks!

  23. Don't get it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Still don't get why China would launch hacking attacks from their own country's ip range, which is why I'm a little leery of the press reporting on this story. Even the government is giving mixed signals as to China's involvement:

    Officials are still investigating the actors behind the breaches and what the motivations might
    have been. Theft of personally identifiable information (PII) may be used for identity theft and
    financially motivated cybercrime, such as credit card fraud. Many have speculated that the OPM
    data were taken for espionage rather than for criminal purposes, however, and some have cited
    China as the source of the breaches.

    and

    Speaking at an intelligence conference on June 24, 2015, Admiral Michael Rogers, director of the
    National Security Agency and head of U.S. Cyber Command, declined to discuss who might be
    responsible for the attacks, stating “I’m not [going to] get into the specifics of attribution.... That’s
    a process that we’re working through on the policy side. There’s a wide range of people, groups
    and nation states out there aggressively attempting to gain access to that data.
    ” Speaking at the
    same conference a day later, however, Director of National Intelligence James Clapper identified
    China as the “leading suspect” in the attacks.
    Mr. Clapper expressed grudging admiration for the
    alleged hackers, noting “[y]ou have to kind of salute the Chinese for what they did.... You know,
    if we had an opportunity to do that, I don’t think we’d hesitate for a moment.”

    So, there still is an investigation going on over the breaches, though some intelligence officials like Clapper are already fingering China as the culprit. I think it would be more sensible to follow Admiral Roger's caution as to assigning blame for the breach given the fact that there is are a "wide range" of groups and nations aggressively trying to get access to the data and US systems. Its certainly possible that whoever did it simply used China IP space to launch the attacks in order to cast suspicion on China. So why then is the press and certain government officials beating the drum to cast blame for the attacks on the Chinese?

    If the United States chooses to respond in other ways to intrusions from China, experts have
    suggested that China has multiple vulnerabilities that the United States could exploit. “China’s
    uneven industrial development, fragmented cyber defenses, uneven cyber operator tradecraft, and
    the market dominance of Western information technology firms provide an environment
    conducive to Western CNE [computer network exploitation] against China,
    ” notes one scholar of
    Chinese cyber issues.

    Ah, now I get it.

    1. Re:Don't get it. by GoonDuIO · · Score: 1

      Well according to this, the theory kinda fall flat. US would do it in a heartbeat and it's all fair game really:

      “This is espionage,” said Michael Hayden, a retired Air Force general and former head of the CIA and the National Security Agency, of the OPM hacks. “I don’t blame the Chinese for this at all. If I [as head of the NSA] could have done it, I would have done it in a heartbeat. And I would have not been required to call downtown, either” to seek White House permission.

      The reason why the government is sending mixed signal is probably what you mention, if the Chinese really do it, why would they be so obvious in showing the source of attack is from China?

    2. Re:Don't get it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't you understand that we have hacked the routers in their firmware? We know where the signals are coming from as no matter how much spoofing there is in transport, the signals still use hardware. That is why they can say it came from China.

  24. Top secret data accessable from Internet. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I have to ask why was such sensitive information able to be accessed from the internet? Doesn't the government have leased lines or some other really secure backbone?

    And retribution towards China. I think a one trillion dollar fine would be in order. Freeze some of their cash, make some of their US Government Treasury bonds worthless ....

    1. Re:Top secret data accessable from Internet. by whitelabrat · · Score: 3, Interesting

      A few scenarios are possible:

      1. Some high muckedy muck decided they wanted access to the data for some thingy and squashed the CIO/ISSO when they objected. This happens all the time.
      2. Lots of compliance and security theater in place giving a false sense of security. What needed to get done wasn't done.
      3. Probably some contractors involved who don't really care except to get paid.
      4. Inside job.

    2. Re:Top secret data accessable from Internet. by RabidReindeer · · Score: 1

      I have to ask why was such sensitive information able to be accessed from the internet? Doesn't the government have leased lines or some other really secure backbone?

      And retribution towards China. I think a one trillion dollar fine would be in order. Freeze some of their cash, make some of their US Government Treasury bonds worthless ....

      And if they did, then how would all of the web-based services that use this data get to it?

      Not every database exploit comes from some dimwit leaving port 1433 open to Internet access or a SQL Injection attack. You can do even worse damage if you pwn the webservers and start working your way back up the LAN.

    3. Re:Top secret data accessable from Internet. by elistan · · Score: 3, Interesting

      An ars article seems to give the clearest view of a rather murky subject. Basically, there appears to have been multiple ways in to the data. Including situations like IT contractors hiring database admins located in places like Argentina and China, at which point it doesn't matter what technical security solutions are put in place since people are explicitly given full access to the data. (I guess technically that falls under the "inside job" scenario?)

    4. Re:Top secret data accessable from Internet. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have to ask why was such sensitive information able to be accessed from the internet? Doesn't the government have leased lines or some other really secure backbone?

      Yes, they do. But this data is not classified SECRET, so putting this on the SIPRNET is not appropriate. Rather it is most likely labelled FOUO, which means that all sending/receiving/storage should have been encrypted.

      And retribution towards China. I think a one trillion dollar fine would be in order. Freeze some of their cash, make some of their US Government Treasury bonds worthless ....

      Yeah, let's just go off the deep end and shoot ourselves in the foot over this. That will show them! You do realize that downgrading our own treasury bonds to junk status will have far worse of an affect on us than it ever will have on them, right?

    5. Re:Top secret data accessable from Internet. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Honestly, I have to ask why this isn't considered an act of war. We've kicked countries' asses over much less.

    6. Re:Top secret data accessable from Internet. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A couple points. First, the data is PII, but it is not top secret. Second, it has to be on the internet because in order to be hired you need the clearance and you can't access DoD systems without the clearance.

    7. Re:Top secret data accessable from Internet. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Cold war

    8. Re:Top secret data accessable from Internet. by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      Honeypot of staff after 2000 with every name in English, project names on the same database, letters about how well a project went and the staff who worked on them all searchable. Just waiting to be read by any internal or external staff member with access or who could get access...
      Its just a lot of useful cutouts, web 2.0 names, bait, front companies, names, terms, funding, locations that might have existed to push staff and products into US operations and bases after 2000.
      If the US needed a deep cover mission for a fancy international NGO, a staff member can be located on their post 2000 work. The readable, open, contractor database can be looked into and Bob or Sally is found with a few years of work for the US mil or gov as their job application shows, with a SS number and other background.
      Such a list also keeps all post 2000 contractors distant from all other US mil and gov staff going back decades.
      Staff that have had war time experiences, talked to too many translators, made dual citizen friends under the stress of occupations, been friends with other nations staff, other nations embassy workers and contractors.

      Every nation that thought it turned some cleared US staff since 2000 now understands that name is on a plain text list with on an open network. Who or what did they really get?
      Sometimes unencrypted, network facing and plain text has its own long term value for other longer term honeypot missions.
      Staff in the US used that huge easy to read database everyday, got to look up and enter names. Great to watch who was searching for what terms, names over years. Sensitive information is kept very secure AC, other bulk readable information is left to be found, internally and for others.

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    9. Re:Top secret data accessable from Internet. by Curunir_wolf · · Score: 1

      Honestly, I have to ask why this isn't considered an act of war. We've kicked countries' asses over much less.

      Because the indications that it was "Der Chiners" was just innuendo and speculation by media reporters. There is NO evidence that it was the Chinese, and no official statement that China was involved or that they had evidence to that effect. It's just as likely that it was some kid in his parent's basement in Jersey.

      --
      "Somebody has to do something. It's just incredibly pathetic it has to be us."
      --- Jerry Garcia
  25. Jail? by otaku244 · · Score: 2

    Snowden leaks a bunch of sensitive information and government officials beat their chests over the jeopardy of his actions, never allowing him to be forgiven. Meanwhile, Katherine Archuleta and her OPM staff walks freely on the streets even though the security was Bridge of Death Easy and not Mission Impossible Hard
    Clearly, the government's priorities are screwed up.

    --
    Mod me down, I shall become more off-topic than you could possibly imagine.
  26. You want to know why the system is broken? by MikeRT · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Because even in the face of this, no politician has the guts to propose a bill that would transfer OPM's work to more competent agencies, fire all of its staffers with a 90 day severance package and have GSA sell the agency's assets at public auction. The worst assault on US national security since the Rosenbergs' treason (yes, much much worse than any of the recent leaks) and no one high level is even losing a job, let alone facing indictment. And the best part, no one in Congress seems to think it sufficiently grave to raise that issue.

    This is why when people say Donald Trump is a joke and we need serious candidates, I say bullshit. If you're talking foreign policy as a candidate and you don't have a comprehensive answer to this, you aren't serious because this is more serious than Iran getting a nuke or two. This compromises so much of our ability to do black ops.

    1. Re:You want to know why the system is broken? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wait, weren't the Rosenberg's framed? Didn't someone lie to send both of them to the chair?

    2. Re:You want to know why the system is broken? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You're assuming, of course, that the gross incompetence displayed by the OPM is somehow exceptional. How quickly we forget that RSA had their most highly sensitive databases cracked by the Chinese, which stored the secret keys to tens of thousands of key fobs used to access highly classified government and contractor offices and databases.

      If there's gross incompetence here, it's the NSA, and specifically NSA leadership. By choosing to stymie and hold back security technology, they're the ones responsible (more than any other single entity) for the horrendously poor choices we have in terms of securing infrastructure. It's not just about algorithms. They've been putting up roadblocks to pervasive use of public-private key smart cards, for example. They do so by suggesting this or that might be illegal; or this or that might lead to a loss of government contracts. They push overly complex standards that they know will never see pervasive adoption.

      The incompetence is that they failed to understand that COTS solutions _must_ be secure. There's simply no way to cultivate and grow a market of secure solutions for the government while sabotaging COTS markets. They're too interconnected. Plus government has to hire the bulk of their IT and engineering staff from the private, COTS-focused job market.

      And the NSA miscalculated how quickly other countries would adopt secure solutions in the U.S. As incompetent as the U.S. government can be, it pales in comparison to the incompetence of Russian, Chinese, and other governments we need to spy on. It doesn't matter how cheap or easy to acquire secure solutions are, if an incompetence bureaucracy would fail to implement properly.

      You're assuming the OPM is uncharacteristically incompetent. But they're almost certainly not. The intelligence agents sabotaged the market in security solutions, so it's entirely predictable that large organizations will fumble the task of securing this information while making it readily available and useable. Remember, the latter is their primary task. Maybe you're a system administration. Sysadmins seem to think their job of "securing" things is accomplished only when things are locked down so tight nobody can actually make use of the information or resources. I'm a programmer, and to me the failure here is the lack of simple and secure solutions.

    3. Re: You want to know why the system is broken? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You understand that the fups here were CONTRACTORS who gave sudo access to a Chinese national subcontractor, right?

    4. Re:You want to know why the system is broken? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Donald Trump's racist approach to dealing with Mexico, for example, is "comprehensive"? It's not even sane.

      This crack was a crime. There are foreign policy implications and practices for dealing with international crime, but this is as much a justice issue, if not more so.

      And are black ops are central to foreign policy? Maybe a tool, but if you're building your whole foreign policy around black ops, you may be doing it wrong.

      captcha: haircut

  27. SF86 implications by OffTheLip · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If the number of affected users, via SF86 forms, is as large as reported the implications are enormous. These clearance request forms contain detailed information about the applicant, extended family, references, etc. Fingerprints just ice the cake.

  28. Re:spying: good when we do it, bad when they do it by sims+2 · · Score: 2

    Lets call these people A B and C.

    A works for the nsa.

    B is A's Girlfriend who is cheating on A with C.

    C is the other guy.

    A uses the nsa's database to keep track of B during the day.

    I imagine that when A discovers B's calls to C's number there might be a murder.

    "NSA analysts spied on spouses, girlfriend"
    http://www.nydailynews.com/new...

    But they are just imaginary people so I suppose its ok.

    --
    Minimum threshold fixed. Thanks!
  29. This is exactly what the Republicans wanted by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They hate government employees and consider us leeches. Well, except when they're a government employee themselves. They're such hypocrites.

  30. Say it with me: PRESIDENT TRUMP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They hate government employees and consider us leeches

    Say it with me: SECRETARY OF STATE SARAH PALIN

    Better start getting that cv into shape, leechy.

  31. Some perspective by Okian+Warrior · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Just to put recent events in perspective:

    1) The Chinese grab a database of our personnel, which lets them impersonate anyone (in the database), find spies and ongoing projects, blackmail federal workers for more information... and no one is charged with incompetence, fired, or even blamed.

    2) David Petraeus, former director of the CIA, gave classified information to his biographer/mistress to make him seem more powerful... he pleads guilty, gets a $40,000 fine and 2 years probation.

    3) Edward Snowden releases summary information about widespread illegal activity by the U.S. spy services. No specifics about operations or personnel were leaked, resulting in no deaths and no aborted operations(*) ...he's banished from the U.S.

    4) Chelsea [nee Bradley] Manning releases video evidence of war crimes committed by the U.S. military, literally gunning down members of the international press and other civilians with no provocation... was subjected to months of cruel and unusual punishment (tortured, per U.N. definition of torture), sentenced to 35 years in prison, and given dishonourable discharge.

      (*) Quoth the office of the president: "Mr. Snowden's dangerous decision to steal and disclose classified information had severe consequences for the security of our country..."

    1. Re:Some perspective by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Manning also released a ton more information, including the trove of diplomatic cables, mostly because he just grabbed whatever he could. He was sloppy, his motivations suspect (he got caught by bragging about it!), and he deserved some kind of punishment. Just not what he got. He's gonna end up in jail longer than Pollard!

      Snowden's motivations, by contrast, are unimpeachable, no matter how hard the naysayers try to smear his name. And while he may have been sloppy (if so, nothing like Manning), his punishment should only be sufficient to keep people honest. That is, at most a year or two in jail followed by a pardon so he's not a felon. Preferably I'd like to see a commendation instead of any punishment, but the system needs it's pound of flesh, and Snowden seems willing to make the sacrifice.

  32. Re:spying: good when we do it, bad when they do it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The pot called the kettle black. Guess what, the kettle's black, regardless of what color the pot is.

  33. Re:spying: good when we do it, bad when they do it by chipschap · · Score: 2

    I didn't think it was necessary to spell it out but when clandestine agents and their collaborators are uncovered they can be in mortal danger.

  34. Re:So you made this giant database of sensitive in by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Where's the Class Action law suit against the US Government for violating the Privacy Act of 1974 (as amended) for violating its duty to protect this information?

  35. Compelling Gov't Interest: TCINASP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    AALDEF is going to have a real hard time getting juries that are not alcohol dehydrogenase impaired to see things their way. The last time I checked snivel rights jurisprudence, this sort of national security issue was a compelling government interest wherein discrimination that would otherwise be unlawful would be lawful. People who seek to preserve careers and social standing will have to face the dour fact that the best and brightest are also security risks.

    KM:EY

  36. Re:So you made this giant database of sensitive in by Actually,+I+do+RTFA · · Score: 1

    A perfectly reasonable assumption, if it was in a locked room secured by armed guards. Which is really where it should have been.

    --
    Your ad here. Ask me how!
  37. Re:spying: good when we do it, bad when they do it by sims+2 · · Score: 1

    Yes you are correct.

    I was just trying to point out that even if the spying is done on regular civilians it can still put them in harms way not as commonly as if you were spying on the military but harm still the same.

    --
    Minimum threshold fixed. Thanks!
  38. Re:So you made this giant database of sensitive in by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A class action law suit against the government is called an election.

  39. Double standards by nrasch · · Score: 5, Insightful

    So Edward Snowden can't be pardoned because of "all the damage" he did to our security (which is nonsense for the record).

    But on the other hand these clowns can allow something orders of magnitude worse to happen that has real, actual consequences for security, and not a damn thing will happen to them.

    1. Re:Double standards by Anne+Thwacks · · Score: 1
      Be not afeart, this level of incompetence is only found in third world countries.

      Oh, wait ...

      --
      Sent from my ASR33 using ASCII
    2. Re:Double standards by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Our nation is beyond the phase of governance and into consolidation of power. Effectively, we do not have a government that can protect us. We have a government that serves itself and not the people whom put them into office. WE ARE FUCKED!

    3. Re:Double standards by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If that lion-killing dentist is any measure, public shaming is still effective.

      Get the names of those responsible.

  40. Re:So you made this giant database of sensitive in by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A class action law suit against the government is called an election.

    A class action law suit against a politician is called an election.

    A class action law suit against a government is call a revolution.

    The problem that we need to solve is two-fold.

  41. What they have to worry about by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    is that their superiors and government is going to continue to scream wolf and lie to them. The Chinese aren't breaking into computers left and right. What has been definitely proven, however, is that the U.S itself does this.

  42. Someone needs to be shot... by Karmashock · · Score: 1

    ... There is a certain level of incompetence that is so unacceptable that you can't do anything besides line up some people against a wall and blow them away... and then move forward with everyone on the same page that "X was fucking unacceptable."

    I don't know what else it is going to take to get these government fuckwits to take security seriously besides a literal firing squad.

    I don't want to do it... I just don't know how to get through to these people. They're so fucking stupid.

    --
    I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
    1. Re:Someone needs to be shot... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Those are some big words, there. Do you know how the hack happened? The summary certainly didn't tell us that. How exactly do you tell them how to repair their setup when you don't know what was wrong?

      You're jumping to a really big conclusion when you claim to be better at security than the people who set up the network that was compromised here.

  43. Re:spying: good when we do it, bad when they do it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    This is an NSA example, so please rephrase your example with the proper cryptological terminology - Alice, Bob, Eve.

  44. Don't tell me, let me guess.... by erp_consultant · · Score: 1

    Some government dimwit is going to cry over "chronic under funding" leading to this whole mess. Just like when the Amtrak train flew off the tracks. Never mind that the guy was driving the train at TWICE the speed he should have been. Noooooo....more money...that's what we need. Yeah, that'll fix everything.

    When are people going to realize that more money is not the solution. The solution is to get rid of idiots that cannot/will not enforce policies.

    1. Re:Don't tell me, let me guess.... by just+another+AC · · Score: 1

      The solution is to get rid of idiots that cannot/will not enforce policies.

      Can you still call it a government if there aren't any people in it?

    2. Re:Don't tell me, let me guess.... by erp_consultant · · Score: 1

      Well, that raises a good point. How do we get competent people to work for the government by choice? I've done a lot of contracting work for government agencies and the like so I speak with some authority on this. There are some good, hard working, competent people in government. No really - there are.

      The problem is that almost none of them - in my experience - are in management or leadership positions. Now some might say that is true in the private sector as well. No argument there - there are certainly a lot of idiots in management in the private sector as well. But not nearly as many as I have seen in government. It's not even close.

      So the question becomes...why is that? Lots of reasons.

      They have to deal with insane procurement regulations...the kind that lead to the $100 pencil. Unlike private companies, managers do not get rewarded for saving money. They get punished for it with a reduced budget for next year. So that leads to waste. It is difficult, or nearly impossible, to fire workers. Likewise, it's nearly impossible to get rid of incompetent managers. That leads to a lot of dead wood.

      Many of the higher positions in government are either appointed (political cronyism) or elected (money/popularity contest). Neither of these methods addresses the issue of whether or not the person is actually qualified and has the skills for the position. So you end up with some people in way, way over their heads. The problem is that the government is so big that this rarely gets noticed unless there is some sort of colossal screw up.

  45. so basically by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    all the same things your nsa \ government does?

  46. hello by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    hi nice one

  47. BE SMART AND BECOME RICH IN LESS THAN 3DAYS. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    BE SMART AND BECOME RICH IN LESS THAN 3DAYS....It all depends on how fast you can be to get the new PROGRAMMED blank ATM card that is capable of hacking into any ATM machine,anywhere in the world. I got to know about this BLANK ATM CARD when I was searching for job online about a month ago..It has really changed my life for good and now I can say I'm rich and I can never be poor again. The least money I get in a day with it is about $2,000.(two thousand USD) Every now and then I keeping pumping money into my account. Though is illegal,there is no risk of being caught ,because it has been programmed in such a way that it is not traceable,it also has a technique that makes it impossible for the CCTVs to detect you..For details on how to get yours today, email the hackers on : (atmmachinehackes @ gmail.com). Tell your loved once too, and start to live large. That's the simple testimony of how my life changed for good...Love you all ...the email address again is atmmachinehackes@gmail.com

  48. Re:spying: good when we do it, bad when they do it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So? That's the risk they take when they signed up, no? Surely they understand that, to some degree.

    However I imagine the expectation is that their own government's incompetence won't be the thing that outs them.

  49. Kidnapping by Greyfox · · Score: 1

    The last company I worked for gave us all T-Shirts left over from the "Better Days" swag bin. Then HR told us all not to wear them. "You'll make yourself a target for kidnapping," they said. So on behalf of that company, which if you're the Chinese hacker who compromised my information, you'll know who it is, please don't kidnap their employees! With their culture of ineptitude and recent public stock offering, anyone who knew how to build a thing that we were working on had long since left the company! Literally the worst thing you could do for your country's program is kidnap one of their employees! You will set your program back by a least a decade! You'd be much better off targetting Google's employees for kidnapping! Thanks for your understanding!

    --

    I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

  50. DoD too, or just civilians? by SgtAaron · · Score: 1

    I've been trying to find out whether the breach of background investigation info also includes military. I underwent an FBI background check in the 90's, and if there are 21 million records stolen, I have a feeling mine could be one of them. The paperwork I had to fill out pretty much told my life story, and I had to give names and addresses and phone numbers of people I knew. Which the FBI didn't talk to, they asked for others that knew me from those 5. Hell they even interviewed my high school counselor.

    Regardless I am not feeling worried. What would the Chinese want with me nowadays? :-) Still a bit creepy though.

  51. Re:spying: good when we do it, bad when they do it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No, we take that risk too. We even read /..

  52. Those employees' careers are burned by davidwr · · Score: 1

    If security trumped everything, those employees would all be retrained and reassigned to completely unrelated tasks and their previous access yanked as soon as their replacements could be trained.

    Now, that's not going going to happen except in a relatively small percentage of individuals.

    Instead, our country is probably going to take the risk that this info will be used to hurt us rather than pay the cost of losing a valuable employee 21 million times over.

    --
    Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
  53. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  54. Re:spying: good when we do it, bad when they do it by rtb61 · · Score: 1

    Well then, let's hope those hackers do not use the information to fly drones around the place firing off missiles seemingly at random. That or spends billions of dollars to take over countries only to generate civil wars. Then there is the whole idea of blackmailing all the worlds political leaders to ensure they obey the dictates of US corporations, no matter how many of those countries citizens are harmed by those dictates.

    Bucket loads of people do DIE as a result of those things, you mean it could be worse than that or do you mean those other things might happen less as a result. So which generates the greater number of casualties a few dead American spies or the hundreds of thousands who die as a result of the actions of those American spies. Especially when those spies were not serving justice or freedom but to serving corporate greed and slavery. I think you view about American spies is wildly exorbitantly biased, yeah those honourable people who believed in freedom and justice from decades are long, long, gone. Now they are amongst the worst criminals of the lot, some worse then third world dictator varieties, well, toss up there, after all America propped up a lot of those third world dictators.

    --
    Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
  55. I think you need to see by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Heir to an Execution which was a documentary made by a grandchild of Julius and Ethel Rosenberg.

    The creator of the documentary discovered by talking to her grandparents' friends and relatives that they were, indeed, spies for mother Russia. In fact the people who were their closest associates are quite open in admitting to the spying and seem quite proud of it. I seem to recall one of them even regrets they did not get more classified material to Russia. They were all Marxists and they believed they were helping the Communist utopia over in the Soviet Union. Usually, when a young person sets out to do a documentary to save the reputation of their relatives and finds no reputation to save, the project is quietly dropped. Ivy Meeropol deserves a great deal of respect for her objectivity and honesty; she herself, of course, bears no responsibility for the acts of her elders - we are each accountable only for our own deeds, which in her case are completely honorable.

  56. I hate to defend Petraeus, but you forgot... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    that his biographer/mistress Paula Broadwell had her own security clearance high enough to make it legal for her to handle such information. She was an army officer herself, and she wisely did not disclose anything that was unsafe to disclose. The result was that while he and she were both in the wrong (affairs by officers in the US military have long been unlawful and can result in various punishments (unless that has recently changed)) no actual damage was done by the particular transfer of classified info.

    Also, Your white-wash of Snowden is misleading: his data all ended up in the hands of Russia, and possibly China. His only faux defense of this is to either pretend he is unaware of any copies they have made of his memory sticks/laptop drives, or to be aware of such copies and lie, or to claim the data is so well encrypted that it will take them years to crack it (which is something he cannot know, and something he cannot compensate American taxpayers for if he is wrong). I do agree with the sentiment however that it's a little bit of a stretch for the same government that handed over data on millions of Americans to China to go all self-righteous on Snowden.

  57. What Federal Employees should really worry about by nickweller · · Score: 1

    What Federal Employees should really worry about after the Chinese hack - is the next version of Microsoft Windows - without which - none of these 'cyber' attacks would work.

  58. Re:So you made this giant database of sensitive in by Eunuchswear · · Score: 1

    In my corporate experience, data warehouse and big data projects happen when an executive gets annoyed with the slow progress of IT and basically dumps out the contents of a few databases into an almost-impossible-to-secure bowl of soup.

    Exactly how the whole Chelsea Manning/Wikileaks thing happened.

    Before 9/11 info was comparmentalised and need to know, after it was "gotta let every low level person have access to everything so we don't slip up again". Whoops.

    --
    Watch this Heartland Institute video
  59. what difference does it make? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Over the last seven years the US has been flushed down the proverbial commode