Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Analysis: China-US Hacking Accord Is Tall On Rhetoric, Short On Substance

Posted by samzenpus on from the how-sharp-are-your-teeth? dept.

An anonymous reader writes: Ars takes a look at the cyberspying agreement between the U.S. and China. The article looks at what the accord does but more importantly, what it does not. "But even assuming both sides would follow the pact, the accord is tall on rhetoric and short on substance. The deal, for instance, defines the method of enforcement as requiring the two nation's to create a 'high-level joint dialogue mechanism,' according to a joint statement from Attorney General Loretta Lynch and Homeland Security chief Jeh Johnson. More important, the two superpowers make no commitment not to hack one another for intelligence-gathering purposes. That means the recent hack of the Office of Personnel Management's background investigation data—5.6 million sets of fingerprints from US federal employees, contractors and other federal job applicants—doesn't run counter to the accord. The OPM hack is believed to have originated in China and the data, as Ars has previously reported, is 'in the hands of the foreign intelligence services of China.'"

38 comments

  1. The US cannot follow a pact by Psychotria · · Score: 5, Interesting

    So, why should anyone expect China to?

    In fact, if I was a Chinese government official I'd be laughing at anything the US suggests. Maybe I'd sign the pact just for a joke though.

    1. Re:The US cannot follow a pact by lkcl · · Score: 4, Interesting

      So, why should anyone expect China to?

      In fact, if I was a Chinese government official I'd be laughing at anything the US suggests. Maybe I'd sign the pact just for a joke though.

      the thing is, what the U.S. politicians - and many people around the world - don't realise is that the Chinese Intelligence is so secretive it doesn't even have a name. its members operate in effect as independent cells, through word of mouth contacts, with absolute negligeable two-way contact with the outside world... even inside china and *including with the politicians*. remember, china's politicians, under the "one party state", don't actually have much in the way of power, and are not really that well-respected (or trusted).

      so the hilarious thing is that the only way for the politicians to inform the Chinese Intelligence that there's a treaty that's supposed to be signed is, in fact, to announce it in the news and hope like hell that someone relevant, somewhere, in their lair / bunker / hideout, actually reads it. here's the problem, though: if those operatives happen *not to agree* with that treaty, as far as "China National Security and Interests" is concerned, then, well, they don't actually have to take a blind bit of notice.

      the same goes for when all these attacks keep occurring. the *simplest* thing to say is "it was chinese hackers! they're nothing to do with us politicians! we have a policy of not attacking foreign assets! no really!" because for the politicians to even *admit* that it was Chinese Intelligence operatives - not that they could possibly find out who they were even if they wanted to - would probably result in them getting a knock on the door and them and their family deported to some remote area of China which hasn't changed in several centuries.

      we in the West assume that just because the Politicians in Western countries make the laws, that other countries have to follow that exact same process. China's politicians - people don't realise - are *not* at the top of the food chain as far as power is concerned. They're not even second to top. on mature reflection, you might call that a good thing, as it means that they can't really screw things up.

    2. Re:The US cannot follow a pact by Intrepid+imaginaut · · Score: 1

      Have you got a single source for this bizarre fairytale? Politicians are the party elite in China, look at one the wrong way and you'll find out pretty quick how much power they have.

    3. Re: The US cannot follow a pact by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      bingo. mao did not win wars with uncontrolled soldiers. what the other guy writes is probably american fancy based on american fiction.

      protip: read the paperback to discriminate fact from fiction.

    4. Re:The US cannot follow a pact by CODiNE · · Score: 1

      China's politicians - people don't realise - are *not* at the top of the food chain as far as power is concerned. They're not even second to top.

      This sounds a lot like what I've heard people say about the American president as well. There's several levels of power above his head and he's told what to do by his masters... Freemasons, Illumnati, Reptilians, Raelians, the Vatican?

      So please enlighten us, what would be the 2 levels above the Chinese political base?

      Actually, just flat out really REALLY wealthy people sort of makes sense...
      Though they'd have to organize a bit to make sure their wishes were followed out... Probably want to keep those groups secret...
      Oh shoot.

      --
      Cwm, fjord-bank glyphs vext quiz
    5. Re:The US cannot follow a pact by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh yes pacts are good. Like the Molotov-Ribbentrop lol...

    6. Re:The US cannot follow a pact by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      There's this giant organized conspiracy of nearly 7 billion people who really pulls all the strings, but they are so secretive they never collaborate face-to-face and their plans are nearly inscrutable to most.

    7. Re:The US cannot follow a pact by Zontar+The+Mindless · · Score: 1

      How many times have you visited China? How many Party members do you actually know?

      For me, the answers to both questions are "many".

      I am pretty sure that, in China, when the Central Committee of the CCP say "frog", hopping ensues shortly thereafter.

      I am also pretty sure that the Chinese leadership are just as good as, if not better than, the plausible deniability thing as their American counterparts.

      --
      Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
    8. Re:The US cannot follow a pact by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      Re: " don't realise is that the Chinese Intelligence is so secretive it doesn't even have a name"
      China produces a lot of internal documents. What any one person can walk out with to a US/UK embassy is never really that useful.
      The UK was reduced to rebuilding container ships with signals equipment and having cargo ships move far up rivers in China. Did the UK get much? No. Hong Kong, Little Sai Wan, Chum Hom Kok, the large Demos 1-4 NSA designed dish upgrades did not really get much going into the 1980's for the US and UK.
      Most of that collection is now done from Australia after 1997. Lots of the usual, expected military grade traffic any nation pumps out everyday is collected in bulk.

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    9. Re: The US cannot follow a pact by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I recall doing that. It seemed to be north of 9K at the time.

    10. Re:The US cannot follow a pact by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      WTF is wrong with you? You know sentences begin with a capital letter, but only your last sentence is capitalized in your post. I know that it's not due to a broken shift key, because you properly capitalize things like "U.S." and so forth. You do realize that not capitalizing the starts of your sentences only makes you look like a fucking moron, right?

      On a separate topic, the content of your post is also incredibly stupid.

  2. As Pres. Obama put it... by QuietLagoon · · Score: 1
    ... the accord is just words at this point. The proof will be in the actions that follow those words.

    .
    If you really expect China to stop stealing our commercial secrets,you are living in a fantasy world. China needs to build its technology infrastructure, and it is far easier and quicker to steal it rather than develop it.

    1. Re:As Pres. Obama put it... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are right, they are following the US industrial revolution playbook.
      You know, from back when the US was really busy stealing the rest of the worlds copyrighted technology.

      Interesting read: https://www.techdirt.com/blog/...

      Nice quote:

      "Either way, those who insist that the US was founded on the principles of strong respect for "intellectual property" haven't paid that much attention to the actual history of American industrialization."

    2. Re:As Pres. Obama put it... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What's the point of stealing if you're just going to give it away?

  3. Much like the START and SALT disarmament talks by vikingpower · · Score: 1

    Nobody expects either party to truly disarm. The important point: to keep them talking, instead of (virtually or really) shooting at each other.

    --
    Religous speak to God. Insane are spoken to by God. When all shut up, one can finally hear Shostakovich in peace
  4. I needed a good morning laugh by schwit1 · · Score: 1

    The Chinese will pretend to stop, and Obama will pretend to believe them

  5. Problem solved by Krishnoid · · Score: 1

    requiring the two nation's to create a 'high-level joint dialogue mechanism,'

    Hey, I can help! Just give me an hour to get a red case from the kiosk in the mall, and they can use my cell phone as a mechanism for high level communications, including dialogue, for a very reasonable price.

    I'll bet the problem is that you also have to legally alter where apostrophes go in English. If so, I'm out of luck; these international relations issues always have some kind of catch.

  6. Typical useless Obama agreement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Lots of words, means nothing.

    Iran is allowed to take their own soil samples.

    Syrian "red line"? BWAAA HAAA HAAA!!! Yeah, right.

    1. Re:Typical useless Obama agreement by ColdWetDog · · Score: 1

      Lots of words, means nothing.

      Iran is allowed to take their own soil samples.

      Syrian "red line"? BWAAA HAAA HAAA!!! Yeah, right.

      To be fair, digging holes is about the most we can expect out of the Iranians. Gotta let them do something.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
  7. US has wimp for President by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Its a tall order to address the China hacking problems but one that needs to be addressed. trouble is we don't have a forceful President who can draw the line and mean it. Once you loose your willingness to fight the enemy knows it. Even worse we do not even fight back in terms of hacking let alone preventing hacks in the first place. If you don't get China to stop on their own. At least make a strong defense to prevent it. But this administration seems content to do deals with the devil and do bad deals at that.

  8. Civilization at a low ebb by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So, from what you say it's exactly the same in China as in the West, the establishment does whatever the fuck it wants, and the politicians have only a token idea of what's happening. And the laws they pass and any so-called "international agreements" are totally irrelevant.

    Nothing really changes. There's only an illusion of civilization on this planet in the East or in the West. The only vague hints of civilization seem to be in the EU.

  9. Chinese already have everything by hsmith · · Score: 1

    33 million records from date of birth, ssn, bank accounts, everyone you've ever met, etc from the OPM hack via the Chinese. Now 5 million finger prints. The Chinese already have all the info they need to blackmail people in real life. So why not agree? Notice nothing of this mentioned by the White House or Congress.

    1. Re:Chinese already have everything by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But China don't blackmail or threaten people in real life. The U.S does however, and it also drops bombs and kills people in other countries, and everything between. There are very few things the U.S does which you can also accuse China of doing.

  10. Agreements must be realistic by mlookaba · · Score: 1

    Asking a nation sign a pact not to spy/hack is silly. Obviously they'll do it anway. That goes for ANY nation.

    So options are: (1) create an agreement that bans hacking and watch it be ignored in practice, or (2) write an agreement that doesn't require things that can't be lived up to.

    Of course it would be nice if everyone would stop being mean and just get along together and coexist so we wouldn't have a need for this at all. Could happen.

    1. Re:Agreements must be realistic by Alain+Williams · · Score: 1

      Agreements can also be for the PR (Public Relations). Many (including me) are cynical about this and believe that this is an insult to the paper that it is written on; however some will take it at face value and believe that their respective leaders are making the world a better place. Not everything that governments do is done with you in mind.

  11. Anything by China is high on rhetoric by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    China-US Hacking Accord Is Tall On Rhetoric, Short On Substance

    Anything coming out of China or touched by the Chinese is tall on rhetoric and short on substance.

    FTFY.

    1. Re:Anything by China is high on rhetoric by gweihir · · Score: 1

      Yeah, they learned that from the US. Always learn from the best!

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
  12. As long as the NSA exists by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    the U.S will continue indiscriminate economic, political, and industrial espionage, as it always has. Why or how could you possibly trust the U.S on this, or other things for that matter? The problem is and has alway been the power-hungry and murderous U.S government.

  13. Is it really China hacking the US? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    If a country other than China hacked the US wouldn't it make sense to make it look like it originated in China?
    Are there always tell-tale signs that a hack was definitely Chinese or not?

    1. Re:Is it really China hacking the US? by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      Beyond the logs left to be found full of ip's and the 9 to 5 time zone day shift in that part of the world? Traces in the code that was used was found to be what is expected?
      Any advanced nation can fake that trail as the public now understands from the recent whistleblowing news over the past few years.
      Ex staff, former staff, nations that allowed access to advanced 5 eye nation sites and had smart local support staff working on site. Some other nation built their own more interesting "collect a network" system while understanding just how "collect it all" was hidden.
      Methods, mid network junk encryption standards and advance hardware soon get into the hands of a lot of other nations after they have seen the 5eye network magic.
      The only trick is to really make it look like another nation with all the expected methods, time, ip's, a trail back thats logged and all gov, mil, private sector contractors can agree on.
      The other question is why did the US place its lists on an open server, in english without encryption for some time.
      After all the years of expert digital security per mil/gov taskforce, agency, councils, executives, offices why the rush/need/demand/request to list on in plain text on an open server.
      The other option is the list found was created with US disinformation with junk tracked names, SS numbers, projects, letters with project names.. mixed in with contractors and gov workers. Who would be allowed even create such a list thats human readable?
      Bait, a trap the US had as a vast readable honeypot or some other nation tested their own methods.

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
  14. We should raise hell in the UN by jsepeta · · Score: 0

    Hacking the US power grid is an act of war, and if China won't stop, we need to send the world a clear message that this is unacceptable behavior. I recommend nuking Beijing.

    --
    Remember kids, if you're not paying for the service, YOU ARE THE PRODUCT THAT IS BEING SOLD.
    1. Re:We should raise hell in the UN by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      You are aware the Chinese have nuclear weapons as well right?
      The world needs less "nuke them" people such as yourself.

      You want to start a new "cold war" with one of your major financial backers?

    2. Re:We should raise hell in the UN by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Could you just off yourself and take your stupid thoughts out of the world?

  15. Uhm. DUH? by Chas · · Score: 1

    Of course it is. Because it's violated before the ink was ever dry. On BOTH sides most likely.

    --


    Chas - The one, the only.
    THANK GOD!!!
  16. Pot and Kettle of Douche? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Who's the bag?

  17. Should be obvious to anyone by kheldan · · Score: 1

    Analysis: China-US Hacking Accord Is Tall On Rhetoric, Short On Substance

    Seriously? Anyone with an IQ over 75 that actually believes that either the U.S. or China is going to cease their 'cyberspying' activities needs to take off and put away their Rose-Colored Glasses and view the world the way it really is. That's like when the crossbow was invented and was put into regular military use; it was deemed an unchivalrous and honorless way of killing your enemies, but did that stop it's use? Hell no. Genie's out of the bottle, and it's not going back in for love or money, not until hearts and minds all over the world are changed such that no one feels the need to spy on anyone else; in other words, not during our lifetime.

    --
    Are YOU using the TOOL, or is the TOOL using YOU? Think about it!