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

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.'"

Comments

The US cannot follow a pact

[Psychotria]

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.

Re:The US cannot follow a pact

[lkcl]

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.

Is it really China hacking the US?

[Anonymous Coward]

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?

Re:We should raise hell in the UN

[Anonymous Coward]

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?