Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

China Adopts Controversial Cybersecurity Law; Experts Say It Will Hurt Businesses (techcrunch.com)

Posted by msmash on from the when-in-China dept.

The Chinese government today passed new cybersecurity regulations that will put stringent new requirements on technology companies operating in the country. The proposed Cybersecurity Law comes with data localization, surveillance, and real-name requirements. From a TechCrunch report:The regulation would require instant messaging services and other internet companies to require users to register with their real names and personal information, and to censor content that is "prohibited." Real name policies restrict anonymity and can encourage self-censorship for online communication. The law also includes a requirement for data localization, which would force "critical information infrastructure operators" to store data within China's borders. According to Human Rights Watch, an advocacy organization that is opposing the legislation, the law does not include a clear definition of infrastructure operators, and many businesses could be lumped into the definition. "The law will effectively put China's Internet companies, and hundreds of millions of Internet users, under greater state control," said Sophie Richardson, Human Rights Watch's China director. HRW maintains that, while many of the regulations are not new, most were informal or only laid out in low-level law -- and implementing the measures on a broader level will lead to stricter enforcement.

61 comments

  1. Finally, China by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Finally, China has caught up to the USA in anti-privacy and censorship. Congrats, China.

    1. Re:Finally, China by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh look everyone, it's the paid China shill again, this time spreading anti-American propaganda, instead of directly defending his Chinese masters!

      Shove it up your ass, China shill, we're all onto you.

    2. Re:Finally, China by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't worry, we'll adjust their place on our human rights lists if it's important to pass something like TPP. ... and yes, we have been doing such already. It's in the leaked emails.

    3. Re:Finally, China by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Looks like you purposely chose to ignore the Great Firewall of China. To quote JFK: "Freedom has many difficulties and democracy is not perfect, but we have never had to put a wall up to keep our people in, to prevent them from leaving us. "

      How many journalists are jailed in US right now? Chinese government just arrested a few hundreds of journalist and writers who share a different view than it does.

      No western nation can hope to compete with China in term of censorship, at least not yet anyway.

    4. Re:Finally, China by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The fact that most poor/lower middle class people cannot afford to leave the USA even if they wanted to is basically an economic wall keeping in the people who would benefit most from leaving.

      But keep quoting stuff from back when the USA actually had freedom and common sense policies even if equality was a bit of a clusterfuck. At least people could manage to leave with next to nothing.

      And funny how you talk about jailing journalists when that's exactly what the USA has been doing with regard to the Dakota Pipeline journalists. Just keep pretending how things are "better" in the USA when it has gone to shit and exactly as bad as even the worst nations.

  2. The US is making this easy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    How is this so different from what the US government says they need to do to "keep us safe"? This is one argument against backdoors in the US. If our government can mandate this, other countries can mandate them. You could even make the argument that China is being more open about what they are doing.

    1. Re:The US is making this easy by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 3, Insightful

      How is this so different from what the US government says they need to do to "keep us safe"?

      Ah yes, the old "Everybody does it" fallacy ... and from an AC, which is illegal in China. Look, America has some government overreach, but we have no "real name" requirement, there are no "prohibited" topics, and data localization is not required. The objectives as well as the methods differ: America's monitoring is designed to catch bad guys, not to suppress discussion or prevent the flow of information.

    2. Re:The US is making this easy by Geoffrey.landis · · Score: 2, Insightful

      How is this so different from what the US government says they need to do to "keep us safe"?

      It is different because people in the U.S. talk about policies that require real names, and even about censoring, while in China the government has implemented real name policies and censorship.

      There is a big difference between random people talking about something, and a government actuallly doing it.

      --
      http://www.geoffreylandis.com
    3. Re:The US is making this easy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Until the definition of "bad guys" changes, stupid.

    4. Re:The US is making this easy by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Until the definition of "bad guys" changes, stupid.

      See if you can spot the difference:
      1. Country C is censoring speech.
      2. Country A might censor speech someday.
      These are not the same thing, and it is absurd to suggest they are.

    5. Re:The US is making this easy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So what really....

      I find China an abhorrent, awful place, Know what I do about it? I don't go there. I try to avoid things built/manufactured there, but that's almost impossible in the modern world.

      But they are a sovereign nation, and they have the right to their own laws and rules. If the billions of people in China didn't like it, they'd rise up and do something about it...
      Sorry, we aren't the world's policeman and neither should we be. The Chinese people need to fix this if they want it fixed....

    6. Re:The US is making this easy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can easily disguise Country A as Country C by also censoring the fact that you censor speech... that's the problem with censorship, you can't just "do a little bit" without having the capability to do a lot more, and if you think "Trust" is enough to prevent people from doing "a lot more" then you are the one who is absurd.

    7. Re:The US is making this easy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ... for various values of "bad guys"...

    8. Re:The US is making this easy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Cool, Cool. So tell me Mr Bill; How would you plan to overthrow the US government? There are no verboten topics yeah? You have no problem laying out a plan for a coup right? No one would come knocking at your door...

    9. Re: The US is making this easy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I promise you that Chinese people hate their government restrictions on the Internet. I work for a Chinese Internet company.

    10. Re:The US is making this easy by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 0

      You can easily disguise Country A as Country C by also censoring the fact that you censor speech...

      ... and you, of course, have zero evidence that this is actually happening.

      that's the problem with censorship, you can't just "do a little bit" without having the capability to do a lot more

      The capability to do something, is not the same as ACTUALLY DOING IT.
      I own a knife. That doesn't make me a murderer.

    11. Re:The US is making this easy by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1

      I find China an abhorrent, awful place,

      You should get some perspective. Americans are FOUR TIMES more likely to be arrested and imprisoned by their government than Chinese are. Sure, America is better if you want to publically criticize the ruling party, but in many other ways, China is better.

      Know what I do about it? I don't go there.

      I go there one or twice a year on business. Know what I do? I don't loudly criticize the ruling party in public. That is partly because it will get me arrested, but also because it is none of my business. As a foreigner, it is not my place to try to "fix" China.

    12. Re:The US is making this easy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Swing and a miss.

    13. Re:The US is making this easy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There is a big difference between random people talking about something, and a government actuallly doing it.

      There is a big similarity between cultures that don't abhor secret prisons, secret polices, secret courts, etc. At some point it doesn't matter what the superficial law says, it matters what the facts on the ground, largely dictated by the largest group of well armed and otherwise powerful folks want happening.

      At some point the government can coerce self-censorship without so much as a stroke of law. That point was years ago.

    14. Re:The US is making this easy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      America's monitoring is designed to catch bad guys and anyone who might ever possibly eventually be a bad guy anytime in the future,...

      FTFY

      There's a reason that useful idiots are considered useful.

    15. Re:The US is making this easy by Altrag · · Score: 1

      no "real name" requirement

      No, just enough metadata hanging around to make the requirement trivial anyway. At least with an explicit real name requirement, the user knows they're probably being tracked and spied on. Not that that's much solace.

      no "prohibited" topics

      No, just topics that will get you sent to gitmo, or sued out of existence (though that's more done by shady companies than the government.) Still, not technically prohibited.

      data localization is not required

      True, though this is by far the most benign issue on the list, and in some ways non-localized data is a risk as well (if national or even just corporate secrets happen to be stored on a non-local server, its entirely possible for the foreign government to just confiscate the server.) Basically, would you want your emails and data stored in China? Then why would you think the Chinese want theirs stored in the US?

      America's monitoring is designed to catch bad guys, not to suppress discussion or prevent the flow of information

      Except when they decide simply having/sharing information makes you a "bad guy."

      Now certainly China is going to be worse than the US and most other western nations in basically all of those categories, but please don't mistake that for the assumption that the US doesn't participate in them at all -- America does many similar if not the same things, just at a smaller (and often more subtle) scale.

      And that's just the government. Many of the largest digital companies in the US are well-known for censoring topics they don't like, and several have attempted to enforce real-name policies. Given how much emphasis the US in particular puts on corporations, that's still a fairly large issue even if its not as severe as the government performing those actions (companies at least don't have the power to imprison you, legitimately or otherwise.)

    16. Re:The US is making this easy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No "prohibited" topics? The main reason why America states it's doing what it's doing is because of TERRORISM and CHILD PORNOGRAPHY.

    17. Re:The US is making this easy by currently_awake · · Score: 1

      The American government handles such matters with secret orders and NSA letters. Do you really think ALL the American companies chose to mandate real name policies at the same time? The censorship is done in secret, so the sheep won't complain.

    18. Re:The US is making this easy by cfalcon · · Score: 1

      > The capability to do something, is not the same as ACTUALLY DOING IT.

      This arguments works for cars and guns and knives. But pretend you had a magical pen that erased a person from existence and memory. You write their name, and they are unmade. You could claim you were never going to use this pen, or that you would document your uses, and only use it for good. But NO ONE WOULD KNOW.

      Censorship is more dangerous than the magic pen, because it doesn't magically erase people, it actually erases ideas, and even truth itself. And no one can prove it happened- the perfect crime.

  3. Communist dictatorship... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    ... issues censorship laws. News at 11.

    1. Re:Communist dictatorship... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      they are just copying USA

    2. Re:Communist dictatorship... by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      they are just copying USA

      No, the US hides what they are doing using vague language* in the Patriot Act to justify it if caught. In this particular case, the Chinese gov't is telling the world what they are doing up front.

      * Other vague language possibly got Hillary off the hook. Our laws are infested with vagueness. Vagueness favors those with better lawyers. It's why more little guys go to jail for classified breaches than fat cats.

      --
      Table-ized A.I.
    3. Re:Communist dictatorship... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ... issues censorship laws. News at 11.

      This may not be at all surprising, but it is nevertheless infuriating. The Chinese government rules approximately 20% of the people on Earth. They do not allow the people to choose which party will do the ruling. They are paranoid about being criticized, and they do not allow their people to express themselves freely. They block access to information they deem inappropriate, and they crack down on subversive expressions with inhumane abuses of basic dignities. Worst of all, they have indoctrinated their people to such an extent that many of them think they are getting a good deal. The people in Hong Kong, who have tasted freedom, do not seem particularly happy about losing their autonomy. Let's not dismiss the basic dignities of 1/5 of the people on this planet with a wave of whimsical sarcasm about the inevitability of corruption seeking to solidify its power. It's still wrong.

    4. Re:Communist dictatorship... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Let's not dismiss the basic dignities of 1/5 of the people on this planet with a wave of whimsical sarcasm about the inevitability of corruption seeking to solidify its power. It's still wrong.

      Sarcasm is powerful [your bothering to reply proves it] and harmless. What am I supposed to do? Pontificate on social justice? Sarcasm is the last resource left, and it can do wonders.

  4. Well, duh! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Seems that we have forgotten that China is a Communist dictatorship. They have been since 1947 and will be for quite a long time - thanks Reagan->Obama for enriching them to the degree that they are challenging us (successfully, so far) militarily in the South China sea. What did we expect?

  5. there is no online anonymity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Interesting

    Even if you think you have it... you don't.

    China is just being more honest about what the USA already does behind the scenes. You think everything you do online isn't tracked by the NSA? Go back and reread the Snowden disclosures. You have no anonymity online, even when you are not using your real name or identity in any way, and are taking steps to guard your privacy. There are a vast amount of ways to de-anonymize you, and you have not guarded against all of them. You haven't even heard of all of them. The war was fought and was lost. Most people didn't care beause they were "not doing anything wrong".

    The future of the internet is more and more tracking of the behavior of the entire population of the world, more and more requirements to sign in with your real world identity, because the ruling classes always want a way to take inconvenient people down. Inconvenient like MLK was inconvenient. You pop your head up, embarrass the ruling classes, and they have your entire life history to comb through.

    1. Re:there is no online anonymity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      China is just being more honest about what the USA already does behind the scenes. You think everything you do online isn't tracked by the NSA? Go back and reread the Snowden disclosures.

      I've read the Snowden disclosures. I don't think you have.

      The NSA does not require users to register with their real names and personal information on websites; they don't censor content that is "prohibited", and they don't shut down internet social media that refuse to register their users' real names.

    2. Re:there is no online anonymity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      and they don't shut down internet social media that refuse to register their users' real names.

      You forgot "disallow social media and other posting sites that don't allow government agencies access to remove posts they dislike." But the rest is certainly all true.

    3. Re:there is no online anonymity by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      The NSA does not require users to register with their real names and personal information on web

      [taps side of nose] That's because they already

      BRB. Door.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    4. Re:there is no online anonymity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've read the Snowden disclosures.

      Shit, I think I missed a page or two, can you fill me in? /sarcasm, you clearly have jumped to some broad conclusions based on a vast amount, though still vastly fractional amount of information about "what the NSA does".

      they don't censor content that is "prohibited", and they don't shut down internet social media that refuse to register their users' real names.

      *cough* lavabit *cough* silentcircle *cough* 12-C00422224 *cough*

    5. Re:there is no online anonymity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The NSA does not require users to register with their real names and personal information on websites

      They track your identity EVEN IF you do not sign in with your real name, which I think was the GP's point. You are not anonymous in the USA any more than you can be in China.

  6. Lopsided by Tablizer · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I don't know why we don't tariff these guys. We readily allow their products and services in, yet they put up barriers to our software and services, creating lopsided trade. If we keep giving in, they'll keep doing it.

    --
    Table-ized A.I.
    1. Re:Lopsided by Geoffrey.landis · · Score: 0

      I don't know why we don't tariff these guys. We readily allow their products and services in, yet they put up barriers to our software and services, creating lopsided trade. If we keep giving in, they'll keep doing it.

      Because standard economic theory, the stuff you would have learned in Economics-101, says that protectionism and tariff wars always hurt both parties.

      --
      http://www.geoffreylandis.com
    2. Re:Lopsided by ADRA · · Score: 2

      So complete supplication to an authoritarian regime is the better policy? Well fuck lets lift all the trade restrictions on North Korea / Russia / Syria, etc.. What could the possible consequences possibly be? Commerce and trade clearly trumps any other possible outcomes.

      --
      Bye!
    3. Re:Lopsided by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      standard economic theory you learned Geoffrey.landis is horseshit.

      see Richard Wolff if you want to learn actual economic theory.

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

      Do you know what the word "supplication" even means?

    5. Re: Lopsided by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      us gov has supported dictators in the past. It's called 'realpolitik', as von Bismarck coined the term I believe

    6. Re:Lopsided by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Uhh but they are doing that to us so.... what would you suggest instead Geoffrey? They are just tariffing us by proxy by playing the rest of the game unfair.

    7. Re:Lopsided by Altrag · · Score: 1

      There's a huge difference between a product like cheap knock-off toys and an information service like Google.

      One is personalized, the other isn't. I'm sure the Chinese would have absolutely no problem buying American products like clothing and DVDs.. except they have no reason to do so since they make all that shit themselves at a fraction of the cost of US producers (and then sell it to us since much of it is produced under license from US or at least western-based companies because again.. fraction of the cost.)

      Similarly, if we actually cared about Chinese information services, we probably would start seeing limitations put on them. But like the Chinese with physical products, the US has little need for outside information services since we still produce the (subjectively) best services on the planet, with some input from Europe and Japan here and there.

      There's another angle here as well -- the rules that China's making apply equally to their national businesses, so its not an explicit barrier to international trade -- its a barrier to business in general. Now the fact that Chinese companies were probably already doing things like that while foreign companies typically wouldn't have been is another question but its not a question of trade policy as such since the rules are the same on both sides in this case and "I'm not used to that rule" isn't a solid argument.

      Imagine if we allowed China to ignore lead safety rules in their products just because they aren't used to having to design things that don't kill people. Obviously that sounds ridiculous but it would be a (somewhat) similar "barrier" to Chinese imports.

    8. Re:Lopsided by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      standard economic theory you learned Geoffrey.landis is horseshit.

      see Richard Wolff if you want to learn actual economic theory.

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XndjoAsBGr8

    9. Re:Lopsided by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      Economics-101, says that protectionism and tariff wars always hurt both parties.

      As others pointed out, theory and practice are often different.

      For one, lopsided trade will result in lopsided cash flow, which may result in bubbles, as excess cash in narrow sectors often does. Economists still haven't figured out how to prevent bubbles, even after 400 years of them. Thus, their theories are missing some pieces or their cows are too spherical.

      And Japan has some of the lowest unemployment rates in the world despite being fairly protectionist. One may argue products are more expensive there because of it, but choosing jobs over stuff is a subjective trade-off that's up to the population.

      --
      Table-ized A.I.
    10. Re:Lopsided by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It means: "There is only one autocorrect. Do not serve other autocorrects, or try to figure out the words by yourself, for the true autocorrect shall punish those who do so."

  7. US is far worse by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    At least China has spelled out their intentions very clearly. China deserves praise for their openness while the US should be admonished for their lies, secrecy, and cover-ups.

    1. Re:US is far worse by tietokone-olmi · · Score: 1

      And in China, there's likely quite enough Chen Dongs that the realname policy translates quickly to "yeah... whose real name?"

    2. Re:US is far worse by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1

      And in China, there's likely quite enough Chen Dongs that the realname policy translates quickly to "yeah... whose real name?"

      Name collisions are no more common in Chinese than they are in English. Just because their names sound the same to you, doesn't make them the same. In your example, "Dong" can be spoken with four different tones, and can be written with dozens of different hanzi.

    3. Re:US is far worse by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You no mess with Lo Wang!!

    4. Re:US is far worse by tietokone-olmi · · Score: 1

      I kinda hate to point this out, but English has already enough common names that it's impossible to tell without some kind of official ID that a particular guy isn't actually John Smith. And with "photo of ID card" stuff there comes the issue of "whose ID card", photoshop and what-not being what they are.

  8. BTW - here are the keys to the Internet, world by bjdevil66 · · Score: 0

    And we're handing control of the Internet to countries with views like this? The globalist view (i.e. "we're all equals and friends; we need to trust each other to work together for all people...") on some topics is truly naive...

    1. Re:BTW - here are the keys to the Internet, world by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're an idiot. DNS is what was handed over to a global agency, and it's hardly the keys to the Internet, just it's phone book.

      Nothing is stopping anyone else from using different DNS servers and there are alternate DNS roots out there.

  9. On the upside by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    At least Stinky Chinky is transparent about it. In the US, you'd be tossed in Club Fed if you told that these requirements are in effect via the back channels (discretionary powers etc.) that've been used to enact them.

  10. The Spirit Of The Night by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    America has some government overreach, but we have no "real name" requirement,

    Some of us remember (or can look up because it's probably the same 15 years later) nyx.net's drivers license requirements. And FCC complaint id #12-C00422224

    You can't be faulted for the fact that laws and policies have been distorted by decades long diseducation campaigns from NSA deconfliction units, but... Snowden happened. Stop pretending, stop living in denial.

  11. Wrong Argument by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "The law will effectively put China's Internet companies, and hundreds of millions of Internet users, under greater state control,"

    This repeated argument works for the US audiences. It does not persuade the people involved to see the things they do as harmful. Want to show that political rights have a positive influence to the society? Start with showing how it can lead to more profits. less corruption and fewer life-taking "accidents" in Chinese mining and other industries.

  12. ok by b783719 · · Score: 1

    It needs a real name, hmm...

    me:(Type in Mark Zuckerberg)
    Web: Register failed... There are already 38546 Mark Zuckerberg registered.
    me: Damn it!

  13. curso NR 10 by Instituto+Santa+Cata · · Score: 1

    Curso NR 10 online curso NR 10 curso NR 10 online