Slashdot Mirror


China Has Abandoned a Cybersecurity Truce With the US, Report Says (bloomberg.com)

Cybersecurity firm Crowdstrike says China has largely abandoned a hacking truce negotiated by Barack Obama as President Trump embarked on a trade war with Beijing last year. "A slowdown in Chinese hacking following the cybersecurity agreement Obama's administration secured in 2015 appears to have been reversed, the firm said in a report released Tuesday that reviewed cyber activity by U.S. adversaries in 2018," reports Bloomberg. From the report: The report comes as the Trump administration seeks to reach a trade deal with China, including provisions on intellectual property theft, ahead of a March 1 deadline. Trump has said he may extend that deadline and hold off on increasing tariffs on Chinese imports if there's progress in the talks. China's hacking targets in 2018 included telecommunications systems in the U.S. and Asia, according to Crowdstrike. Groups linked to Iran and Russia also appeared to target telecommunications, a sector that yields "the most bang for your buck" for hackers due to the large number of users that can be accessed after breaching a single network, Meyers said.

The findings align with concern in the U.S. about telecommunications security as the country transitions to the next generation of mobile networks and the Trump administration seeks to secure so-called 5G technology from foreign intelligence gathering. The administration has expressed particular concern about the spread of products made by the Chinese firm Huawei Technologies Co.
The report also mentions the increased cyber activity in other parts of the world. "Iran focused much of its cyber activity on Middle Eastern and North African countries while Russia engaged in intelligence collection and information operations worldwide," the report says. "North Korea deployed hackers for financial gain and intelligence collection, while China targeted sectors including technology, manufacturing and hospitality."

114 comments

  1. Re:TLDR by Jarwulf · · Score: 1

    Oh, its also a dupe too of another article posted today but thats to be expected I guess.

  2. As decided by random security firm? by xxxJonBoyxxx · · Score: 2

    >> official thing negotiated by POTUS

    So...the standard of whether or not the agreement was violated is decided by a random security firm?

    1. Re:As decided by random security firm? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The standard is determined by people who set policy. The report documents the frequency of known attacks, which is increasing. Crowdstrike is hardly random, they've done this for a while. Why phrase things dishonestly?

    2. Re:As decided by random security firm? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Yeah, I think I'd rather trust the DoD, or NSA, or even the FBI to determine if a government is behind the attacks verses some rando, publicity seeking, scare mongering, Alex Jones level of conspiracy spewing "security firm" like Crowdstrike.

    3. Re:As decided by random security firm? by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Why are we expected to believe anything CrowdStrike says these days?

    4. Re:As decided by random security firm? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And yet you seem to think "the standard" is being set by crowdstrike, and you seem to think you have information indicating crowdstrike's numbers are wrong somehow. In fact both are false. Maybe try again?

      You started from a false assumption. Everything that followed was pretty ridiculous but in your defense, it wasn't very specific.

    5. Re:As decided by random security firm? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What's your conflicting source of information, with equal specificity and methods? Or are we just pretending you have one to point to and you don't, actually? And who cares WHAT you believe, who asked YOU to believe anything?

      That's entirely up to you, but you'd still need a source then to argue with them about it.

    6. Re:As decided by random security firm? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You don't need a source to call out fake news. If you need a source for everything then you lack the ability to make your own mind up based on what is right in front of you. That's so beta.

    7. Re:As decided by random security firm? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because they're the firm that worked with the Russian & British spies (Oleg & Steele) on behalf of the DNC, so they're clearly well-connected, right?

    8. Re:As decided by random security firm? by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      So...the standard of whether or not the agreement was violated is decided by a random security firm?

      Occam's Razor: What on earth makes you think that a company is honouring such a minor agreement with an adversary that is actively trying to economically punish them?

      No the standard of whether or not the agreement was violated should be decided by proof that under the current conditions it is still being adhered to.

    9. Re:As decided by random security firm? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why are we expected to believe anything CrowdStrike says these days?

      As opposed to whom? Trump et co?

    10. Re: As decided by random security firm? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This folks is the repubtard logic.

  3. Anti China Propoganda by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's at an all time high. Hot war coming at 4.

    1. Re:Anti China Propoganda by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I wonder who the next conservative faction will pick to be the enemy,

    2. Re:Anti China Propoganda by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1

      Yes, it is anti-China propaganda. Instead of calling these "attacks", they should say "free penetration testing".

    3. Re:Anti China Propoganda by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, it's facts. Sorry you don't like facts, Propaganda Bill. China is faggot shit run by liars and thieves, and you back that because you're the former who wishes he were smart enough to be the latter.

    4. Re:Anti China Propoganda by arglebargle_xiv · · Score: 1

      Internal enemies work best, because then you can demonize your opposition and suppress them. For example "the media" (meaning "the media when they say things I don't want to hear") was one example. Look up "stochastic terrorism".

    5. Re:Anti China Propoganda by dcw3 · · Score: 2

      It's my new pick up line...Hey baby, want some free penetration testing?

      --
      Just another day in Paradise
    6. Re:Anti China Propoganda by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, it is anti-China propaganda. Instead of calling these "attacks", they should say "free penetration testing".

      Interesting that a "patriot" such as yourself would defend the actions of an authoritarian police state.
      The record is clear regarding Chinas years of "IP transfer", aka stealing and many other cyber attacks against American infrastructure.
      But you knew that.

      So in my eyes, you aren't the patriot you claim to be, but merely another authoritarian yourself.
      But you knew that also.

    7. Re: Anti China Propoganda by astrofurter · · Score: 1

      Perhaps the Chinese are worried that President Trump is about to turn North Korea into an American ally?

  4. Fake truce by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Never existed. Obama fooled. Prog left ecstatic over losing.

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

    You're easily duped, that much is true fucking moron.

  6. Re:Orange man bad. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Orange man good.

  7. Let me get this straight by Crashmarik · · Score: 2

    We are supposed to be disturbed that China is trying to hack our networks and steal information, and intellectual property from us in response to our trying to hold them culpable for stealing information ,intellectual property and one sided trade practices ?

    Well I guess the next time somebody commits murder their solemn promise not to do it again should be enough for anyone.

    1. Re:Let me get this straight by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 1

      I wish more people would see the reality of this.

    2. Re: Let me get this straight by edris90 · · Score: 2

      They Didn't commit any crimes. Because they are the authority any decision makers of how Law is defined within their land. Us businesses chose to give their IP to the Chinese government when they chose to do business with China and transfer that information into the country. Now they're mad because they made a bad decision. everyone knows that the Chinese government has rights to anyting within their borders IP wise. Because that's the law. So call it what it is American businesses stupidly thought American legal definitions applied to other countries and now have to eat their mistake. China's not the unites states. Us law doesn't matter there. Nor should it. Instead weather Blame whoever was in those companies decided to stupidly send their IP to China when they didn't want to lose control of it. That's who fucked up.. Intellectual property has no natural Basis. It's a legal contruct to provide artificially enforced economic value. You leave law system that maintains the existence of IP, and you enter the bigger world where that shit is nonsense.

    3. Re: Let me get this straight by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They Didn't commit any crimes. Because they are the authority any decision makers of how Law is defined within their land. Us businesses chose to give their IP to the Chinese government when they chose to do business with China and transfer that information into the country. Now they're mad because they made a bad decision. everyone knows that the Chinese government has rights to anyting within their borders IP wise. Because that's the law.

      IP theft is still theft, even if various government say it is not. Execs making stupid decisions that helps hand precious IP to people that will steal it is also incredibly stupid. If the execs knew or suspected that theft would occur then it is possibly aiding and abetting a serious crime, most likely to pad their bonuses. If you could prove it, then perhaps prosecution is something to consider. Overall it illustrates why governments, alliances and order matter. Trump may not care if we gut NATO, but those dealing with us will notice and consider us weaker for our foolishness.

    4. Re: Let me get this straight by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      " China's not the unites states. Us law doesn't matter there " - Lol. Walk through Canada and say that, you stupid punk ass trying to continue to do business in the Northern Hemisphere. Gone. Gong show gone.

    5. Re: Let me get this straight by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      IP theft is still theft, even if various government say it is not.

      It really isn't.

      At most you'll find that it is infringement but IP is also always conditional.
      Trademarks are for example limited to a specific market.
      It is perfectly possible for multiple companies to have the same name but be in different countries.
      When someone then tries to go international it could for example give up its name and change it to something more unique but it is more common for a company to sell its products with different names in different places.
      For copyright you could have a look at how it works in Anguilla.

      Execs making stupid decisions that helps hand precious IP to people that will steal it is also incredibly stupid.

      You mean execs handing over IP to people that aren't bound by your rules?
      Yep, you can trust them as long as you send them money and make perfectly clear that the money stream will end if they don't respect you rules.
      It is a bad business decision.

    6. Re: Let me get this straight by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      1. what you said isn't true. That isn't what the law says in China. But if you are okay with the people "in charge" just doing whatever they want because nobody is going to physically stop them, you are part of the problem. 2. You may have missed the part where they are hacking computers that reside outside of China, taking information that resides outside of China.

    7. Re: Let me get this straight by edris90 · · Score: 1

      And that there right as a Sovereign Nation to conduct and Define their own legalities and morality. unless you're saying they're merely a colony that which case to whom is the authority they have to answer to? And then who tells that Authority what to do, eventually all forms of legalitiescome down to might makes right . that's what the law enforcement part is the night Whoever has the bigger gun can control other people. So are there people have value intrinsically and therefore oh nothing to laws they didn't create personally themselves, or they're only valuable relative to how they can be sacrificed for society and so therefore the government named body of that Society defines morality, and a person has no value except relative to what Society deems them to be,

  8. Mexico will pay for it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But but Orange man is like Jesus! Double the deficit again please papa orange man! Take more of my money! I was born to be a blind follower! Feelings feelings feelings. No logic or math 4eva!

  9. Orange man? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Are you referring to the unindicted co-conspirator, aka individual 1?

    The guy who's been under investigation by multiple federal and state level agencies since before he was even elected? The guy who'd administration has had 34 people charged so far with over 100 criminal counts and 6 guilty pleas from people in his immediate circle? That guy?

    1. Re:Orange man? by Cmdln+Daco · · Score: 1

      Dave's not here, man.

    2. Re: Orange man? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How many of those charges had anything to do with the actual investigation? None? Oh.

      How many of the charges were the result of information that was known to the authorities for years, but not acted on until it was politically convenient to do so?

    3. Re:Orange man? by penandpaper · · Score: 1

      No, I'm Dave! Open the door.

    4. Re: Orange man? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So your argument is that everyone knew that the current administration was full ofta criminals and therefore should we should give them a pass?

      Most people knew Trump was a crook. That is why he didn't win the popular vote.
      Intelligence agencies didn't arrest him because they didn't think he would win and the policy is to not show the enemy that you know what assets they have.

      Unfortunately they didn't realize how easily fooled a lot of people are and we ended up in this mess.

    5. Re: Orange man? by zugmeister · · Score: 1

      Hold on, so the "crook" was not prosecuted for his crimes because law enforcement was trying to sit on their incriminating evidence for... what again?
      Have you any idea how silly that sounds?

    6. Re:Orange man? by Tulsa_Time · · Score: 1

      You mean the person that was a target of the treasonous investigation of a duly elected president ?

      Using illegal FISA warrants, justified by DNC opposition research from Fusion GPS that had illegal access to NSA surveillance systems?

        That person ?

      --
      5 out of 6 people enjoy Russian Roulette & 6 out of 7 Dwarfs are not Happy
    7. Re: Orange man? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Billionaires" aren't prosecuted in this country, unless there's an overwhelming public demand. Otherwise, wealth is above the law.

    8. Re: Orange man? by zugmeister · · Score: 1

      "Billionares" aren't illegal in this country, full stop.
      Wealth makes it easier to avoid or mitigate the negative effects of breaking the law, but only to a degree.
      For example, look at this guy. He's 80 and will be out of prison in 150 years.

  10. old fashioned fear mongering by SirAstral · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Be nice to us economically or face random hacks... we will also tell your citizens that you would not be nice to us and "negotiate" so they will get mad at you about it too.

    China is terrible country that is far worse than America. I don't have a problem with cutting ties with that disgusting nation until they stop abusing their citizens. It like someone coming to your door and saying... I want you to sell me your house for 20% off or I am going to harass your neighborhood and watching your fellow neighbor getting pissed off at your for refusing to let bad people get their way!

    Sadly, it works too! Just look at this article!

    1. Re: old fashioned fear mongering by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ... and face random hacks. BDS should be focused against china, not Israel.

    2. Re:old fashioned fear mongering by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Have no fear, CISA is here! The Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (no, we're not just NPPD with a cool new name) is here to help. All we need is hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars so we can go on trips to Europe (we even have people living there at taxpayer expense), reorganizing our internal groups to increase promotions for our friends, and generally goofing off.

    3. Re:old fashioned fear mongering by dcw3 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      We should cut ties because the NSA hacks the planet,

      Certainly the UK would never do such a thing. And the UK certainly doesn't have a history of torture...oh no.

      If you don't think your country is spying on just about every other country on the planet, you're a simpleton.

      --
      Just another day in Paradise
    4. Re:old fashioned fear mongering by Trailer+Trash · · Score: 1

      If you don't think your country is spying on just about every other country on the planet, you're a simpleton.

      Narrator voice: It's AmiMoJo, definitely a simpleton.

    5. Re:old fashioned fear mongering by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      I don't have a problem with cutting ties with that disgusting nation until they stop abusing their citizens.

      Yeah you do. If you actually wouldn't have a problem cutting ties with them you wouldn't have posted this on Slashdot using your Chinese made computer parts.

    6. Re:old fashioned fear mongering by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      As much as I don't like defending AmiMoJo he's point stands well. You on the flip side committed a Tu Quoque logical Fallacy. Pointing out hypocrisy doesn't invalidate the original argument.

    7. Re:old fashioned fear mongering by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      I never meant to imply that the UK was better. My point was that it's the pot calling the kettle black, and none of the involved parties have the moral high ground here.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    8. Re:old fashioned fear mongering by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Be nice to us economically or face random hacks... "
      hohoho look who is talking.. very fucking funny

      "China is terrible country that is far worse than America."
      - citation needed

      "I don't have a problem with cutting ties with that disgusting nation", but i like the sweet deals on all the cheap stuff we were able to get in past and outsource all manufacturing there while giving a shit about our own workers.

      - What a disgusting hypocrite. What was wrong with making stuff in USA? Oh i see, profits not big enough. Be a good boy now and eat shit you helped to cook.

    9. Re:old fashioned fear mongering by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      USA USA USA!

      or some such bullshit

    10. Re:old fashioned fear mongering by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have never in my wildest dreams thought I could use this song link as a reply to an internet comment but it fits perfectly here https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

    11. Re:old fashioned fear mongering by jostage · · Score: 1

      Can you tell me WHY "China is terrible country that is far worse than America. "???

  11. Time for a timeout? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Cut china off the internet for 7 days...

    1. Re: Time for a timeout? by edris90 · · Score: 1, Insightful

      no wonder nobody likes United States listen to you guys trying to apply United States influence to a place where their influence can only be taken as an act of War against the sovereign state of that territory. If I came in your house and told you what to do it would be similar. United States and China have a peer to peer relationship, not a hierarchical relationship of parent, child

    2. Re: Time for a timeout? by Gravis+Zero · · Score: 1

      United States and China have a peer to peer relationship

      I would say it's more accurate to say we have an adversarial relationship that is closer to the USSR and USA in the 1980s. It seems calm and peaceful but both nations are ready to kill each other but don't as they know the consequences of open warfare would be devastating.

      If you don't see things like that then you probably aren't paying close enough attention.

      --
      Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
    3. Re: Time for a timeout? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Now that I have read this and your other post it would seem like you are at a minimum a troll and at worst a member of China's propaganda army.

    4. Re: Time for a timeout? by thereddaikon · · Score: 1

      Found the chinese shill. So are you paid to do it or are you one of them working from an office in shenzen?

    5. Re: Time for a timeout? by dcw3 · · Score: 1

      If you steal shit from my house and expect me to buy it back then there's a problem. There are international treaties and China has been a member of WIPO since 1980, so your analogy is dog shit.

      --
      Just another day in Paradise
    6. Re: Time for a timeout? by edris90 · · Score: 1

      Intellectual property is not real it's an artificial construct created as an economic prop. And exist only as a product of law. Outside of law, sharing and duplicating and refining existing information is just pragmatic and useful. I don't need to take what you have because with this information I can make my own and now neither of us either depend on each other and can do our own work.

    7. Re: Time for a timeout? by edris90 · · Score: 1

      Or maybe I just don't have blind worship for the random Nation I happen to have been spat into the world, disassociated from such blind loyalties am to see things clearer. I hate to say it but people who live in the u. S. Turn to think like a bunch of fanboys when it comes to contrasting different countries and cultures. The bias is glaring I must be accounted for. Just because it's the country you were born into doesn't mean you should automatically granted any Allegiance. Respect must be earned.

    8. Re: Time for a timeout? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But if people have rights I can't have slaves ðYz

  12. Re: TLDR by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But crazy white socialist guy good! Crazy young horse face socialist woman also good! They both want to give me moar phr33 st00f.

  13. Re:Orange man bad. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    At going to prison? So far, so great.

  14. Smell that? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I SMELL JOB SECURITY!!

    1. Re:Smell that? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Agreed, I'll be earning my $250k/year as a security professional well into the future.

  15. They can knock that shit off if they want a deal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You don't give ransom to kidnappers and you don't give concessions because the enemy attacks you.

    Tell them they can knock that shit off or the market is closed, full stop, until they learn to behave.

  16. What this means: by Gravis+Zero · · Score: 5, Insightful

    What this really means is that China's ability to obtain companies' IP through other means (e.g. espionage or via Chinese law) are not as effective as they once were or hoped they would be. The policy of the Chinese government has been "China first and to hell with the rest of you" long before Trump paraded out his "America First" line. China only does things that will benefit China and therefore the truce was part of that calculation. Now that things have changed and/or it's proven to not be as effective as hoped/expected (e.g. beefed up security and/or higher awareness by US companies), the Chinese government has resumed their normal hacking operations to steal IP. Alternatively, they predicted a massive influx of US companies that would be handing over their IP to China which hasn't panned out as expected. Anyway it goes, they were expecting to get more of the IP from US companies and it didn't happen and their response is to take it by hacking into companies.

    Note: I'm not claiming superiority in any regard, I'm just explaining the thought process that dictates their actions. (Take your whataboutism and shove it because this is about China.)

    --
    Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
    1. Re:What this means: by acrimonious+howard · · Score: 1

      So you think the part of the equation that changed is China realized they were not getting legal IP transfer they expected.

      I personally think what changed is Trump 1) threw out global political norms, and 2) started a trade war. So 1) increased cyber warfare wouldn't be noticed as much, and 2) In world opinion (soft power), they have an excuse/defense for the times they're caught.

      I have tons of evidence to back up my opinion. I'd guess you have a lot less, but I'd be interested in seeing it.

    2. Re:What this means: by acrimonious+howard · · Score: 1

      s/legal/espionage or via Chinese law/

      Also note, I'm not actually disagreeing with anything you said, I just wana see evidence, and filling in other reasons. I have no way of really knowing which reasons are more important, but the ones I listed I thought were more obvious.

    3. Re:What this means: by thereddaikon · · Score: 1

      We should;d just quarantine the Chinese from the internet already. Deny all DNS that resolves to a Chinese address. Probably wouldn't effect that much beyond their hacking anyways. The legitimate Chinese traffic rarely gets past their own great firewall and US citizens aren't exactly going to Baidu. Any US corps that have a business reason are clearly outsourcing traitors who need to be punished anyways. (only partially sarcastic there).

    4. Re:What this means: by Gravis+Zero · · Score: 1

      So you think the part of the equation that changed is China realized they were not getting legal IP transfer they expected.

      There is a lot of evidence for China's "China first and to hell with the rest of you" position. The rest is simply a logical extension of that policy. The trade war seems only to be a factor in that it's hurting them. Regardless, they were going to get that IP one way or another for their "Made in China 2025" initiative.

      --
      Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
  17. Looking at it from outside .... by AxeTheMax · · Score: 2

    For comparison, what is the historic and current level of US espionage / hacking of China and Chinese targets? Preferably from an independent source.

    1. Re:Looking at it from outside .... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      2 Wongs don't make a wight. And, if a rich and poor man both steal from one another, who wins? It's only fair among equals.

    2. Re:Looking at it from outside .... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Whataboutism.

  18. There was no slowdown on China's part by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Obama just cut back on monitoring so he could wiretap the many Republican candidates, which took up all his time and resources.

  19. Re: TLDR by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

    Free stuff? No â" essential services to help better our society that we pay taxes for. Problem is you assholes would be fine living in a third world shithole crawling in the dirt living as slaves, just so long as you didnâ(TM)t have to pay taxes. Taxes are theft durr hurr

  20. Remember checking our logs when signed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The day and next few days after China and USA signed the agreement, I didn't see any different in the attack logs of our servers. About 60% come from Chinese IPs, usually Universities and sometimes "unknown" IPs that aren't assigned to anyone in the world officially.

    Every week, I look through the rejects for all web and email traffic. Don't think the attack levels are any different today, though we do get more "your account has been hacked, pay this bitcoin ... " stuff in the spam folders.

  21. Negotiate One thing, Get Another by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I suspect the Orange One hasn't figured out that when you negotiate one thing, you're actually negotiating something entirely different that's not mentioned in the meetings or even by the advisors beforehand, or in the pre-read, or in the papers reporting your "success" or anywhere else. Certainly, his actions with many nations and groups to date don't appear to show that he's grasped this fact, despite being such a stable genius.

    Pissing off one bit of the Chinese population/government isn't likely to be invisible to the other bit.

  22. Truce? by c++horde · · Score: 1

    When was a Truce negotiated? There wasn't one. Crowdstrike is the group that handled the DNC server investigation when the FBI was not allowed to look. The propaganda machine is in full swing. The hits on our servers are still consistently coming from China and there has been no slow down.

    1. Re:Truce? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      When was a Truce negotiated?2015.

      There wasn't one.

      There certainly was one. Maybe no one followed it, but it clearly existed. I can find dozens of articles from 2015 about it.

      Crowdstrike is the group that handled the DNC server investigation when the FBI was not allowed to look.

      Non sequitur.

      The propaganda machine is in full swing.

      Yours is?

      The hits on our servers are still consistently coming from China and there has been no slow down.

      Yup.

  23. Ban Them by NicknameUnavailable · · Score: 1

    This shouldn't even be a negotiating point, if they're actively hacking us ban them until they get their shit under control (not like they don't control their whole network at the government level anyway, should be simple to stop the state-sponsored hacks from China.) The idea they would even suggest this as an ultimatum for not buying their backdoored hardware shows they need a kick in the balls.

  24. Re:TLDR by terrycarlino · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Yeah, because China wouldn't have dared to lie to Barack.

    Please. China has been engaged in cyberwarfare since the invention of the computer network. They're not stepping it up. They're getting caught more, and western countries are starting to replace "unknown foreign actor" with "Chinese" in reports, rather than continuing to give them cover.

    They steal our intellectual property, manipulate currency, and likely install backdoors in networks, chips and other devices manufactured for export. And like Lenin said many U.S. corporations are not only glad to sell them the rope with which to hang us, they'll actually pay them to put the rope around our necks.

  25. Re: TLDR by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    essential services like "WE ARE DEAD IN 10 YEARS!!!!!"
    essential services to refurbish and rebuild every building in America.
    essential services to nationalize energy, health, and housing.
    essential services to raise the minimum wage in places that do not need it that high
    essential services to mention cow farts as a serious issue
    essential services to hand out free college because gender studies can't find a job and no one can tell me what new skills are necessary that college will provide that high school can't for the next century
    essential services like open borders and eliminating ICE because evvvill racism
    essential services like taxing everyone to combat climate change while outlawing the actual source of energy that can solve the problem.

    She is retarded. Her ideas are retarded. Her ideas would turn the US into a 3rd world shithole. Her understanding of economics are retarded despite a piece of paper saying she should know better. Anyone that believes her or thinks her ideas are genius is a retard.

  26. Someone didn't take their meds today by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Looks like someone forgot to take their meds today. Yesterday wasn't a good day for APK and it looks like today won't be either.

    1. Re:Someone didn't take their meds today by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      JEW gets caught LYING admitting it 110010001000 https://hardware.slashdot.org/... saying he's no jew but is quoted beforehand he is.

  27. Never trust Chinks^Z^Zese by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Chinese did not abandon the said agreement - they never respected it.
    One of the reasons for the trade war was the ongoing cyber-espionage.

  28. You cannot make treaties with communists by WCMI92 · · Score: 1

    And of Obama made it. They will not honor any treaty that stops their march towards dominance.

    --
    Corporatism != Free Market
  29. Abandoned? That's funny! by Chas · · Score: 3, Insightful

    They were violating it while it was being signed, and never actually lived up to any part of it.

    --


    Chas - The one, the only.
    THANK GOD!!!
  30. Pharmakeia? You need truth serum, lol by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Speaking of DRUGS? You need truth serum https://it.slashdot.org/commen... lmao!

    * Such FINE "character" (not): Point-blank - YOU & YOURS tend to SHOOT YOURSELVES DOWN IN FLAMES, lol!

    APK

    P.S.=> Unbelievable - STALKING me by UNIDENTIFIABLE anonymous too & LIBELING me as well? LMAO, as usual?? YOU LOSE, jews... apk

    1. Re:Pharmakeia? You need truth serum, lol by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Goy cattle, learn it's ok for JEWS to LIE for they are self-proclaimed 'holy ones'! Schabouth Hag. 6d: "Jews may swear falsely by use of subterfuge wording."

    2. Re:Pharmakeia? You need truth serum, lol by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Explain why jews get kicked out of everywhere they go: Jews = biggest racists of all for which they "jew guilt" you for no less! They're hypocrites known as thieves all thru history or were Argentines in the 1940 under Peron, Spanish inquistion, France (1306), Egypt (despoiled/robbed by jews), Arabs (pre & post 1948), England (1330 Edward longshanks), Romans under titus, Russia pogroms and Germany who got rid of them from their nations (ALL nazi german's too? No). Driven into DESERTS ages ago! Don't wonder why after all those exilings above.

  31. Why'd ya stop CHATTERING twat? apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See subject: Did this https://it.slashdot.org/commen... & this https://it.slashdot.org/commen... shut you up? Apparently so.

    * Pats self on back!

    Ah, it's your SELF-PROCLAIMED "holiness" right? Schabouth Hag. 6d: "Jews may swear falsely by use of subterfuge wording." what a joke. Megalomania.

    (KEEP STALKING ME by UNIDENTIFIABLE anonymous - I'll just keep BLOWING YOUR LYING ASS AWAY, easily... lol!)

    APK

    P.S.=> Come on TWAT - chatter more so I can FUCK YOU UP even more, please... lol! apk

  32. Why'd ya stop CHATTERING twat? apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See subject: Did this https://it.slashdot.org/commen... & this https://it.slashdot.org/commen... shut you up? Apparently so.

    Ah, it's your SELF-PROCLAIMED "holiness" right? Schabouth Hag. 6d: "Jews may swear falsely by use of subterfuge wording." what a joke. Megalomania abounds in YOUR culture.

    * Pats self on back!

    (KEEP STALKING ME by UNIDENTIFIABLE anonymous - I'll just keep BLOWING YOUR LYING ASS AWAY, easily... lol!)

    APK

    P.S.=> Come on TWAT - chatter more so I can FUCK YOU UP even more, please... lol! apk

  33. No mention of ... by CaptainDork · · Score: 1

    ... designing hardened systems.

    America is not willing or able to design innovative cyber defenses.

    --
    It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
  34. Re: TLDR by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    She is retarded. Her ideas are retarded. Her ideas would turn the US into a 3rd world shithole. Her understanding of economics are retarded despite a piece of paper saying she should know better. Anyone that believes her or thinks her ideas are genius is a retard.

    I think you have just described the ideal woman for APK.

  35. Re:Orange man bad. by zugmeister · · Score: 1

    How is he good at going to prison?
    Has he done that before?
    I've been hearing about his imminent downfall since he was elected President, but it keeps not happening.

  36. Re: TLDR by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    your face is tarded

    fuck your self-important ignorant bullshit, fucking retard

  37. Re:Abandoned? That's funny! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And your support for this statement is what exactly?

    No, citing one, several, or numerous Chinese hacks won't answer the question. We need something specific and concrete that supports the idea that Chinese hacking won't get worse now.

  38. lol, too funny by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Cybersecurity firm Crowdstrike says China has largely abandoned a hacking truce negotiated by Barack Obama as President Trump embarked on a trade war with Beijing last year."

    Is there ANYTHING that Donald Trump can't fuck up?

  39. Re: Orange man bad. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It took years for things to go anywhere with Nixon, too.

    "Why hasn't he been arrested yet, then???" Isn't proof of innocence, in any way

  40. Xi's UN Internet Code of Conduct by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    'Cybersecurity firm Crowdstrike says China has largely abandoned a hacking truce'.

    The agreement came at the behest of President Xi.

    In 2015 he proposed a UN Internet Code of Conduct calling on members to “Comply with the UN Charter by respecting sovereignty and territorial integrity; not to use information and communications technologies, ICT, for hostile activities and aggression and not to proliferate information weapons or related technologies; to cooperate in combating criminal and terrorist activities that use ICT; to promote the establishment of a democratic and multilateral internet management system, and to promote the important role of the United Nations in formulating international norms.”

    The US vetoed the resolution and, a few months later, as Xiwas preparing to visit the US, Washington announced sanctions on Chinese companies for alleged digital Internet attacks. Xi immediately altered his itinerary and invited America’s technology CEOs to dinner at Bill Gates’ Seattle home. Forbes reported, “Beijing is pushing back in an unorthodox way by organizing a technology forum in Seattle to demonstrate its own sway over the American tech industry. The meeting is rankling the Obama administration by veering off the script agreed to for Xi’s carefully stage-managed visit.” Apple’s Tim Cook described the reaction when Xi entered the room, “Did you feel the room shake?”

    The CEOs discussed the Internet code of conduct and, after publicly expressing their support for Xi’s position, informed President Obama who promised, “The United States will neither conduct nor knowingly support cyber-enabled theft of intellectual property, including trade secrets or other confidential business information, with the intent of providing competitive advantages to companies or commercial sectors.” The New York Times opined, ”Looking back at the trip, the most memorable moment–and maybe the most important–was watching $2.5 trillion of American corporate power pay homage to the Chinese President.” As The Diplomat subsequently observed, “In his visit, President Xi Jinping brilliantly outmaneuvered the United States.”

    Since China leads in most of the sciences and technologies, it has no need to spy. Nor is there a shred of evidence that it does.

  41. Re:Abandoned? That's funny! by Chas · · Score: 1

    Oh dear!

    An innocent little lamb!

    --


    Chas - The one, the only.
    THANK GOD!!!
  42. Re: TLDR by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Of course the Chinese lied to Obama. You don't think handlers tell the _whole_ truth to their assets, do you?

  43. Re:Abandoned? That's funny! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So weak, do you need a hankie? How about a cold compress?

  44. Trump hates everything Obama did for America by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Because Trump hates America even more than he hates Obama.