Slashdot Log In
CNN Website Targeted by DoS
Posted by
CmdrTaco
on Sat Apr 19, 2008 07:37 AM
from the different-kind-of-d-o-s dept.
from the different-kind-of-d-o-s dept.
antifoidulus writes "CNN is reporting that they were the target of a Denial of Service attack yesterday. According to the article, there have been reports on Asian tech sites that Chinese hackers were targeting CNN for their coverage of the unrest in Tibet. One has to wonder if this hacking attempt was government sponsored or not. The Chinese government hasn't been very happy with CNN -- in fact, the Beijing Bureau Chief has been summoned about a day before this happened."
Related Stories
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
In Other News (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Wait.. (Score:5, Funny)
woah.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Really though, if the chinese guv'ment is behind this, I think they're pretty childish. And it's not like they can just keep it up forever.. sooner or later they're going to want to check their email rather than just hitting refresh.
Re:In Other News (Score:4, Informative)
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
Well, let's take a look at this .. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
[...] They need to be found out and put away for a few years. On the other hand, if it was sponsored by the Chinese leadership it means they're attempting to extend their brand of censorship worldwide. In which case, they also need to be put away for a few years.
Sir, I refer you to the concept Belling the Cat [wikipedia.org]. If one found merit in your suggestion, how would you propose to carry it out?
(takes a giant step backwards)
Hackers or government? (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes, that would be interesting to know. But one of the more insightful views I've heard recently in the China vs. Tibet matter, is that "after so many years of communist rule, it is hard for Chinese people to make a distinction between government, communist party, policy and country". As a result, criticism of Chinese actions concerning Tibet may be felt not as attacks on policy, but attacks on the Chinese people and country. Don't know if that is true, but I'd welcome readers from China to comment on that.
There is a big difference between saying "you are bad" and saying "you are doing something bad". I guess the real gain is that more people (including the Chinese) are talking about Tibet now, and maybe someday the Chinese *people* will realize that Tibetans just want the same thing as the Chinese: run their own affairs, be left alone, and live in peace with their neighbors.
In general I feel that whenever 'weapons' (DoS attacks, censorship, physical force) are used to end a discussion, it means that party has run out of reasonable arguments (and in a way, admits moral defeat).
Parent
Re:Hackers or government? (Score:5, Insightful)
There is a big difference between saying "you are bad" and saying "you are doing something bad". I guess the real gain is that more people (including the Chinese) are talking about Tibet now, and maybe someday the Chinese *people* will realize that Tibetans just want the same thing as the Chinese: run their own affairs, be left alone, and live in peace with their neighbors.
Parent
Re:Hackers or government? (Score:4, Insightful)
Although, as far as I recall, there wasn't an American DDOS attack on British news sources based on the Iraq thing, government sponsored or not.
And as far as the Chinese... as long as you are going to be horrible to entire nations like that, people are going to say bad things about you. Why, look at us! Quit whining about it, either stop or accept that the world can recognize your evil actions for what they are.
I would prefer them to stop, by the way. And I wish we'd (USA) stop treating them like they're our best chums while they're violating human rights on international scales.
Parent
Re:Hackers or government? (Score:5, Insightful)
You're right that it's not unique to China, but it sure seems stronger there, doesn't it?
I've met tons of Americans who criticize their own government.
I've met Taiwanese people who bash the hell out of their government, calling it a corrupt charade.
I've met French people who -- though generally positive about their country -- have intelligent criticisms of their leaders.
I've met Singaporeans who, while recognizing the state's economic successes, bemoan the state of their country's government-controlled press, who resent the heavy-handed restriction of free speech and honest reporting.
All the Cubans I've ever met wished for Fidel Castro's death -- and are sorely disappointed that power has been handed over to Raul.
I've met tons of Chinese people -- many more Chinese than Taiwanese, or French, or Singaporean, or Cuban. So why the hell have I yet to meet a Chinese person critical of their own government?
In fact, it's worse than that. Even the many Chinese-Americans I've known -- people who either were born in the US or moved here as small children, people who you would think would not have been bombarded by the Chinese state media -- tend to be Chinese nationalists, supportive of whatever the country does.
I just don't get it.
There's this incredible conflation going on of the Han race, the Chinese ethnicity, and the government of the People's Republic of China. It's in the CCP's interest to confuse these separate concepts as much as possible, as it buys them the loyalty of not just their own subjects but also of Chinese people around the world -- who, if they paused and thought for a second, would realize they they have little more in common with the CCP's ruling elite than a few genetic markers.
More, it severely hampers debate, because the minute an American or European caucasian speaks critically of the CCP on the Tibet issue, *BAM*, a bunch of brainwashed Chinese people (please, don't get hung up on this: most people of any ethnicity are idiots) come out swinging with a bunch of prepackaged straw-man talking points (kind of like American conservatives):
1 - "You're just racist." Way to use an ad-hominem argument there. Even if I am, that doesn't mean I'm wrong.
2 - "Well, YOU are in Iraq." For starters, I am not in Iraq, you unable-to-separate-a-person-from-his-government moron; the idiot president of my country made that call, not me. And besides, it's irrelevant; your argument hardly justifies Chinese control of Tibet; it sounds an awful lot like, "Oh yeah? Well YOU beat your wife too!"
3 - "You European imperialists can't criticize us!" See #1 above. Just because the Dutch raped South Africa doesn't mean it's China's turn to fuck over other countries too.
4 - "We have historical claims to Tibet." For starters, who the heck is "we?" What do you get, personally, from Chinese control of Tibet? Why are you identifying with the CCP? And more, why do ancient territorial claims matter? Gaul was once part of the Roman empire; does that give modern Italy a claim to France? The stated present-day desire of Tibetans to rule themselves is the most relevant claim.
The problem is that you can't just ignore this trend by Chinese people of conflating "Chinese-ness" with supporting the CCP. Until this social trend is reversed, the sad truth is that Westerners will not be paranoid for finding the loyalty of Chinese people suspect.
I know this post will get modded down to hell, as it's incredibly un-PC, probably comes across as a little racist, and if you inspect it a little more deeply is also just plain bitter. But it's not a parroted stereotype -- just the disappointed real-life observation of someone who expected more out of people.
Parent
Re:Hackers or government? (Score:5, Interesting)
> attacks, censorship, physical force) are used to
> end a discussion, it means that party has run
> out of reasonable arguments (and in a way,
> admits moral defeat).
If you ever have access to the discussion of those Chinese youths, you will understand the problem better. There are no longer two "parties" trying to make an "argument". They see the biased report as an intentional attacks to their country. As a person born and lived in HK for a long time, I can understand that news in Western standards normally tries to please their audience, so they are eager to report and exaggerate anything negative about China while tend to neglect or downplay positive things since they don't sell papers. Not for them. What they feel is that their voice goes nowhere except among the Chinese. Even if a large group of Chinese go to demonstrate in London and Paris, they get minimal media coverage. A small group of pro-Tibet people will get a huge noise, in contrast.
They are not just worried, but are angry, literally. If you see it, you will not be surprised by such attacks at all. It is just a matter of when. No, I don't think government intervention is required. Indeed I believe the Beijing government very much want this not to happen at all, given the upcoming Olympiads, but they probably have no way to prevent this.
It is sad that this whole thing fueled a whole generation of Chinese youth who continue to think that their country is being belittled, and think that it all comes because they are not powerful enough. Your dream just goes the reverse direction, unfortunately. But instead of being "against the Tibetans", they are "against the Western world". They more and more are thinking in the lines of "over-power the West", rather than to live in harmony with them. The main result of the current episode is a strong mutual distrust. Europeans mistrust news reported by PRC (never mind they can now report criticism as long as it is not persuading any movement threatening their rule over China), and Chinese in general mistrust any European or American reporting.
Parent
Re:Hackers or government? (Score:4, Informative)
That could be the case for the Chinese people, but conversely, after years of hearing anti-China media coverage, it is hard for you to make a distinctions between myths announced by the Tibetan movements and facts in Tibet, between past and present, between Tibetans in exile, Tibetans supported by political influences/CIA, and Tibetans in Tibet.
It is wording like the summary and your comment that angers Chinese people who take actions on themselves. In fact, from the events in the past few years, like the bombing of Chinese embassy in Kosvo in 2000, Chinese fighter jet's collision with the US spy plane in 2001, and the anti-Japanese protests in 2004, it was the Chinese government who was afraid of overrun patriotism. Just yesterday, the Chinese government mouth piece published a statement [sina.com.cn] asking for calm and ration in patriotic actions, like what they did after the earlier mentioned events. You could say the Chinese government is freaking about destabilized society, whether that is caused by Tibet, Falun Gong or patriotism. Blaming every anti-West protest as government sponsored is exactly what humiliate those who are patriotic.
Parent
Re:Hackers or government? (Score:4, Informative)
Couldn't disagree more. As a UK born Chinese I can honestly say it more about the sheer hypocrisy of the west and also the 'way' in which those protests against the torch were carried out. Just to set the background, I was born in the UK, have some English relatives, went to public school etc. and probably speak better English than 99% of English that you find on the high street. For all intents and purposes I am 'British'. I am also very aware of my cultural identity and ties and am very comfortable in both environments. However for all my Britishness, the way that western media have portrayed this whole saga has been very disturbing for me. So much so that I am actively questioning my loyalties to the UK and the west in general.
We are all aware of human rights abuses in China (yes, even the Chinese in China) but the fact is if you go there you will see that the great majority of people are happy and grateful to the government for raising them out of poverty. What westerners can't grasp is how people can have such loyalty to a communist government. But that is a westerners' view through western tinted glasses and I can't help but feel there is lingering colonial attitude to the idea that somehow western democracy is the only way to govern and whether you like it or not, you "other countries" should have it as well regardless of what the majority of people in the country think. The fact is the relationship between the Chinese population and the Chinese government is much more, shall we say paternal. We do recognise that there needs to be change but that change must be at "our" pace, not yours. China has achieved more since opening up than almost any other country in history has in the same amount of time, but even that is not enough, the time scales most Chinese think about for democracy is in terms of 30-50 years. Not tomorrow or next month or next year. For some reason what took centuries to achieve in western democracies by western demand, must occur overnight in China. That of course doesn't preclude it from being possible but it is not necessarily desirable. China looks at the incredible instability that the break up of the USSR brought about and it nerve wracking not just for China but also for all the neighbouring countries.
On the subject of Tibet, it is not as simple as "Free"ing Tibet as so many band wagon jumpers have proclaimed. The fact is the histories are intimately tied and in addition to that Tibet has one vital resource that China absolutely cannot do without. Water. Both the Yangtze and Yellow river are sourced from the Tibetan plateau. An independent Tibet means there is no longer a guaranteed source of water. Without that, you have a country the size of the US without a major source of water. So what do you do? If you allow the break up of a unified China, you lose control of your source of water and run the risk of 50+ ethnicities all going there separate ways. You also lose control of all the nuclear weapons and have to deal with the ensuing headache. Those that say talking to the Dalai Lama is the solution also only have half the story. The Dalai Lama only speaks for a section of the exiled Tibetan community. Although he states his aims are an "autonomous" region with true autonomy, there is firstly no accounting for mission creep - give an inch take a yard, and secondly he does not speak for the Tibetan Youth movement who demand full sovereign status. The two entities are entirely at odds with each other. What is more the Dalai will die eventually; the youth movement will outlive him so it is their demands that have to be dealt with. So speaking to the Dalai Lama does not lead to a solution, it leads to maybe half a solution whilst he lives but would ultimately, with his death (insert reincarnation joke here!), lead to demands for fully sovereignty which, given the resource at stake is not acceptable.
Much is also made of the non interve
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
...and maybe someday the Chinese *people* will realize that Tibetans just want the same thing as the Chinese: run their own affairs, be left alone, and live in peace with their neighbors
The trouble is that people in 'the west' have been educated to think that Tibet is independent (or should be), and so any argument or commentary starts with that assumption. I have yet to see any commentary in the western media that isn't dripping with blatant bias. This mostly has come about due to the anti-communist attitude of various US presidents and their attempts to work against communism, whether directly or surreptitiously.
I also have yet to see any reference to the historical involvement of Brit
Re: (Score:2)
"One has to wonder..." (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:"One has to wonder..." (Score:4, Funny)
Parent
Re:"One has to wonder..." (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
It is probably more along the lines of a wink and a nod and looking the other way, not organized government sponsorship. As others have noted, the 'Great Firewall' could easily block DOS attacks but didn't in this case.
Id say more along the lines of shouting "CNN, hate china!, are your patriotic!" then turning the otherway.
My dad used to have a similar technique for dealing with bullying when he was a teacher, he would find out the kid had been bullying a 1st year, then get called out to some bullshit, and leave some kid he'd just caught bullying smaller kids, in with his form (who where oldest, biggest bullies) for a few minutes. Im just glad i didn't go to any schools he taught at!
Re: (Score:2)
I also seem to remember that Russia had done the same about 4-5 years before.
Not real big news, actually. Although we probably don't do it through so-called hackers, we probably do have government researchers who probe adversary systems.
But (assuming my memory is correct) the fact remains that China's method was to us
Re: (Score:2)
No, a lot more recently. When Estonia last year move a monument to Soviet Soldier [wsj.com] from the center of a city to the cemetery, Russians (who refuse to accept, that for most of their neighbors their occupation were worse than the Nazis') were very upset.
Both — the government and the people...
In today's China the same sentiment prevails — the Han nationalists are very upset and demand from their government far stronge
Re: (Score:2)
1) They merely have to threaten to remove these businesses from China.
2) They already have the resources to block Web sites without 'hacking' them
3) There are plenty of anti-Western geeks in China who are more than willing to 'make a point'
Re: (Score:2)
Great Firewall of China (Score:5, Interesting)
I'm not defending the great firewall of China, but I think it's worth pointing out that when the goverment has that kind of control over what does and doesn't go in and out if they wanted to they could easily do something to stop these kind of accusations surrounding large scale DoS attacks unless they're happy for them to continue in which case may the stories continue.
Of course there's always captured zombie machines outside the great firewall to do the trick, but certainly here in the UK many ISPs take note of which computers are sending out suspicious traffic, I've known a couple of people have their net access disabled by their ISP for throwing out known virus traffic at least. Most responsible ISPs worldwide could no doubt do exactly the same things.
The real question is could ISPs do this without introducing "feature" creep? My guess is, no, they'd quickly use the tools for blocking bad traffic for blocking things like BitTorrent, well, those few that don't already of course
It's a shame really that the tools are out there to prevent this kind of bad traffic, and yet the bad traffic is all to often allowed through and the tools are used to filter good traffic which is certainly the case with China. There's a question of what's good and bad traffic of course, but that's a debate for another day I think.
Re:Great Firewall of China (Score:5, Informative)
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
Of course there's always captured zombie machines outside the great firewall to do the trick, but certainly here in the UK many ISPs take note of which computers are sending out suspicious traffic, I've known a couple of people have their net access disabled by their ISP for throwing out known virus traffic at least. Most responsible ISPs worldwide could no doubt do exactly the same things.
Exactly. These guys are doing Command and Control from Internet cafes wherever they are, so there's very little traffic and it's surely wrapped in encryption anyway. Eventually the zombies get shut down, but that may be a matter of hours or days. Unfortunately, current detection and mitigation technologies don't keep up with the rate that new zombies are added to the horde.
The real question is could ISPs do this without introducing "feature" creep? My guess is, no, they'd quickly use the tools for blocking bad traffic for blocking things like BitTorrent, well, those few that don't already of course ;)
Just about everyone with a network bigger than a bread box has some type of attack mitigation gear in place. Most of the good stu
Re: (Score:2)
Not smart (Score:3, Insightful)
Poking at big news bureaus like this doesn't make them back down. It makes them more resolute in their reporting and possibly (probably) more biased against your cause.
-S
CNN was at fault too (Score:2, Interesting)
State Sponsored Information Operations (Score:2, Informative)
Chinese anti-CNN site (Score:2, Informative)
Life iin China (Score:3, Informative)
Chinese Government (Score:3, Informative)
There's probably no need. The thing that many people don't seem to realize that the information chinese people in China get and the information people outside China get are very different, and what the implications of this are. I've met a number of people from China, and, simply put, there is a world of difference between what is common knowledge here and what is common knowledge there.
Where many Americans see the chinese government as a repressive tyranny that needs to be overthrown to allow the chinese people to be free, the chinese see huge economic development and modernization. Where I've heard Europeans call the One Child Policy a crime against humanity, I've heard chinese people call it an unfortunate necessity, put in place for the good of the people. The Dalai Lama? How dare he criticize the chinese who have done so many good things for him! And you may not realize it, but the chinese government is actually doing a lot of good things for the environment.
Of course, the chinese government isn't perfect, and I think everybody will agree. But, knowing what a chinese person in China does, some of the things that foreign press agencies have been saying about China are completely outrageous. And when they are also critical of your country, some people will get angry. In a large country like China, that means a lot of angry people.
Remember the flame wars that were all over the net and the media when foreigners criticized the Bush government, its warlike policies, and their attempts to deceive the American people and the world? The same thing is now happening in China. The good thing about it all is that it raises awareness, in China, about issues that are important to the rest of the world. The bad thing about it is that it seems that the criticism is being turned into evidence of a worldwide conspiracy against China.
Of course, this is the wrong way to deal with criticism. The right response would be to find the cause of the criticism and only then decide on an appropriate action. Perhaps the critics have a point and the situation should be improved. Perhaps the critics are misguided and they should be corrected. Or perhaps their criticism is unfounded - in which case the appropriate response may be to ignore them or to criticize them in turn. Silencing critics is not, I think, an appropriate response.
One really interesting question is, though, how well informed are the critics? How sure are _you_ about the real situation over in China?
Glad they leave FOX News alone (Score:3, Funny)
Irony Alert! (Score:5, Interesting)
Right! Who needs a scapegoat? Obviously this is likely the fault of US companies. There's no point blaming someone when we can blame someone that it's more slashdot-friendly to blame. The man! Teh evil corporations!
For what it's worth, I spent most of my day yesterday in rent-a-brain mode mopping up after a web site defacement that was attempted from half a dozen Chinese IP addresses, succeeded from another one, and which was throwing JS-based redirects at browsers so they'd wind up on web sites hosted in China, where trojan-flavored malware was being served up. There's no way that a country with Draconian content sniffing and a country-wide firewall like China's doesn't know when operations like that are flourishing. FWIW, the demographics targeted in this case were mil/defense types, and the visible content on the redirected target was meant to momentarily confuse people expecting that the specific content they'd have been expecting. Year Of The Rat, indeed.
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
I doubt it.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Cold War (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:Cold War (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
And the way the government works over there, maybe they will just go out and kill anyone who dares to starve and charge the family for the bullet.
If China implodes, chances are good the US will have imploded before they do. And if it comes to that, do you really want any nuclear power to implode? I'm betting they would make demands of Taiwan and
Re: (Score:2)
There is no evidence Chinese water torture was ever used by the Chinese. It's about as authentic a Chinese custom as the Chinese fire drill.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
That may be the common view over there. It may even be believed by most of the government. But having had the opportunity to learn George Orwell's Nineteen Eighty-Four, it seems much more likely that it is part of a Chinese propaganda machine -- that at least a few people on the top have set it up to prevent dangerous ideas from rea
Re: (Score:2)
If it's pre-literate reasoning, then I'm guilty, guilty, guilty. I would submit, though, that it can be an unconscious but powerful force.
Over just the past twelve months I've had to worry about whether I was poisoning my kids, dogs, and self--all with items manufactured in China.
When I sit down to my desk to look at the server logs, the firewall reports that it's blocked umpteen hundred illegal login attempts over the past day--more than half from China. I turn to the website logs and find that the Baid
Re: (Score:2)
Let me say this, friend, at
Now either fit in with the rest of the world - or hide behind your firewall.
Just don't try and form us into your vision of what the world should look like.