Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Security Censorship The Internet Government Your Rights Online News

FBI Looks Into Chinese Role in Darfur Site Hack 107

Posted by Zonk
from the those-guys-sure-do-get-around dept.
Amy Bennett writes "This past weekend we discussed an increasing level of attacks online, targeting Tibetan-based NGOs. Now the BBC is reporting that the Save Darfur Coalition has called in the FBI on what appears to be a similar matter. Allyn Brooks-LaSure, a spokesman with the group, doesn't know who is behind the attacks, but he said the IP addresses of the computers that had hacked his organization were from China. Save Darfur has been trying to get China, one of Sudan's largest trading partners, to pressure Sudan's government into stopping the mass killings in Darfur's ongoing civil war. 'Someone in Beijing is trying to send us a message,' Brooks-LaSure said. Probably the same message they're sending by continuing to shut down video sites covering the Tibetan unrest."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

FBI Looks Into Chinese Role in Darfur Site Hack

Comments Filter:
  • by elrous0 (869638) * on Tuesday March 25, 2008 @08:47AM (#22855784)
    They are on the verge of becoming a world superpower. They have worked hard to build up close economic ties with the West. They stand to make billions on the deals they've struck. They have been given a chance to host the Olpympics, a golden opportunity to show the world they've arrived.

    And what do they do? They proceed to show the world that they are still a backwards oppressive country with no common sense, jeopardizing much of the progress that they've made over a bunch of piss-ass monks and to avoid some bad press that 99.9% of the world would have ignored if they hadn't tried so hard to supress it.

    Is there no Chinese term for "Bad PR" or are they just that stupid?

    Don't get me wrong, I'm no fan of the Dali Lama (like Penn Gillette, I think his intentions are a lot less pure [google.com] than he lets on). But jeez China, USE YOUR HEAD. At least wait until AFTER the Olympics to start busting heads.

    • by Shivetya (243324) on Tuesday March 25, 2008 @08:52AM (#22855814) Homepage Journal
      that is the real question. I think they don't.

      Why? Because even with all the previous threats and actual atrocities they committed they were granted the Olympics. Every time they threaten Taiwan and the US responds in the political arena its the US who is chastised for being the war mongers.

      The real question is, what is the fate of places like Tibet and Taiwan during and AFTER the Olympics?
      • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 25, 2008 @09:18AM (#22856048)
        Every time they threaten Taiwan and the US responds in the political arena its the US who is chastised for being the war mongers.

        Correct. Don't forget the universal leftist/socialist/progressive meme: "America bad!" And if happens that some non-American country has done something undeniably bad then the universal leftist/socialist/progressive response is: "But America is even worse."

        • by genner (694963)
          Yeah China is gulity of playing this card.....but in America it's even worse.
        • Re: (Score:2, Flamebait)

          by utopianfiat (774016)
          There's a big misunderstanding here. The "meme" itself is only what the right-wing/fascist/regressive camp chooses to hear- in reality a lot of leftists will point out what exactly is fucked up about an aspect of American policy and the right-wing chooses to disagree with the statement, on the grounds that if the "liberal" (term for "people who disagree with conservatives") thinks there's something wrong with America that the "conservative" does not, well the "liberal" must just hate America. The implied me
        • Every time they threaten Taiwan and the US responds in the political arena its the US who is chastised for being the war mongers.

          Correct. Don't forget the universal leftist/socialist/progressive meme: "America bad!" And if happens that some non-American country has done something undeniably bad then the universal leftist/socialist/progressive response is: "But America is even worse."

          China threatens Taiwan.
          The U.S.A. threatens, then blows up, invades and occupies Iraq.

          But, China bad! China worse! Because Amurika perfect and above all reproach! It not actions that count on Bizarro world, it image!

          • by jotok (728554)
            This sort of relativism is unproductive. We're just going on circles arguing over which is worse, rather than determining if any actions are simply bad. And both sides are forced into ridiculous positions: America sends people to Gitmo, and the left doesn't like that, so they have to endorse China's human rights abuses instead? And China restricts access to the internet and threatens its neighbors, and conservatives don't like that, so they now HAVE to support sending people to Gitmo?

            What the fuck? This
            • Why can't I simply say that human rights abuses and government censorship are universally bad?
              That's what I'm saying. But I was replying to someone who says you can't find any fault with the USA, since China did "x".
      • ...but in the last 10 years I can hardly think of a war started by china. So maybe the US reputation of warmonger isn't so overrated.
        • To the mods (Score:3, Insightful)

          by aepervius (535155)
          You might feel it as a flamebait... But sadly this is the feeling which is most probably shared by a lot of people right now. In the last 10 years the US has waged more war than China did (zero for China as far as I can tell). As such the US has earned a reputation of warmonger, whereas China, however how bad at human right is, has made no war in the last 10 years, and thus is not a warmonger.
        • Re: (Score:1, Troll)

          by TheLink (130905)
          The US Gov loves to use China as a bogeyman to the citizens e.g. "Oh no the chinese will kill us all".

          Sure the Chinese Gov is evil etc, but it's maybe only slightly above average in evilness[1] and I doubt they are stupid enough to attack US Gov - it will hurt China a lot too.

          After all the USA buys what China makes and pays them in US Dollars. Whenever the USA runs short on dollars it "prints" more (for example by issuing bonds, which China buys ;) ). Printing more USD = USD becomes worth less, the USA thus
      • The real question is, what is the fate of places like Tibet and Taiwan during and AFTER the Olympics?
        In case you haven't noticed, Taiwan's KMT, which supports closer ties with China, just won a landslide victory at the presidential election. And the "joining UN" referendums, which may be used to serve a prelude to the independence referendum, were both defeated.
      • by kcelery (410487)
        After Chinese spend so much effort to organize the Olympics and subsequent investment etc. It would be a total moron for the Chinese to initiate any crackdown on the Tibetans. The Chinese don't need such negative publicity by any measure. On the other hand, the separatist Tibetans could take this opportunity to stir up a scene when the Olympic torch pass through their area. They would receive the least suppression from the govt. The timing favors the separatists. Dalai lama must have a good PR team to or
      • The US interest in Tibet and Taiwan is for its own strategic interests, rather than genuine concern over human rights. Back in 1970's, China was still under Mao and was in a period known as the Cultural Revolution; it was one million times more oppressive than it is now and over half million people died for political reason (comparing to maybe tens to hundreds, depending on the reports you read, of people are under arrest for political views today.) YET , it was at that time the US gave up on Taiwan to fos

    • by sm62704 (957197) on Tuesday March 25, 2008 @08:58AM (#22855860) Journal
      They are on the verge of becoming a world superpower

      On the verge? What would happen to our economy if we had a falling out? Damned near everything you can buy these days is made there!

      Plus, they have for decades had nuclear weapons.

      They not only already are a superpower, they are more powerful than the US. I don't see how we could possibly hurt them, but they could destroy us.

      Thank you, patriotic multinational corporations, for buying my government and ruining my once great nation.

      -mcgrew

      (yes, I'm in a bad mood)
      • by elrous0 (869638) *
        Bah, until you're popular on YouTube you're nothing.
      • by johnsonav (1098915) on Tuesday March 25, 2008 @09:13AM (#22855994) Journal

        They not only already are a superpower, they are more powerful than the US. I don't see how we could possibly hurt them, but they could destroy us.
        They're not more powerful than the US. We both have a loaded gun pointed at the other in the form of trade. Sure, they could pretty well screw us over economically if they decided to. But there are hundreds of millions of newly urbanized Chinese, who make the toys and electronics that are shipped to the west, who would be very pissed off if the actions of their current government resulted in the loss of their relatively good paying jobs.

        I would be surprised if the government of China would throw away the last fifty years of economic progress in their country over something like Tibet or Taiwan. There is a large section of their population who only accept the repressive authoritarianism of their government because of the massive increase in the standard of living. Take that away, and the current leaders will be out on their asses.
        • Seems to me the best solution for the Chinese would be to make sure there markets remain stable and willing to buy Chinese manufactured goods. If this involves a military assault on Washington and annexing New York, San Fransico and LA to ensure US co-operation then so be it thats just good business.
          • by sm62704 (957197)
            Well yes, it is in their interest to make sure the markets are good. But what if they decide it isn't in their interest? Then what?
            • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

              by johnsonav (1098915)

              Well yes, it is in their interest to make sure the markets are good. But what if they decide it isn't in their interest? Then what?

              That's when one hundred million urban Chinese men, only a generation removed from the rice paddy, who got used to their cell phones, DVD players and relatively high standard of living, decide that returning to the country farm, when the factory they used to work at closes, isn't what they would like to do. Without those factories that manufacture goods for export, there will be an awful lot of pissed off young men who have an issue with the current Chinese government.

              Not to mention that many of those facto

        • by vertinox (846076) on Tuesday March 25, 2008 @10:29AM (#22856950)
          I would be surprised if the government of China would throw away the last fifty years of economic progress in their country over something like Tibet or Taiwan.

          If Taiwan did declare independence (officially) there would be military action from China even if it means war with the US.
          • Well, fuck em!

            For China to bitch over Taiwan would be like the UK bitching over how America is still theirs. China had a civil war and the nation split. One side is on the mainland, the other on an island. So much has changed now, they should be looked at as two independent nations.

            I sware, the Chinese government is populated with a bunch of cry babies. Waaahhhhhh
        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          by chrispalasz (974485)
          They're not more powerful than the US. We both have a loaded gun pointed at the other in the form of trade. Sure, they could pretty well screw us over economically if they decided to. But there are hundreds of millions of newly urbanized Chinese, who make the toys and electronics that are shipped to the west, who would be very pissed off if the actions of their current government resulted in the loss of their relatively good paying jobs.

          This is a good point.

          I always used to joke around and say that if the U
        • I would be surprised if the government of China would throw away the last fifty years of economic progress in their country over something like Tibet or Taiwan.

          There is a little story that goes somewhat like this:
          Once upon a time, there was a Chinese emperor who had a powerful neighbor. That neighbor sent a messenger to the emperor, demanding gold and all sorts of valuables in tribute. The emperor sent the messenger away with the requested tribute.
          A few years later, the neighbor again sent a messenger. This

      • by Crazy Taco (1083423) on Tuesday March 25, 2008 @09:48AM (#22856422)

        On the verge? What would happen to our economy if we had a falling out? Damned near everything you can buy these days is made there! Plus, they have for decades had nuclear weapons. They not only already are a superpower, they are more powerful than the US. I don't see how we could possibly hurt them, but they could destroy us. Thank you, patriotic multinational corporations, for buying my government and ruining my once great nation.

        Actually, I still think we could hurt them far more than they can hurt us, for the following reasons:

        1. Yes, they make everything, but who buys their stuff? If no one buys their stuff, what happens to them? They lose trillions of dollars. If they stop making their stuff, what happens to us? In the short term, prices on eBay go up for goods Americans have that are out of stock, but in the long run, we build our own factories to fill the market needs, and that is actually good for Americans. And if the factories don't get built here, they go to India and Latin American countries, which are far more stable anyway.
        2. You say they have nuclear weapons. Well, we have more, and as China is a smaller nation in terms of land area, we have the advantage of having less square footage to wipe out. You say you can't see how we could hurt them, when we could actually wipe out their country many times over. And we have a least a partial missile shield, which of course wouldn't stop them, but is at least slightly better than the nothing they have. So there isn't going to be a nuclear engagement.
        3. If we had a conventional weapons war, our conventional weapons are better. True, they have more people, but as more of our weaponry becomes automated that becomes less of an advantage for them, so long as we can mass produce our robots.
        4. We also have higher technology than they do. We alone posess most of the technology for making the fastest computer chips, and that gives us an extraordinary advantage. They recently attempted to make their own home grown "Dragon" PC chip in an effort to not be dependent on us, and it turned out to be the equivalent of a very slow 486.

        I will agree with you on one thing though: our multinationals are selling us out. They are building factories there so that they can sell in that market and avoid duties, but that really sucks for us because it pumps up the economy of a repressive regime. Still, though, at least that reason is better than the more common reason, which is that they want cheap labor to make goods they will ultimately sell not in China, but in the US. That's almost treason to humanity, because there are many countries in the world that aren't so repressive and that have people who would be desperate for those jobs and would work just as cheap. But no, we give their jobs to the repressive nation.

        • by sm62704 (957197)
          Very good points, I think you convinced me.
        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          Don't forget that China has a massive dollar reserve. They have the power to completely crash the value of the dollar by dumping their reserve on the global market. And if they would actually do this, every country with dollar reserves would follow to minimize their losses.

          Their reserves would be hurt by a dollar crash ofcourse, but they'd have the 'bonus' of massively increasing prices on imported goods for the USA. Including oil, because if the dollar would crash, OPEC would most likely start pricing the
          • by gnick (1211984)
            This is certainly a case of economic Mutually Assured Destruction. We're civilized now - We no longer threaten to blow up our rivals' citizens, we threaten to starve them.

            It's pretty much MADD, but this time on an economic level.
            I'm not sure that Mothers Against Drunk Driving really have a vested interest in this situation... =)
        • ...our multinationals are selling us out. They are building factories there so that they can sell in that market and avoid duties...

          I agree, but in the end the multinationals will suffer as well. What good is the official multinational product selling at X when there's another factory a couple miles up the road making a practically identical product that can be sold for 1/10 X? The multinationals are heavily dependent on IP laws to protect their bottom line, but the local Chinese businessman (or so I've
        • by droptone (798379)
          And if the factories don't get built here, they go to India and Latin American countries, which are far more stable anyway.

          I don't think anyone has every accused Latin America of being stable. And yes, I know that is a relatively minor point but it just gave a me a chuckle seeing such a claim. Although it could be a serious problem since if Latin America can't be counted on, where will we turn? India? Right beside China and if China wants to undermine our production they won't sit idle as India produces m
        • by CowTipperGore (1081903) on Tuesday March 25, 2008 @01:54PM (#22860300)

          Yes, they make everything, but who buys their stuff? If no one buys their stuff, what happens to them? They lose trillions of dollars. If they stop making their stuff, what happens to us? In the short term, prices on eBay go up for goods Americans have that are out of stock, but in the long run, we build our own factories to fill the market needs, and that is actually good for Americans. And if the factories don't get built here, they go to India and Latin American countries, which are far more stable anyway.

          By outsourcing to India and Latin American countries, America is actually cutting her own throat - she is personally building the economies that will allow the Chinese to stop propping up her failing economy. India followed only China in growth in recent years and is now considered in the top dozen economies of the world, while accounting for about 17% of the world's population (about four times more consumers than the US). Brazil has more than half the population of the US and a stronger economy than India. Don't forget about Russia, the third strongest growing economy who is aggressively pushing population growth and relations with China. China's dependence on the US consumer is a very time-limited reality.

          I'm completely confused about your comment about India and Latin America being far more stable than China. The US has directly used economic and military pressure to keep Latin America unstable for better than half a century. There's almost always multiple civil wars in progress (or fights between terrorists and puppet dictators, if you like).

          You say they have nuclear weapons. Well, we have more, and as China is a smaller nation in terms of land area, we have the advantage of having less square footage to wipe out. You say you can't see how we could hurt them, when we could actually wipe out their country many times over. And we have a least a partial missile shield, which of course wouldn't stop them, but is at least slightly better than the nothing they have. So there isn't going to be a nuclear engagement.

          I can't speak for the parent poster, but I read his comment about nuclear weapons simply as a statement supporting his assessment of China's current superpower status. It is ludicrous to suggest, as you do, that a difference in land mass gives us some advantage in a nuclear war. To quote Joshua, the only winning move is not to play.

          If we had a conventional weapons war, our conventional weapons are better. True, they have more people, but as more of our weaponry becomes automated that becomes less of an advantage for them, so long as we can mass produce our robots.

          The recent wars undertaken by the US are but minor skirmishes compared to a military confrontation with China, yet the US military industry is supported primarily by loans from China. If the US economy were forced to bear the cost of Afghanistan and Iraq, the current economic woes would seem like the good old days. Now imagine the costs of a real war, then factor in that America would be fighting against the nation financing its current military operations. I see a relatively small window in which you can continue to mass produce your magic robots.

          We also have higher technology than they do. We alone posess most of the technology for making the fastest computer chips, and that gives us an extraordinary advantage. They recently attempted to make their own home grown "Dragon" PC chip in an effort to not be dependent on us, and it turned out to be the equivalent of a very slow 486.

          Your "stable" comment in your first point confused me. Now you've totally lost me. You think that all computer technology knowledge is locked away in a vault somewhere in the US? Perhaps you keep it in Fort Knox? I guess you aren't aware that Intel has production facilities in China, Costa Rica, Malaysia, Israel, Ireland, India, Philippines, and Russia? I don't suppose you realized that AMD's primary research and manufacturing

        • You say they have nuclear weapons. Well, we have more, and as China is a smaller nation in terms of land area, we have the advantage of having less square footage to wipe out.

          From the CIA World Factbook:

          USA:

          total: 9,826,630 sq km
          land: 9,161,923 sq km
          water: 664,707 sq km
          note: includes only the 50 states and District of Columbia

          China:

          total: 9,596,960 sq km
          land: 9,326,410 sq km
          water: 270,550 sq km

    • by clragon (923326) on Tuesday March 25, 2008 @09:09AM (#22855952)
      Remember the internet attacks on Estonia [wikipedia.org]? The IP Adresses came from Russian so people speculated that the Russian government were behind the attacks for political pressure. But it turned out not to be.

      You have to realize that many Chinese youth today feel China is wronged by the West by a double standard, I won't go into the details as you can read them yourself (ex. the fb group "Tibet WAS,IS,and ALWAYS WILL BE a part of China"). But the point is, the attack is more likely to be caused by a Chinese citizen than the government itself.

      In another story I read this comment by Digestromath (1190577) and it pretty much nails it.

      Believe or not, extreme nationalists are willing to do the dirty work for free. It doesn't matter what country your in, you'll find some extreme patriots willing to go above and beyond to silence thier radical counterparts. Some governments do more to stop them, others do less... when it suits them.

      Like the parent said, the Chinese government would be stupid to attack these sites right before the Olympics. I read a book called "China Shakes the World" By James Kynge and in one chapter in mentioned how the Chinese government has "nurtured nationalism in the youth into so potent a force that they are about to loose control of it."(remembering from the top of my mind...)For example, Only recently are the Japanese portrayed in a semi-positive light in WWII TV series, which probably explains the large amount of people that participate in anti-Japanese riots.

      Of course the Chinese government could do more to stop these attacks, but the political climate in China prevents it from happening. No, I'm not talking about the dictatorship of the people. See, anyone that stands up and say these actions are wrong would be labeled a traitor by both politicians and majority of the citizens alike. So politicians tries to avoid denouncing anti-foreigner actions for the sake of their own skin.
      • See, anyone that stands up and say these actions are wrong would be labeled a traitor by both politicians and majority of the citizens alike. So politicians tries to avoid denouncing anti-foreigner actions for the sake of their own skin.

        It's more than that; that kind of nationalism (such as the "eternal dominance" claims over Tibet and Taiwan) serves directly to legitimize the power and prestige of the existing government. They're not just scared to denounce it; they actively encourage it because it helps
      • by nmosfet (770062)
        >For example, Only recently are the Japanese portrayed in a semi-positive light in WWII TV series, which probably explains the large amount of people that participate in anti-Japanese riots.

        Umm, do you even know about the atrocities committed by the Japanese during WWII? It was worse than Hitler. Many westerners don't seem to know or care. Also, the resentment not specific to Chinese people. Don't believe me, ask non-Japanese Asians what what their opinions are?
        • by jotok (728554)
          I've studied them extensively. It's a terrible story. But I also know that the bastard sons and daughters of rape victims, and their children, are treated like shit by Chinese citizens largely because of government propaganda and general social stigma. And I know that there are people growing up in Japan who had nothing to do with the war, and Chinese people growing up who had nothing to do with the war, and I wonder why it's still an issue, other than that it's still being exploited for propaganda purpo
    • Why don't you use your own head? Chinese officials are mostly technocrats who want immediate and effective solutions rather than good press. While good press is nice, if it's beyond their reaches they won't hold on that super-ego.

      What's more important? Containing the ethnic riots at home or win the propaganda war in the west? And is it even possible for the later? Will the bad press stop if the western media is given the direct access to Tibet? No! They'll just continue turning a blind eye on balancing repo
    • Re: (Score:1, Troll)

      by CmdrGravy (645153)
      I'm not sure how the events in Tibet can exactly reflect all that badly on the Chinese, from what I see on the news a whole bunch of Tibetans have been engaged in racially motivated attacks on Chinese Tibetans and the authorities have quite rightly done what they have to protect all Tibetans from this sort of violence.

      All I hear on the news are various western talking heads banging on about Buddism being a religion of perfect peace and how evil China is whilst totally ignoring the facts that Tibet has alway
    • by billcopc (196330)
      The thing is, China realizes that it doesn't matter what they do. They could all force their slave citizens to rape and kill their daughters, film it all and upload to Youtube.cn for the depraved enjoyment of government staff, and the Walmarts of the world would still kiss China's ass for cheap products to sell.

      China knows this, which is why they ignore what the rest of the world thinks. They know that nothing matters outside of China, unless it's a piece of paper with a lot of numbers on it.

      The only logi
      • Was going to write the exact thing. Chinese leadership has always done as they please, and the 'west' coming in and wanting to use their facilities/cheap labour only doesn't change anything, it only provides them with a skilled workforce, and lots of 'western' technology for free.

        If anything this has let the leadership know that as long as we get our cheap toys and electronics we'll turn a blind eye to anything not directly impacting the price and availability of said cheap items.
    • by nstlgc (945418)
      What I find more shocking is not that they do it, but that they've been doing this for YEARS without ANY worthwhile repercussion from the Western world they've been bonding with. They know Economy doesn't care about Ethics.
    • by jandersen (462034)

      And what do they do?

      I don't see them doing anything they haven't seen the West - most notably the US - do over and over, and get away with it. That doesn't mean that oppression is OK, but in the real world it doesn't matter, because it doesn't matter to most people in the world, as long as they have what they want. I'm sure you can think of something you, yourself, do without caring about what goes on behind the scenes. Do you drink Coca Cola? Does it bother you that the Coca Cola company allegedly runs a factory in India tha

    • Do you think the Chinese really care about PR in the US?

      I don't think they do very much. If the US (North America for that matter) decide to stop buying stuff from China, the US is done. You can't exist without your Chinese trading partners. They do all the work that American's won't do, or at least won't do for the salary paid to the Chinese.

      It's a sad business (for us) but North America is screwed. Maybe not next week or next month, but sooner or later, the economy is going to collapse, infrastructu

    • Is there no Chinese term for "Bad PR" or are they just that stupid?
      Wait until they hire a PR and lobbying firm in Washington, D.C. and the problem will be fixed. Actually I read a news on a Hong Kong newspaper websites the other day that many lobbying firms are opening up offices in Beijing under variety of disguise -- not sure if they want to help American penetrate the Chinese government or help the Chinese penetrate the U.S. government -- or both.
    • > And what do they do? They proceed to show the world that they are still > a backwards oppressive country with no common sense, jeopardizing much > of the progress that they've made over a bunch of piss-ass monks and to > avoid some bad press that 99.9% of the world would have ignored if they > hadn't tried so hard to supress it. > Is there no Chinese term for "Bad PR" or are they just that stupid? They aren't stupid, because they know precisely, that the glorious human-rights-waving We
  • I find it amazing that countries are still able to act with such impunity over the Internet, just because they aren't doing these things in the physical realm.
    • by aleph42 (1082389) *
      That might be the science fiction fan in me speaking, but isn't this exactly the "war between robots" that we've been wishing for, were the only casualities are mechanical (or here, software)?

      (Of course, I'm not speaking of the killing of tibetans.) If hacking becomes like economic warfare, a way for countries to gain influence that doesn't involve sending people shooting each other, I say it's a good thing.
      • On the other hand, if war becomes so easy to carry out, why think before starting it, and why bother ending it?
  • by SystematicPsycho (456042) on Tuesday March 25, 2008 @08:50AM (#22855804)
    So what if the IP came from China? Are there not a billion people there, who probably do have computers with default exploitable installations of Linux or Windows that could be used to launch attacks elsewhere? Not everything has to read like a Tom Clancy novel when it comes to international events.

    Lately the world's been trying to undermine China who is looking like the next superpower. Western leaders are continually meeting with the Dalai Lama to make them mad. Soon there will be Olympic boycotts.
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by elrous0 (869638) *
      Actually China seems to be doing a pretty good job of undermining THEMSELVES at this point, with or without Western help.
    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by Otter (3800)
      So what if the IP came from China? Are there not a billion people there, who probably do have computers with default exploitable installations of Linux or Windows that could be used to launch attacks elsewhere?

      Exploitable installations of Linux?!? Unpossible!

      Anyway, I don't think anyone is claiming that the FBI is taking these claims seriously, least of all the link, which doesn't even mention the FBI. Allyn Brooks-LaSure is free to float any wild theories he wants, but I'd be amazed if it were anything bu

    • by Pecisk (688001)
      You won't get any far with playing hardball, even as "superpower". If we talk a little bit more objectively (not OMG China ownz da world trough producing iPods), China can't be superpower without West - but West can be serious power without China. It will ask to cut some bloat and unhealthy hooks on China productions, but it can be done. China, however, are not in such luck here.

      Yes, China can stone US with screwing with US dollar, but it is like going total nuclear - no one wants it because after that ther
      • I perhaps think you meant the other way around. West cannot be a superpower without China. We have had free-slavery in our colonial confederate days. Our farming, cotton and all were done by slaves for nothing. Our products today manufactured in China is almost done for nothing. Without this edge capitalism cannot happen here. No way in hell I am paying $300 for a 5 port network hub or $50 for a coat hanger.
        • by Pecisk (688001)
          Sorry, bullshit. When hub would start to reach 100$, laws of market will kick in - corporations will have to find a way to "minimize profits" and find manufacturing places elsewhere. And frankly, there are already tons of talented and willing to work people in Eastern Europe, Africa and India. So, hub will cost a little bit more - so fucking what, they can cost double and people will still buy it.

          China actually have done so wrong here creating itself as image of "US of Asia". It is not like it's not happene
    • by thermowax (179226) on Tuesday March 25, 2008 @10:53AM (#22857300)

      I work in the network security field. Probably 70% of the IP space I block at the edge of my network is Chinese. The Pentagon and DoD have had repeated problems with hackers using Chinese IPs in the last two years or so. Make no mistake about it, this effort is tacitly (if not outrightly) being supported by the Chinese government.

      Here's a sample- Google "china hacking" for plenty more: http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-uschina4mar04,1,3559963.story [latimes.com]

    • by microbox (704317) on Tuesday March 25, 2008 @12:06PM (#22858522)

      Lately the world's been trying to undermine China who is looking like the next superpower. Western leaders are continually meeting with the Dalai Lama to make them mad. Soon there will be Olympic boycotts.

      Western leaders meet with the Dalai Lama because he is a religious leader to many people, and an advocate of peace. He does have the Nobel Peace Prize. That was not awarded as some anti-chinese conspiracy. Not everything about the Dalai Lama is about China - despite what the Chinese will try to assert. Just another example of how China does it's best to control-control-control *our* dialog. It is extremely ego-centric.

      If the Chinese had done *nothing wrong*, then they would have *nothing* to censor, and would not be concerned about managing our perception of them. Their censorship in the Tibet matter speaks volumes.

      There must be some cognitive disfunction when we talk about free-thinking. For example, I've seen Chinese people get extremely defensive when you talk about censorship. This country lashes out at the west for ridiculous things, such as talking to people. What type of paranoid person tries to control who other people talk to. Do the Chinese not understand free association?

      The west has made many mistakes on human rights issues, and wishes that China would learn from history. So far, the Chinese have been busy revising history to create some sort of false image - a situation analogous to a person who dwells in dreams.

      The west doesn't want to undermine China at all. The west just doesn't want to be tarnished by chinese crimes against it's own citizens while it greedily buys chinese goods. All this violence and censorship is entirely unnecessary.

      • There must be some cognitive disfunction when we talk about free-thinking. For example, I've seen Chinese people get extremely defensive when you talk about censorship.
        Talk to Americans about propaganda, indoctrination and swearing things to flags in classrooms, and see how defensive they get.
        • While the US certainly has its indoctrination process, they still fundamentally believe in the right of free speech and assembly. It is interesting that china apologists most frequently reach for the "you're bad too" argument. If something happens and you're critical to a person, and then they look at you coldly and say "you're no better than me" - that highlights a pretty poor moral development. Kohlberg's stages of moral development [wikipedia.org] would rank this at stage 2, self-interest orientation. That's one level b
      • ... who other people talk to?

        Hmm. A Communist dicatorship, perhaps. I hear they sort of get off on that.

        >>
        Do the Chinese not understand free association?
        >>

        I think you will find that the Chinese government understand counterrevolutionary activity quite well, Comrade. It is the West who doesn't understand China, because its intellectual class has been self-deceptive for decades about Communism. ("You can't say that! We're just as bad!") China is a one-party totalitarian state where genocide
    • by swm (171547) *

      So what if the IP came from China? Are there not a billion people there [...] ?
      No. There are not a billion people in China.
      There are maybe 200M people in China.
      Plus a billion peasants, and the peasants don't matter.
  • Not surprising (Score:5, Informative)

    by InvisblePinkUnicorn (1126837) on Tuesday March 25, 2008 @08:52AM (#22855810)
    "Save Darfur has been trying to get China, one of Sudan's largest trading partners, to pressure Sudan's government into stopping the mass killings in Darfur's ongoing civil war."

    First, Sudan's north-south civil war is a separate matter from the Darfur genocide. Second, it has not only been Save Darfur, but also the entire UN, that has been trying to pressure China to stop funding the genocide. However, China has refused to budge, and likewise have the powers of the world. The only real progress that has been made is for individual states, universities, and organizations to remove all of their investments in companies that do business with the Sudanese government and indirectly profit from the genocide. Sudanese divestment has influenced many companies to pull out of contracts with Sudan and it is definitely having some effect.

    For an excellent introduction to China's role in the Darfur genocide, watch Frontline's special for free online [pbs.org].

    To see how much your state congressmen are doing to divest contracts from Sudan, see DarfurScores.Org [darfurscores.org]. The Sudan Divestment Task Force [sudandivestment.org] has info on which states and organizations [sudandivestment.org] are divesting, and which ones are sitting on their hands.
    • by kill-1 (36256)
      For an excellent introduction to the hypocrisy of the "Safe Darfur" movement, read this article:

      http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=4717 [globalresearch.ca]
      • I see a lot of conjecture and hyperbole but not hypocrisy. Different people advocating action in Darfur have different ideas about what to do, and may even have different motivations, but to label the entire "movement" as having these same motivations is ridiculous.
    • by elrous0 (869638) *
      DarfurScores.org needs to get their shit together. According to them my zip (and, in fact, my entire state of South Carolina) doesn't even exist. I hate noble hippies who talk about helping but then half-ass it on the follow-through.
    • I know how Dr. Paul rates among this crowd, and I myself was a devoted fan, until I found out about his stance on the Darfur genocide and Sudanese divestment. See this thread [slashdot.org] for the details and an informative discussion.
      • by Otter (3800)
        1) Paul's position is rather helpful compared to the Green Party, where the Massachusetts party actively supports the Khartoum government against Darfur!

        2) That said, I don't understand why you're a "devoted fan" of the rest of the Libertarian platform but are so upset that he's taking a perfectly consistent position on this issue.

        • "I don't understand why you're a "devoted fan" of the rest of the Libertarian platform"

          That would be because I'm not.

          "he's taking a perfectly consistent position on this issue."

          Which principle is violated if the US government selectively avoiding contracts with companies that supply the genocide?
  • by petes_PoV (912422) on Tuesday March 25, 2008 @08:53AM (#22855816)
    Sometimes the original emails from the attackers appear to contain press releases from other Tibet campaigners - but when they are opened they install a trojan,

    OK, so don't open the emails. Really, does it need the FBI to tell you this?

    Better, maybe use a platform that isn't susceptible to Word/OS viruses and trojans.

    Better yet, how about some anti-virus software?

  • I thought that China had that covered by offering "bullet proof server" services with -allegdely- the ok from authorities to hack from there. They can then blame hacking from China-ip on users of that service, in a kind or tor-like denyability ( "it's not my traffic, my computer is an exit node" won't hold in court, except if you're a country).
    To be honest, I heard this on slashdot; if someone can find the post or the poster elaborate, that would be great.
  • Suggestion (Score:2, Funny)

    by Armakuni (1091299)
    'Someone in Beijing is trying to send us a message,' Brooks-LaSure said. What happened to just writing a letter?
    • 'Someone in Beijing is trying to send us a message,' Brooks-LaSure said.

      What happened to just writing a letter?
      Or leaving a bullet in the mail box on top of a picture of your kids leaving school?
  • by peter303 (12292) on Tuesday March 25, 2008 @09:39AM (#22856296)
    Chinese hackers have the blessing of their government to hone their skills against political enemies. Someday these skills will be needed for military enemies.
  • What have the FBI/CIA/Justice Department been doing to Al-Qaeda and other web sites belonging to Muslim extremists? Possibly infiltrating and shutting them down?

    The Western/American hypocrisy is piling up, nice and thick.
    • Al-Qaeda plans and executes attacks on civilians. The Save Darfur Coalition is trying stop attacks on civilians. Which one could be classified as an enemy of humanity? There's a lot of Western hypocrisy out there but moral relativism will only carry an argument so far.
    • by jotok (728554)
      I think taking down those sites is a bit more justifiable than taking down Save Darfur.

      YMMV, however.
  • by confused one (671304) on Tuesday March 25, 2008 @10:49AM (#22857218)
    there are huge botnets in China. Just because the IP address was Chinese does not prove China is the origin of the attack.
    • Doesn't surprise me in the least. I'm sure most of the Windows XP installations are from a pirated source including other software (Adobe, AutoCAD, MS Office...etc). Hell, even their native instant messenger QQ is craptastic.

      China's network is a dirty filthy slime pit. So many viri and botnets infest it, i'm sure it's their #2 cause of bandwidth consumption closely behind BitTorrent traffic. Oh, and did I mention their DNS replication is FUBAR!. It'll take years to clean it up even if all ISPs banded togeat
  • Here's the current list of IPs. I stuck the entire country on the "drop all packets" list a while back on some of my servers and never looked back. AND got a significant reduction in the random crap that tried to break into my stuff.

    http://www.apnic.net/apnic-bin/ipv4-by-country.pl?country=cn [apnic.net]

    There never was any useful traffic from there for what I am doing, so no loss.
  • When are we going to free Uighurstan [atimes.com]?

fortune: not found

Working...