Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Security Government Politics

Cyber Attacks on US Linked to Chinese Military? 698

Posted by ScuttleMonkey from the not-the-kind-of-concrete-i-would-build-a-house-on dept.
wiredog writes "Security expert Bruce Schneier is reporting on a continuing effort to penetrate US government and industry computer systems that most likely stems from the Chinese military." From the Terranet article: "The attacks have been traced to the Chinese province of Guangdong, and the techniques used make it appear unlikely to come from any other source than the military, said Alan Paller, the director of the SANS Institute, an education and research organization focusing on cybersecurity."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Cyber Attacks on US Linked to Chinese Military? More

Cyber Attacks on US Linked to Chinese Military?

Comments Filter:

  • The mouse click heard 'round the world? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by eldavojohn ( 898314 ) * <eldavojohn@noSpAM.gmail.com> on Wednesday December 14, 2005 @04:17PM (#14258543) Journal
    Is a war already starting in the virtual realm?

    Take, for example this story [freerepublic.com] which includes the quote:
    The Chinese government, in particular, sees its reliance on Microsoft as a potential threat. Conspiracy buffs believe certain patches in the Windows code might give U.S. authorities the power to access Chinese networks and disable them, possibly during a war over Taiwan.


    Let's not forget how important our information infrastructures are and how dependent we have been on computers for quite sometime. Let's also not forget common rules of war one of which is cutting off an enemy's supply line ASAP to reduce their cone of influence. A pre-emptive move to "test the waters" of U.S. security by China would not surprise me.
    • I think if it ultimately gets out of hand, we will just blacklist all of china traffic at the backbones. They like to play by themselves phyically... so lets just help them out virtually too.
      • > we will just blacklist all of china traffic at the backbones

        That's pretty naiive. Off the top of my head I can think of severals ways around that... modem dial long distance into another country, or buy a T-1 into a neutral country into another neutral country etc etc, you know... like how countries on our 'naughty' list buy weapons now, from USA to Great Britain to Germany to Sub-Saharan Africa to the Middle East, etc.

        • For that matter, if China were planning a cyberattack that might provoke such a response from us, I can't imagine why they wouldn't just send some "students" here ahead of time in preparation. (I'm not saying China has done this, I'm just saying it seems like an obvious thing to do).

          • Re:The mouse click heard 'round the world? (Score:5, Funny)

            by flyingsquid ( 813711 ) on Wednesday December 14, 2005 @05:23PM (#14259241)
            I'm just trying to imagine what nefarious devices Microsoft would use to disable the Chinese networks. All I can picture is Clippy popping up and saying, "It looks like you're trying to invade Taiwan. Would you like help with this?" and then leading you through the steps to wipe your hard drive.
      • "I think if it ultimately gets out of hand, we will just blacklist all of china traffic at the backbones. They like to play by themselves phyically... so lets just help them out virtually too."

        Uhm... I think big companies that rely heavily on Chinese imports and outsourcing services might not be too happy about that.

      • Re:The mouse click heard 'round the world? (Score:5, Insightful)

        by winkydink ( 650484 ) * <sv.dude@gmail.com> on Wednesday December 14, 2005 @04:39PM (#14258743) Homepage Journal
        I think you fail to understand how intertwined global supply chains really are. If you blacklist all China tyraffic at the backbones, you'll essentially cripple a large part of the US economy as a result. Then there is the question of all that US debt China is holding.

        As of today, the two countries econmonies are too intertwined for either to seriously screw with the other. Kind of an economic vversion of MAD.
      • Not much point unless you sever China completely. Otherwise they can hop in through some chain of computers. And there are ways past even a physical disconnection (eg, the hacker team could operate from a neutral country).
    • Is a war already starting in the virtual realm?
      No, so long as the hacking remains in the realm of espionage and is not directly offensive. It's like the difference between assasinating the President and "character assasination" against the President - two quite different things.

      A real war between China and the US is not in the offing. Our economies are too intertwined. But there's no doubt we spy on each other.

    • Re:The mouse click heard 'round the world? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by spellraiser ( 764337 ) on Wednesday December 14, 2005 @04:37PM (#14258719) Journal
      Is a war already starting in the virtual realm?

      It would be a naive point of view to think that it hasn't already started. It would be equally naive to assume that the U.S. is not at the forefront of such a war.

      Seriously, it makes no sense to think that the U.S. government is not involved in digital warfare and espionage. The U.S. is the greatest military power in the world, especially when it comes to technology. The Internet was created there - by the military orginally.

      If the U.S. government didn't take digital warfare seriously, this will without a doubt at least have changed after 9/11. The current administration is extremely militant, party with cause, and party without cause. Their ideology is based on 'first strike' principles - on elimiting potential threads as they surface. It is only logical to assume that this ideology extends to all possible fronts.

      Now, who wants to bet big bucks that the United States military is not deeply involved in aggressive digital warfare at this very moment?

      • Re:The mouse click heard 'round the world? (Score:4, Informative)

        by blair1q ( 305137 ) on Wednesday December 14, 2005 @08:26PM (#14260405) Journal
        >It would be a naive point of view to think that it hasn't already started. It would be equally naive to assume that the U.S. is not at the forefront of such a war.

        We already lost the war.

        America spent over $1 trillion in the 70's, 80's, and 90's creating the information economy.

        Then shipped it to China and India in a matter of a few years.

        They couldn't have taken $1 trillion in advantage from us in a shooting war, but they got it anyway.

        The war is over, and this activity by the Chinese is to protect them from our attempt to take it back.
    • Is a war already starting in the virtual realm?

      No, its the same sort of low-level who's-got-the-biggest-dick thats been going on between China and the USA for years.

      China and the USA's economies are far too intwined for either party to seriously start something.

      Oh - and rest assured that the US is doing similar things to China. This isjust what superpowers feel that they have to do.

    • Re:The mouse click heard 'round the world? (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Serveert ( 102805 ) on Wednesday December 14, 2005 @04:56PM (#14258936)
      Conspiracy buffs believe certain patches in the Windows code might give U.S. authorities the power to access Chinese networks and disable them, possibly during a war over Taiwan.

      It happened once, could happen again:

      CIA slipped bugs to Soviets [msn.com]
       
      In January 1982, President Ronald Reagan approved a CIA plan to sabotage the economy of the Soviet Union through covert transfers of technology that contained hidden malfunctions, including software that later triggered a huge explosion in a Siberian natural gas pipeline, according to a new memoir by a Reagan White House official.
    • Let's not forget how important our information infrastructures are and how dependent we have been on computers for quite sometime.

      let's also not forget that Microsoft is a corporation, so it's motivated by only one thing: profit. If they'll put in a backdoor for the US government, why not do it for other governments? They work for the highest bidder.
    • A pre-emptive move to "test the waters" of U.S. security by China would not surprise me.
      Or perhaps some Chinese guy got hold of a Sony music cd and his machine has been pwned ?

  • Blame Game (Score:5, Interesting)

    by biocute ( 936687 ) on Wednesday December 14, 2005 @04:17PM (#14258546)
    Does this sound like another blame game when something bad happens in USA? If they have already traced the source and still couldn't fend it off, I don't know what they would do next, calling President Hu?

    These attacks come from someone with intense discipline. No other organization could do this if they were not a military organization

    Does this rhyme with "Space exploration is both demanding and dangerous. No other nations could do this if they did not have a space shuttle".
    • Or, "Operating systems are just too complex. It takes a huge well-funded corporation to support that kind of development."

      I assure you, as an anarcho-capitalist, I run into this same absurd "argument" on all kinds of subjects.

      "Dams are just too big and expensive, they cannot be built privately." Oh, but don't notice that Boulder Dam was a private project expropriated by the Fed.Gov and renamed Hoover Dam...

      • Re:Blame Game (Score:3, Informative)

        by pete-classic ( 75983 )
        I just toured the Hoover dam a few weeks ago. One of the guides was quite the dry wit. As we rode the elevator down he made note that the government never spent a dime to build or operate the dam, and that all debts were recently retired. He then deadpanned, "It was a great idea. That's why it's never been done again."

        -Peter

    • Re:Blame Game (Score:5, Interesting)

      by IAAP ( 937607 ) on Wednesday December 14, 2005 @04:28PM (#14258655)
      Does this sound like another blame game when something bad happens in USA?

      China == "Goldstein"? See 1984 by George Orwell [amazon.com]

    • I don't think so (Score:5, Insightful)

      by einhverfr ( 238914 ) <chris...travers@@@gmail...com> on Wednesday December 14, 2005 @04:53PM (#14258907) Homepage Journal
      I have been following this for some time.

      This is not the first time this story has appeared on Slashdot. The last time it did (last year, I think), it covered a person who had traced the attacks back as far as China and gave some basic information about the methods and types of attacks. Also there is some reason to think that some military systems have indeed been penetrated and such items as flight control software stolen.

      My own suspicion is that you have some sort of DMZ from which these attacks are occurring. You have a number of people stationed in shifts around the clock logging into these systems (possibly remotely) and using them for the attacks. There is plenty of reason to suspect the Chinese military here. These are not defacement attempts but are pretty surgical attempts at military data theft. This means organized crime (terrorist or not) and military are your only major suspects. The military is more likely the purpetrators given not only the specific type of data being targetted but also the Chinese Gov't's general unwillingness to cooperate with an investigation.

    • Re:Blame Game (Score:5, Funny)

      by craXORjack ( 726120 ) on Wednesday December 14, 2005 @05:15PM (#14259167)
      I don't know what they would do next, calling President Hu?

      Costello: Well then who's the president?

      Abbott: Yes.

      Costello: I mean the fellow's name.

      Abbott: Who.

      Costello: The guy in power.

      Abbott: Who.

      Costello: The president.

      Abbott: Who.

      Costello: The guy calling the shots...

      Abbott: Who is the president!

      Costello: I'm asking you who's the president.

      Abbott: That's the man's name.

      Costello: That's who's name?

      Abbott: Yes.

  • Propaganda machine in action? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 14, 2005 @04:19PM (#14258560)
    This was brought up on my local SAGE mailing list earlier. Someone brought up the good point: Aren't there an awful lot of news stories recently (heck, there've been three on /. in the past few days) villianizing China? Almost as if some large government- or media-induced program is going on to remind us how Evil they are and influence the collective consciousness to be in favor of breaking off relations with the most populous nation on Earth? (Or, to some extreme, treating them like our last Axis of Evil?)
    • "Aren't there an awful lot of news stories recently (heck, there've been three on /. in the past few days) villianizing?"

      I corrected your question for you.

      Bad news sells.

    • Anti-Chinese Sentiments (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Anti-Trend ( 857000 ) on Wednesday December 14, 2005 @04:54PM (#14258915) Homepage Journal
      While I agree with the gist of what you're saying, my firewall logs are constantly filled with hack attempts originating from our Chinese cyber-neighbors. What I'd be interested to know is whether these are concentrated attacks (most do not seem to be) or whether China's tenancy towards software piracy has become a problem for them. Would it surprise anyone if many widely-circulated, Chinese-pirated copies of Windows XP were pre-infected with trojan rootkits? In that case the botnets would be deployed from the moment the OS was installed. That being said, the responsibility ultimately lies with them either way.

    • Unlikely (Score:3, Insightful)

      by SmallFurryCreature ( 593017 )
      First america is totally dependant on the chinese economy. Even more on that region. A war would be a disaster for the american economy ESPECIALLY for the powers that be.

      Second china is not an iraq or vietnam. It would kick americas butt in both a ground war and a nuclear exchange. Massive losses for the chinese sure, but so what? Not like they are going to run out.

      Third russia would have a fit.

      Fourth India would have a fit.

      Fifth non-commercial blokkade would suit the chinese just fine. Less capatalist

    • Villianizing China... why??? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Savage-Rabbit ( 308260 ) on Wednesday December 14, 2005 @05:45PM (#14259417)
      While I don't approve of this method of cutting corners on R&D the Chinese are doing nothing that the US hasn't done in the past and still is doing today, and not just to nations that could be a potential threat either. The USA also spies on it's own allies and that includes abusing base rights and surveillance assets, supposedly there to be used for the benefit of NATO defense, to conduct industrial espionage on other NATO nations. The US has even used these assets to commit occasional acts of economic sabotage, a famous example would be the Saudi Arab airliner deal that Boeing managed to snatch away from Airbus with Uncle Sam's help. Not that I'm complaning mind you, we Europeans are not exactly angels either and the whole Airbus mess did have two positive results. Firstly we now know that we can't even trust our friends in the USA as far as we can throw them (a lesson they are now slowly learning them selves, in reverse, so to speak) and secondly many corporations here now take communications security more seriously than the military. Judging from the way it has been chewing away at Boeing's market share Airbus certainly seems to have learned it's lesson.

      The price of peace is eternal vigilance.... even your friend will stab you in the back to butter his own slice of bread.... learn the lesson, go on and get over it.

  • so (Score:5, Funny)

    by kevin.fowler ( 915964 ) on Wednesday December 14, 2005 @04:21PM (#14258576) Homepage
    so does this mean in the coming information war they are going to use that commie OS, what is it...

    Linux, I think it's called?

  • Ho, Ho! Good luck, China! (Score:5, Funny)

    by bigtallmofo ( 695287 ) on Wednesday December 14, 2005 @04:21PM (#14258579)
    Nice try, China! Your silly attempts to raise yourself to the level of the U.S. will never succeed. The U.S. is the dominant super power and always will be!

    Just ask Britain and France! If anyone understands that national standing on the international scene, once established, is permanent... it's them!

    • Chinese cyber attacks will fill your security logs, but an hour later.......
    • Nice try, China! Your silly attempts to raise yourself to the level of the U.S. will never succeed. The U.S. is the dominant super power and always will be!

      Hmh, this beeing Slashdotage I for a moment got all burned up by my latent imperialistic whorshipping latencies,,, Just ak Britain and France! If anyone understands that national standing on the international scene, once established, is permanent... it's them!

      But then I saw the light, and you where just kidding. Oh my God, you must be a terroris

    • Re:Ho, Ho! Good luck, China! (Score:5, Informative)

      by ta ma de ( 851887 ) <chris@erik@barnes.gmail@com> on Wednesday December 14, 2005 @04:44PM (#14258804)
      Consider going to Bejing, Shanghai or Hong Kong. You might feel differently about US domination. Having been there, I could only conclude that the US was a third world country in the making and that Asia cities represent the ultra modern future we all aspire toward. If you go to Shanghai you should try the sooper high speed mag-lev train.

      I was really surprised by the whole energy of the place. When I went to McDonalds and they didn't have my food immediately, they said no problem we will find you and bring it to you when its ready. 2 min latter I had my fries. This particular McDonald's had around 30 registers all open. They said that they served 6000 lunches everyday -- just nuts. You won't find any fast food resturant in the US that can manage that volume and provide good service too.

      The only downside was all the street vendors, which annoyed our tour guide. She said that they all had day jobs, but would often call in sick to go run side businesses to make extra money.

      In closing, the US needs to sell $3,000,000,000 in bonds everyday to China just to keep running. If they really wished us harm they could just stop buying our debt. Once China no longer relies on exports we will be at their mercy. That will happen in around 10 - 20 years just when the US needs money to fund SS payments to baby-boomers.

      • swing and a miss (Score:5, Funny)

        by shrubya ( 570356 ) on Wednesday December 14, 2005 @05:24PM (#14259253) Homepage Journal
        STEEE-RIKE!!!

        sarcasm -------->
                O
               -|-
                |
               / \
               you

      • Re:Ho, Ho! Good luck, China! (Score:5, Funny)

        by Guy Harris ( 3803 ) <guy@alum.mit.edu> on Wednesday December 14, 2005 @05:24PM (#14259255)
        I was really surprised by the whole energy of the place. When I went to McDonalds and they didn't have my food immediately, they said no problem we will find you and bring it to you when its ready. 2 min latter I had my fries. This particular McDonald's had around 30 registers all open. They said that they served 6000 lunches everyday -- just nuts.

        ...

        If they really wished us harm they could just stop buying our debt.

        From your second paragraph (the first one quoted above), it appears we've already figured out what to do to cause harm to them.

      • Re:Ho, Ho! Good luck, China! (Score:4, Interesting)

        by ergo98 ( 9391 ) on Wednesday December 14, 2005 @11:10PM (#14261242) Homepage Journal
        Consider going to Bejing, Shanghai or Hong Kong.

        Beijing is hardly a futuristic city (not really sure why you included that one. It's a beautiful city, but it hardly fits in with the other two). Hong Kong's prosperity is completely and absolutely the result of the British rule and law, and it has diminished since the takeover.

        If you go to Shanghai you should try the sooper high speed mag-lev train.

        One thing about a statist economy is that you can put billions towards really dumb money sinks, all to get gullible citizens and tourists to proclaim about how futuristic it is. I hear Brazilia in Brazil is a real futuristic city as well.

        I was really surprised by the whole energy of the place. When I went to McDonalds and they didn't have my food immediately, they said no problem we will find you and bring it to you when its ready. 2 min latter I had my fries. This particular McDonald's had around 30 registers all open. They said that they served 6000 lunches everyday -- just nuts. You won't find any fast food resturant in the US that can manage that volume and provide good service too.

        You're impressed that they brought your food to you? Wow, your opinion really needs to be considered suspect. Fastfood restaurants everywhere bring food to you.

        Regarding the McDonalds being big --- if that's your measure of prosperity... That's like saying that a town is a great town because they have the largest Walmart. I'm going to have to presume that you're being sarcastic.

        In closing, the US needs to sell $3,000,000,000 in bonds everyday to China just to keep running. If they really wished us harm they could just stop buying our debt. Once China no longer relies on exports we will be at their mercy. That will happen in around 10 - 20 years just when the US needs money to fund SS payments to baby-boomers.

        Ah, good old fear mongering and ignorant economics. Ignoring the fact that China isn't a big financer of debt (and hasn't been for some time), countries don't buy bonds because they're benevolent - they do it for their own best interest. In the case of China they buy up US $ (and formerly bonds) to prop up the dollar, which keeps the yuan undervalued and serves China.

        Secondly, if China did something (ignoring that they couldn't do anything that could be rapidly circumvented) they would punish the US $, depreciating their own holdings in US bonds (most of which can't be cashed in for years and decades. Boy, win win!

        Idiots that don't have the slightest clue about economics, and that are wide-eyed about isolated advantages (OMG! I hear that North Korea has gigantic pyramid towers! They must be super first world!) should just keep their ignorance to themselves. China is eventually joining the ranks of the first world, and will soon earn some "problems" like citizens that don't like being poisoned by the air and water, and who like some rights, but this pissy nonsense about how the US is doomed reeks of ignorance.

  • Two Things (Rhetorical). (Score:3, Funny)

    by IAAP ( 937607 ) on Wednesday December 14, 2005 @04:22PM (#14258592)

    1. How do they know that it's the Chinese Military? It could be a criminal organization.

    2. Do you really think that anything really sensitive would be able to be accessed from the Internet?

    • 2. Do you really think that anything really sensitive would be able to be accessed from the Internet?

      This *is* the US gov't we're talking about here. I can almost guarantee you there are dozens of machines with highly sensitive data that are accidentally left accessible to the outside world.
    • "1. How do they know that it's the Chinese Military? It could be a criminal organization."

      Especially considering how cheap labor is in Guangdong. This is where gold-farming ops in MMOs get a lot of their labor. There are probably a lot of more technically competent people who also could be hired, as well as an easy cover story for a warehouse full of terminals.

      [sarcasm]Don't buy gold in MMOs! You are supporting the Commie military / criminal underworld / Chinese paramilitary / terrorists!!!111[/sarc

    • Re:Two Things (Rhetorical). (Score:5, Funny)

      by Rick.C ( 626083 ) on Wednesday December 14, 2005 @04:41PM (#14258765)
      1. How do they know that it's the Chinese Military? It could be a criminal organization.

      There is no crime in China. Repeat: There is no crime in China.

      2. Do you really think that anything really sensitive would be able to be accessed from the Internet?

      Hey now! I'm sensitive and accesible from the Internet.

  • Idea (Score:2)

    by zymano ( 581466 )
    Have internet controlling body recommend to people not to use Windows OS or during a BIG DOS attack all Windows OS' will be shutoff the network instantly.

  • From Mars to the Moon? (Score:3, Funny)

    by digitaldc ( 879047 ) * on Wednesday December 14, 2005 @04:23PM (#14258602)
    I heard a story about these Chinese hackers on the radio, apparently all of the data for the Mars Polar Lander was stolen as well.
    Now China is planning on landing men on the moon within 15-20 years......coincidence?
  • it is possible they stole "extremely sensitive" information. I bet they raided the government's pr0n library

  • Act of War (Score:5, Interesting)

    by bluffcityjk ( 909895 ) on Wednesday December 14, 2005 @04:26PM (#14258630)
    Does this, combined with the Air Force's new mission statement [slashdot.org], constitute an Act of War?

  • Two way street (Score:5, Insightful)

    by janneH ( 720747 ) on Wednesday December 14, 2005 @04:31PM (#14258685)
    And the Americans are not doing the same to the Chinese?

    I would have been shocked if this was not going on in both directions - in dozens of directions for that matter.

    • Re:Two way street (Score:5, Informative)

      by CupBeEmpty ( 720791 ) on Wednesday December 14, 2005 @07:16PM (#14260068)
      Well duh... the only problem that people fail to realize effectively is that we are at a serious disadvatage (not so much in the cyber realm) but in the actual espionage realm. China is free to sponsor students to come to the US (and they do regularly). Chinese embassies hold yearly meetings and invite the sponsored students to the embassies and they don't talk about the weather. This is actually fairly commmon in academic fields (even in my field of microbiology). It barely even rates as espionage in most cases because the data will get published in public journals. Now you try running that with a white guy in China who doesn't speak any Chinese language well. Its not going to be easy. Whereas you see someone in science here who is Chinese with good to poor English speaking skill you don't think twice. So in a certain sense it is a ONE WAY street. They are mining a lot of useful intelligence from us and all we can do is supply it.
  • I'm going to stop short of crying "Dupe!" but the articles linked were posted a few months ago:

    http://it.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/08/28/174 5245&tid=172&tid=123&tid=219 [slashdot.org]
  • US calls China out on its hacking game. This comes months after China is said to be training elite teams of hackers.

    Chinese government gasps and says, "WE'RE trying to hack you? You must be mistaken. We would never attack the US! It must be those pesky rogue agents and splinter cells. The ones that we're still funding and paying. China's a big country, you know? We can't really control all 12 billion of our citizens. Never mind that the hackers are using a dual OC-3 with state-of-the-art equipment s

  • Act of War (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Mr._Galt ( 608248 )
    If this can be proven, this is an act of war. Tell me again why China has Most Favored Nation status? WWIII seems close at hand.

  • Oh this is new news ..... not (Score:5, Interesting)

    by JMemonic ( 599287 ) on Wednesday December 14, 2005 @04:38PM (#14258734)
    Just ask anyone involved in the free Tibet movement or any of the ISP's that host websites with the words free Tibet, they used to get massive attacks from DOS right through to serious and well planned attempts to hack these sites. Spent an entire week assisting the fending off of one of these and having to rebuild a server after the attack got through with it.
  • I find this whole thing hard to believe as China appears to want to buddy up with the rest of us. However, insofar as getting pissed at them and their whack-ass government, it should be taken into consideration that there may be disorganization and power struggles within the Chinese government and military and that, like in the game of telephone, the order from the top might be "Install Debian on all military servers" and the suspects mishearing it as "Hook up those pre-blaster patched boxes to use for the
  • I wish they'd hack my mortgage company and reduce my principal!

  • A lone voice (Score:4, Interesting)

    by RM6f9 ( 825298 ) <rwmurker@yahoo.com> on Wednesday December 14, 2005 @04:43PM (#14258788) Homepage Journal
    Crying "Peace" - what purpose can it possibly serve to alert the media that attempts are being made? Who are the terrorists: Those attempting entry, or those publicizing the attempts? Or is some group setting up an attempt at justifying some potential action?
    Peace, please.

  • Complete Media Lie (Score:5, Funny)

    by dada21 ( 163177 ) * <adam.dada@gmail.com> on Wednesday December 14, 2005 @04:48PM (#14258848) Homepage Journal
    It isn't the Chinese!

    Everyone knows that the Chinese could shut down the U.S. military by mailing a baker's dozen fingercuffs to the Commander in Chief and the War Cabinet.

    Can't push the nuke button without use of your fingers, can you?

  • Nothing New (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Evil W1zard ( 832703 ) on Wednesday December 14, 2005 @04:48PM (#14258851) Journal
    Tons of scans and pen attempts have been coming out of the Guangdong Province for years. Funny thing is if you trace the scan back to the IP admin and etc... you can often Google the names listed as contacts and find they are linked to Chinese IW...

    This is not big news IMO just a resurfacing of info that has been seen before... (FUD for new book sales maybe?)

  • I don't understand the US/China relationship (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Clockwurk ( 577966 ) * on Wednesday December 14, 2005 @04:58PM (#14258969) Homepage
    In the 50s, 60s, and 70s, thousands of American soldiers died in an effort to stop the threat of Chinese communism. Today, China is one of our top trading "partners". What has changed? China is still one of the worst human rights violators, and routinely abuses its neighbors (Taiwan and Tibet). In trading terms, China is probably our most abusive partner. Any project done in China must also have any related side projects completed there. China also devalues their currency, further imbalancing trade.

    The China situation probably pisses me off more than any single other issue. Its an issue where both parties are on the same side; the side of profit-whoring multinationals that have no problem selling out American workers and small business and buddying up to the rights-abusing monster that is the Chinese govt.

    • Re:I don't understand the US/China relationship (Score:5, Insightful)

      by PureCreditor ( 300490 ) on Wednesday December 14, 2005 @05:13PM (#14259140)
      I agree. Trade gaps are bi-directional. Without the help of greedy multinationals based on USA desperate for cutting costs and outsourcing everything, China's trade gap won't be rising to record highs every year.

      Stop blaming China, and start blaming Walmart.

    • marketplace (Score:5, Interesting)

      by rodentia ( 102779 ) on Wednesday December 14, 2005 @05:24PM (#14259257)
      American corporations will not stand for being refused entry to a market encompassing a sixth of the world's population. This pressure began to build in the seventies and has only increased. This is the determining factor in all US/China dialogue.

    • Re:I don't understand the US/China relationship (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Stonehand ( 71085 ) on Wednesday December 14, 2005 @05:43PM (#14259407) Homepage
      Shared strategic interests, money, and nuclear weapons.

      To the first point -- the Nixon adminstration saw benefits to detente with Beijing. Better China talking with the US than China talking with the USSR, anyway.

      In the present day, they still share an interest in keeping the Korean peninsula from going -completely- bonkers, because if it did, they'd be flooded with vast numbers of Korean refugees. And in this case, they have a huge potential to be helpful because North Korea is heavily dependent on Chinese economic assistance; should they turn off their energy aid, for instance, Pyongyang would definitely notice.

      There are other potential avenues for cooperation, such as a mutual opposition to Islamic militants. The Chinese have a slight issue with Islamic separatists in Xinjiang, if memory serves. If they were in communication with a broader movement, then the two governments might be able to help each other here.

      To the second point, China's lower cost of labor and potentially huge market makes it an interesting place for investments, reduced somewhat by the higher corruption. Cheaper manufacturing means that the US dollar can essentially go further. And as has been noted by assorted pundits -- we send dollars and receive actual goods or services. It's not in China's interest to cut off trade, either; they've got enough potential problems with labor unrest and so forth to do so.

      And as for nuclear weapons, China -is- a nuclear power, estimated to have at least twenty nuclear-capable land-based ICBMs with sufficient range to hit parts of the United States, if memory serves. The US does not have a feasible way of stopping them; nor does China have a feasible way of stopping a theoretical US nuclear strike (whether it be first or retalliatory). Pragmatists on both sides might suggest that it's a bit late for a full-up military confrontation. Instead, we can push for trade liberalization and hope that their government is gradually undermined by their population's increasing desire for a higher standard of living, including perhaps political liberalization.

      Also helpful, their leadership appears to be more pragmatic and self-serving than ideological or insane. It's easier to find room for agreement with leaders who aren't convinced of their own perfection or a need for extreme isolation or what-have-you.

  • U.S. is naive. (Score:5, Interesting)

    by torokun ( 148213 ) on Wednesday December 14, 2005 @05:03PM (#14259020) Homepage

    I have been worried for a long time about the apparent naivete of the U.S. government and military regarding the Chinese.

    The Chinese government and military are extremely savvy so long as they are not blinded by their communist dogma. When it comes to trade, information, spying, and weapons technology, they understand the reality that those who play fair lose.

    If you are a businessman, have no illusions that your papers and files are safe in your hotel room in China. There have been documented cases of government-sponsored spies following businessmen and bugging or entering their hotel rooms to scour their belongings for useful trade secrets and intellectual property.

    We can see clearly that they are pursuing a strategy of mercantilism in trade, to our great disadvantage, thanks to the cluelessness of free-traders in Congress and the White House.

    Who can doubt that the same issues exist with regard to sensitive military information? The Chinese sponsor students to come to the U.S. with the express goal sometimes of infiltrating research staffs and supplying tech info back to China. The same surely occurs with U.S. government and military employees, although the screening is more thorough.

    In my opinion, the CHinese government would see hacking U.S. government or military sites as a requirement for successful international competition. Hopefully, the NSA and others like them are on top of the problem. I don't doubt, though, that they have gained access to lots of systems on the lower end of the confidentiality spectrum.

    It needs to be impressed on people in government, military, and intelligence work, that the Chinese are playing one mean game of chess in everything they do vis-a-vis the U.S. Their sense of time spans centuries and millennia rather than decades. Any suspicious activity on their part needs to be treated with the greatest skepticism by our guys, rather than with apathy or giving them the benefit of the doubt...

    • Re:U.S. is naive. (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Incadenza ( 560402 ) on Wednesday December 14, 2005 @06:52PM (#14259947)

      If you are a businessman, have no illusions that your papers and files are safe in your hotel room in China. There have been documented cases of government-sponsored spies following businessmen and bugging or entering their hotel rooms to scour their belongings for useful trade secrets and intellectual property.

      We can see clearly that they are pursuing a strategy of mercantilism in trade, to our great disadvantage, thanks to the cluelessness of free-traders in Congress and the White House.

      If you are a businessman, have no illusions that your electronic correspondence is safe _anywhere_, thanks to your 'naive' US. Ever heard of the uses of Echelon [hiwaay.net] in your so-called 'free trade'?

      Some quotes from the link above:

      * In 1990 the German magazine Der Speigel revealed that the NSA had intercepted messages about an impending $200 million deal between Indonesia and the Japanese satellite manufacturer NEC Corp. After President Bush intervened in the negotiations on behalf of American manufacturers, the contract was split between NEC and AT&T.
      * In 1994, the CIA and NSA intercepted phone calls between Brazilian officials and the French firm Thomson-CSF about a radar system that the Brazilians wanted to purchase. A US firm, Raytheon, was a competitor as well, and reports prepared from intercepts were forwarded to Raytheon.
      * In September 1993, President Clinton asked the CIA to spy on Japanese auto manufacturers that were designing zero-emission cars and to forward that information to the Big Three US car manufacturers: Ford, General Motors and Chrysler. In 1995, the New York Times reported that the NSA and the CIA's Tokyo station were involved in providing detailed information to US Trade Representative Mickey Kantor's team of negotiators in Geneva facing Japanese car companies in a trade dispute. Recently, a Japanese newspaper, Mainichi, accused the NSA of continuing to monitor the communications of Japanese companies on behalf of American companies.
      * Insight Magazine reported in a series of articles in 1997 that President Clinton ordered the NSA and FBI to mount a massive surveillance operation at the 1993 Asian/Pacific Economic Conference (APEC) hosted in Seattle. One intelligence source for the story related that over 300 hotel rooms had been bugged for the event, which was designed to obtain information regarding oil and hydro-electric deals pending in Vietnam that were passed on to high level Democratic Party contributors competing for the contracts. But foreign companies were not the only losers: when Vietnam expressed interest in purchasing two used 737 freighter aircraft from an American businessman, the deal was scuttled after Commerce Secretary Ron Brown arranged favorable financing for two new 737s from Boeing.

      "Yes, I'm paranoid - But am I paranoid enough?"

  • ALL YOUR BASE ARE BELONG TO US (Score:3, Funny)

    by NoTalentAssClown ( 623508 ) on Wednesday December 14, 2005 @05:10PM (#14259099)
    'nuff said.

  • This is a non-event... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by FellowConspirator ( 882908 ) on Wednesday December 14, 2005 @05:21PM (#14259220)
    First, the argument that an attack is disciplined thus it must be the national military is just plain stupid -- and I frequently agree with Bruce S.

    Even then, how is this not anticipated? Governments spy on each other (and their own citizens) prolificly, even their allies. We do it, they do it. European countries and the US are constantly one-upping each other in government sponsored corporate espionage. The Internet's done nothing but created a new medium. We steal corporate and military secrets from them, and they from us. Big deal.

    The fact is that this means nothing. We know how to prevent this from being a problem, we do it, and we even disseminate disinformation this way.

    The Iraq boondoggle aside, countries are actually very good about researching each other. There's a level of transparency between nations that is completely hidden to the average citizen. I think that everyone understands that at some level. The problem is, of course, that the public understanding of geopolitics is quite different than that of world leaders and the intelligence community. China could be an invasion threat, or on the verge of a dramatic shift to democracy and becoming our (USA) 51st state -- but, honestly, how many people are privileged enough to have access to sufficient information to make that call? Almost certainly not you.

    By avoiding transparency, governments can avoid accountability to their citizens and other nations. That lack of accountability makes people easy to assuage, makes governments appear artificially effective, etc. In the US we demand little transparency because making information available puts us at risk (so the logic goes). Thus, by simply augmenting the perception of risk (nwes about terrorists, spies, etc.), people will lower their accountability demands, enabling more flexibility for things probably not in the public interest.

    Of the top 100 economic powers in the word, 52 are corporations, and 48 are countries. About 1/3rd of goods transferred over a national border are goods that don't transfer ownership because they stay within a multinational corporation that is internally transferring those goods). It seems that some good geopolitical FUD can make you richer than Croesus if you're an inside player in the game.

  • Anybody remember the first rule of hacking? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by SealBeater ( 143912 ) on Wednesday December 14, 2005 @05:23PM (#14259245) Homepage
    It's never hack from home. Now, even if the Chinese are actively trying to
    hack us, (why not, I am sure it's not just them and I'll bet money we are doing
    it too), why would they source an attack from their primary location? Even if
    the "attacks" are coming from there, that doesn't mean it's the Chinese. It
    could be an American or British kid who took over a box there. And I gotta
    tell you, if it were me, I would bounce my traffic around the world twice
    before I even took a look at a .gov or .mil. I'm pretty sure so called
    "military trained" hackers backed by the Chinese government could and would
    have far more resources and could cover their tracks better than that. If it
    were me, I would have all the attacks sourced from Britian or Iserail, or some
    other friendly US ally. Color me suspicious.

    SealBeater

Slashdot Top Deals

Two can Live as Cheaply as One for Half as Long. -- Howard Kandel

Close