Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

How China Will Use Cyber Warfare To Leapfrog Foes

Soulskill posted more than 5 years ago | from the cold-war-two-point-oh dept.

Security 235

The Walking Dude writes "A lengthy article published in Culture Mandala details how China is using cyber warfare (PDF) as an asymmetric means to obtain technology transfer and market dominance. Case studies of Estonia, Georgia, and Project Chanology point towards a new auxiliary arm of traditional warfare. Political hackers and common Web 2.0 users, referred to as useful idiots (PDF), are being manipulated through PSYOPS and propaganda to enhance government agendas."

cancel ×

235 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Not so (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25602609)

MS will counter China's threat by issuing a critical update imminantly! That's all.

Useful Idiots (-1, Flamebait)

d3ac0n (715594) | more than 5 years ago | (#25602617)

The Chinese have a bunch of those here in America. We know them as Obama supporters.

Re:Useful Idiots (3, Insightful)

MinistryOfTruthiness (1396923) | more than 5 years ago | (#25602673)

I've long had the feeling that many people claiming to be Americans on this board and elsewhere simply aren't. They make the claim in order to make their America bashing sound more like introspection than an outright attack, and therefore more "insightful" than "trolling".

Re:Useful Idiots (-1, Troll)

d3ac0n (715594) | more than 5 years ago | (#25602727)

I've long had the feeling that many people claiming to be Americans on this board and elsewhere simply aren't.

Except in my case, I AM an American. (Although I did live in Canada for about 4 years growing up, but I don't think that counts.)

And I don't see how Obama bashing is "Anti-American". Hell, most euroweenies that I know LOVE Obama. I guess because he is a socialist like them.

Re:Useful Idiots (-1, Troll)

MinistryOfTruthiness (1396923) | more than 5 years ago | (#25602861)

It appears that you've been

( ) upmodded
(X) downmodded

to

( ) Insightful
( ) Interesting
( ) Funny
(X) Troll
( ) Redundant

for one of the following reasons:

( ) Praised MS
( ) Praised Linux
( ) Dissed Linux, but in a cleverly ironic way
(X) Espoused a non-liberal, non-socialist agenda during an election season.
(1/2) Proven to have at least one functioning brain cell

Please report to your local re-education facility immediately before the damage becomes irreversible.

Sorry bud - had to take away a 1/2 point on the last one for living in Canada for 4 years.

Re:Useful Idiots (0, Troll)

MinistryOfTruthiness (1396923) | more than 5 years ago | (#25602903)

Damn, the Obamods rolled out of bed early this morning! It's a good thing this is my trolling account. Maybe if I post enough, I can eat up their mod points so the adults can have an uncensored conversation.

Re:Useful Idiots (0, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25602943)

I've long had the feeling that many people are claiming to be the only Americans and ignoring the rest of America.

From Alaska to Argentina, we are Americans.

And gringos are just gringos.

Alaska to Argentina = Americans? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25603781)

And that got modded up?

What?

Oh wait, I see, someone is being extra special clever and is now going to point out that "America" != "United States".

That song went out of tune by the end of freshman year. (High school or college, your choice).

Re:Useful Idiots (5, Insightful)

porpnorber (851345) | more than 5 years ago | (#25603089)

But in a real sense America can use all the bashing it can get. Seriously. Time to wake up. The fact that you think it matters whether criticism comes from within or without is, it seems, proof of this. Speaking in the broadest terms, America (corporately, I don't mean every single individual) has developed a tendency to view everything 'religiously' rather than empirically. There are white hats and black hats, not right actions and wrong actions. There are us and them, not cooperative-minded people and antagonistic people. This underlies everything from teaching non-science in science classes, to voting for people you know are wrong for the job because of the party they belong to, to making social policy decisions on the basis of whether or not they seem too 'socialistic' rather than looking at what effect (positive or negative) they would have, to choosing friends and enemies among other nations without stopping to think about their internal structures and agendas.

So, now, having said that, I'm not an American. Does that make me a troll? Because like most other non-Americans I do not want to be your enemy. But the key point is that the reason I don't want to be your enemy is not, if you will, that I'm afraid of afraid of rabid dogs and I don't want to meet your war machine in a dark alley, but because I'd like to see the world become a better place, and it would be just great if America (which used to hold itself up as a beacon of hope in this regard) would at least join in.

So there you have it. I'm un-American. I'm wearing the black hat. Mod me troll and make me go away. Because, I guess, it's easier than understanding that much of the rest of the world—specifically, those parts of it where we still believe that the political process can work and wars should no longer be necessary—has lost its respect for you as a power.

Re:Useful Idiots (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25603187)

You're not an American. Does that make you a troll? No; saying "America can use all the bashing it can get" is the part that makes you a troll. However, it is ever-so-fashionable.

Re:Useful Idiots (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25603215)

The problem isn't where real, constructive criticism comes from. It's about whether the criticism is constructive. There are a lot of people who just like to hate on the US, and then there are those who are using social engineering to bring the US down from within.

I think it's time to realize what the United States' enemies are up to. We as citizens of the United States must begin to look around and see whether the rhetoric has merit rather than accepting words from authoritative-sounding people -- even if those people have the faces of Tom Brokaw, Keith Olberman, Dan Rather, or even Jon Stewart and Steven Colbert.

These people repeat and amplify the disinformation and propaganda that threatens the society that made them so successful.

Re:Useful Idiots (1)

thetoadwarrior (1268702) | more than 5 years ago | (#25603843)

Team America - Fuck Yeah!

Seriously, it's this kind of mentality that makes me think I'll never move back to the US.

Olberman is doing more to try to fix the US than any of his counterparts. In fact all of those people have more dignity than some others.

Fox news has done so much to damage the new media but some people love it because it's like watching Jerry Springer and it makes news fun and who doesn't want their wars to be fun?

Getting your patriotism and your foreigner hating propaganda from an immigrant owned news media really makes sense. Murdoch only became a citizen so he could own a TV station and fill the airwaves with his cheap trailer trash media. He's everything that his news station tells rednecks to fear and he's becoming rich from it. He's clearly having a laugh at his viewer's expense.

Re:Useful Idiots (1)

moortak (1273582) | more than 5 years ago | (#25603801)

I agree that any constructive criticism can be useful, there is an extent to which seeing life here from the inside can add a perspective that is lacking without being here. Yes having distance and objectivity is nice, but so is a more intimate familiarity.

Re:Useful Idiots (5, Insightful)

MrMarket (983874) | more than 5 years ago | (#25604079)

You are clearly not an American, b/c your criticisms are characteratures of the polar extremes of America that Europeans (not all, just the lazy-thinking ones) love to lampoon and use as examples of American demise to make them feel better about themselves. Few Americans vote party lines (if at all, but that's a different issue), the school boards who put creationism in the science curriculum are quickly voted out of office in the following election (even in Kansas), and I think if you bothered to meet some normal Americans (rather than the party operatives who play ones on TV), you would find that Americans have a very pragmatic approach to everyday life, which includes views on life, business, and policy.

I would also not attach our foreign policy blunders to the collective views of the American people. The administration has consistently been a lone cowboy (pun intended) in this area - very few viewpoints had a place at the table in the last 8 years (even our own secretary of state was sidelined). Many of us lament the moral high ground our country has lost since the end of the cold war because of the lapses in judgment with regards to torture, just war, and diplomacy that a handful of reckless unelected officials with too much power have conducted on our behalf.

Re:Useful Idiots (1)

kdemetter (965669) | more than 5 years ago | (#25603389)

Well , i'm not an American , for one.
But i find that in most matters regarding slashdot , nationality is irrelevant.

Anyway , i don't know much about Obama , except that the press here (in Belgium ) likes him , so that means there must be something wrong with him.

Also, the media here hates Mccain , so he can't be all bad.

Re:Useful Idiots (1)

negRo_slim (636783) | more than 5 years ago | (#25603483)

Anyway , i don't know much about Obama , except that the press here (in Belgium ) likes him , so that means there must be something wrong with him. Also, the media here hates Mccain , so he can't be all bad.

Such a glorious and insightful way of gauging a potential world leaders acumen. As an American I truly hope you are a leader among your peers.

Re:Useful Idiots (0, Troll)

Futile Rhetoric (1105323) | more than 5 years ago | (#25602681)

As opposed to enlightened McCain supporters such as yourself [chron.com] , right?

Re:Useful Idiots (0, Troll)

OeLeWaPpErKe (412765) | more than 5 years ago | (#25602973)

Answer this : "God damn America !" - McCain or Obama

Re:Useful Idiots (1)

Futile Rhetoric (1105323) | more than 5 years ago | (#25603155)

Jeremiah Wright, who, incidentally, is not running for president.

Re:Useful Idiots (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25603259)

no but someone who sat in his church getting brainwashed for years and years is

Re:Useful Idiots (1)

Uniquitous (1037394) | more than 5 years ago | (#25603361)

That's good! Please, continue to employ a line of attack that has proven useless every time it's been trotted out. That should do wonders for your candidate's poll numbers!

Re:Useful Idiots (1)

Futile Rhetoric (1105323) | more than 5 years ago | (#25603375)

Sane people tend to take things they hear in church with a grain of salt. I can imagine how that can confuse people on the right end of the political spectrum, however.

Re:Useful Idiots (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25603021)

dude, the first post's joke was funnier than yours. Everyone already knows that your glamourization of politics has screwed up your culture, you damn bi-partisan fuck-ups.

Why don't you grow some balls and actually get a real democracy? Then maybe we won't have to listen to your bitching and whining.

Re:Useful Idiots (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25603097)

We've been trying, but it's going to take politicians who actually want what's best for the country to make it happen. Unfortunately, there's a lot of vested interest in having the power structure exactly the way it is.

Re:Useful Idiots (1)

kdemetter (965669) | more than 5 years ago | (#25603475)

- politicians
- who actually want what's best for the country

Well, it would make a good example for explaining a mutex locks

The Golden Tool. (2, Interesting)

Ostracus (1354233) | more than 5 years ago | (#25602667)

"A lengthy article published in Culture Mandala details how China is using cyber warfare (PDF) as an asymmetric means to obtain technology transfer and market dominance."

And when they've achieved their goals how will they feel when the next superpower does them the same way?

Re:The Golden Tool. (5, Interesting)

Halo1 (136547) | more than 5 years ago | (#25602745)

And when they've achieved their goals how will they feel when the next superpower does them the same way?

It's not like the current superpower doesn't use "cyber warfare" to obtain technology transfer and market dominance [europa.eu] (search for "Published cases".

There's nothing really new here, except for possibly some alternate methodologies.

Why would China do this? (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25602693)

China practically owns the USA. Their dollar reserve is huge!

If China wanted to destroy the USA, they simply would dump the dollar and financially destroy the USA.

Conclusion; this article is FUD

Re:Why would China do this? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25602743)

Yeah, but then no one would do business with China.

Thus the Chinese would have to go back to eating dirt and dying in Tsunamis all day.

Re:Why would China do this? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25602841)

Yeah, but then no one would do business with China.

Why not? USA needs China!

Most products in any american house and it says 'Made in China'.

Re:Why would China do this? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25602979)

And with a destroyed economy and no one to buy their shit, their economy goes to crap.

Re:Why would China do this? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25603013)

GP's point was that the US is a HUGE importer of Chinese consumer goods, and that if the US economy went under, the Chinese economy would take a massive hit, too. Of course this is arguable, I don't have numbers on exports & imports from china, but I suspect the US isn't quite as important as many would like to believe. Still, there's no point trying to get the US economy to tank when there's profit to be had from it.

Re:Why would China do this? (1)

cp.tar (871488) | more than 5 years ago | (#25603175)

China will not destroy the US economy... yet.
They will only choose to do so when thir short-term losses from the US market are offset by the cheap labor force they will gain from tanking your economy. China is slowly losing the status of the country where it is dirt-cheap to manufacture stuff, and as the prices and their own manufacturing needs rise, they might want to tank an industrialized economy and turn the tables on you.

Re:Why would China do this? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25603291)

idiots please, the China ecnonomy would be dead long before the US gave out. Such braggard postings are comical.

Re:Why would China do this? (3, Insightful)

kdemetter (965669) | more than 5 years ago | (#25603563)

GP's point was that the US is a HUGE importer of Chinese consumer goods, and that if the US economy went under, the Chinese economy would take a massive hit, too. Of course this is arguable, I don't have numbers on exports & imports from china, but I suspect the US isn't quite as important as many would like to believe. Still, there's no point trying to get the US economy to tank when there's profit to be had from it.

True , the US is only a part of it , but if the American economy suffers , there's no doubt the European market will suffer to .

So China wouldn't just lose sales from the US : there would be a global depression. And that will definitely hurt China too.

Re:Why would China do this? (2, Insightful)

CRCulver (715279) | more than 5 years ago | (#25603033)

Tsunamis have never been a danger to the general population of China as to other countries on the Pacific Rim. Very little of the country is on exposed coastline.

Re:Why would China do this? (1)

lysergic.acid (845423) | more than 5 years ago | (#25603295)

um, maybe you need to brush up on your geography. the 2004 Indian Ocean Tsunami [wikipedia.org] didn't even touch China.

Re:Why would China do this? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25603347)

Oh right, my bad.

It was "dying by the millions in earthquakes and floods."

Re:Why would China do this? (3, Insightful)

betterunixthanunix (980855) | more than 5 years ago | (#25602975)

Except that financially destroying the USA would not destroy the USA's military capabilities. When the USA is faced with a catastrophic economic failure, the course of action will be military intervention, conquering some other nation and using its resources to boost our economy. Case in point, 30 year predictions on oil show major supply shortages, so we invade Iraq.

This is not exactly a new strategy; in the history of the world, whenever a powerful nation/empire is in need of resources, it conquers some other nation in order to obtain those resources.

Re:Why would China do this? (2, Interesting)

OeLeWaPpErKe (412765) | more than 5 years ago | (#25603041)

Name one, just one other nation that the US has conquered.

One.

Conquering means that the US invaded, and that the subjects are now part of the US without voting rights. Like any minority in the islamic lands for example ...

Name one. Since the US "does this all the time" can't be that hard, now can it ?

Re:Why would China do this? (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25603229)

I'll do better than that. After the Spanish American war Cuba, Puerto Rico, the Phillipines, and Guam were taken. Cuba and the Phillipines fought for and achieved independence from the U.S. Puerto Rico has no effective representation for most things. Guam is worse off and is basically dominated without any real representation. Remaining U.S. territory in Cuba, Japan and Germany are havens for crime, with the local justice systems forbidden from prosecuting crimes committed by garrisoned forces: rape, assault, fraud, and many other crimes committed against their citizens. Japan especially has a lot of problems with this. There is a very recent case of an U.S. Army Europe NCO raping several children producing child porn for nearly a decade who was let off with 2 years prison and minimum punishment. This is the short reply.

Re:Why would China do this? (2, Insightful)

Provocateur (133110) | more than 5 years ago | (#25603607)

Except that your short list does not really have countries with an abundance of resources that the US would want...unless you count white sandy beaches with drinks with little tiny umbrellas as resources.

Re:Why would China do this? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25603681)

Wrong. Different times required different resources than the exact present. Occupation for natural and food resources are not the that significant compared to other areas.

Re:Why would China do this? (2, Insightful)

kdemetter (965669) | more than 5 years ago | (#25603593)

Well , itself off course. Everyone knows that.
Wait ,do the native Americans have voting rights ?

Re:Why would China do this? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25603167)

Except that financially destroying the USA would not destroy the USA's military capabilities.

The point the poster is trying to make is that China has no gain in destroying the USA.

It is better to have a debtor paying huge interest for a very long time, than having it go backrupt.

Re:Why would China do this? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25603331)

Exactly. Our consumption helps drive the Chinese economy right now. When they get their own economic engine driven into the hinterlands and not just as far as the corrupt merchant class, they will have less need of our business.

Free trade is probably a good thing, but shipping (for all practical purposes) entire industries out of your country is tantamount to treason. The problem is that ossified politicians and military brass, who grew up in an era of hot wars, don't see Economics as a better weapon than their Big Penis missiles. But it is, and causes fewer deaths to boot.

America needs two decades of moderate, intelligent isolationism to rebuild its strategic economic infrastructure. In this regard the Aries K car of the 80s and 90% of what Walmart sells now is also tantamount to treason. Remember folks, it's "Guns and butter". If you want a war with the former, America will win (at terrible and criminal human cost.) Enemies will certainly count on the latter; it's looks more benevolent. Just like the colonialists did while pushing cash crops on their African colonies.

Re:Why would China do this? (1)

cp.tar (871488) | more than 5 years ago | (#25603213)

Wars are expensive.

The USA may have quite a lot of weapons, but then again, Russia and China have enough as well. Any of these countries has enough weaponry to fuck up the world ten times over.

No. Most of these weapons will likely never get used. They are useful as a means of intimidation, but not much more; once someone, somewhere, uses that kind of weaponry, all hell will break loose. That would be of no use to anyone.

Re:Why would China do this? (2, Interesting)

negRo_slim (636783) | more than 5 years ago | (#25603535)

Wars are expensive.

...

No. Most of these weapons will likely never get used.

We're potentially entering a depression the likes of which we have only seen once before... Seems the key to getting over the hump in that one was the military-industrial complex.

No when faced with massive economic collapse the US would never use China as a means of ramping up military hardware production. By say... dangerously feigning interest in a war (or the potential for one) just to justify increased defense spending... Seems like a likely scenario and a razor thin line to try and walk. Especially with all the Unknown Unknowns out there.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Great_Depression#Rearmament_and_recovery [wikipedia.org]

Re:Why would China do this? (1)

cp.tar (871488) | more than 5 years ago | (#25603655)

OTOH, the US has ramped up their military expenses for the war in Iraq, which is one of the reasons for your current economic crisis. More of the same doesn't sound like a good way out of trouble.

Re:Why would China do this? (1)

negRo_slim (636783) | more than 5 years ago | (#25603709)

Funny that, I tend to keep myself abreast of the world's situation on any given day. Sources such as CNN, BBC, Digg, NPR, My Local NBC/FOX Affiliate, Slashdot, PBS,... and a multitude of others. Books like Project Censored and others have giving me a critical eye for factual information so I tend to take in alot more sources then most. And I don't seem to recall the war ever being discussed as a cause for our current economic issues. In fact if you paid attention to shows like The Colbert Report and The Daily Show you would be vastly more informed then you apparently are now.

From Wikipedia [wikipedia.org] :
"In 2008, a global economic crisis was suggested by several important indicators of economic downturn worldwide. These included high oil prices, which led to both high food prices (due to a dependence of food production on petroleum, as well as using food crop products (ethanol, biodiesel) as an alternative to petroleum) and global inflation; a substantial credit crisis leading to the bankruptcy of large and well established investment banks as well as commercial banks in various nations around the world; increased unemployment; and the possibility of a global recession."

Looks like you better get in there and edit it bro!

Re:Why would China do this? (1)

sw155kn1f3 (600118) | more than 5 years ago | (#25604179)

Congratulations, you just described WW III, only US being former declining power instead of Germany and wanting to retaliate. We all know how it ended. You already have concentration camp project, putting there ppl by race (mostly yet).
Go ahead, America, land of the free.

Re:Why would China do this? (2, Insightful)

Uniquitous (1037394) | more than 5 years ago | (#25603373)

China needs the USA to remain viable so that the USA can serve as China's capitalist cat's-paw. The USA is all about spreading capitalism (by way of installing fake democracy.) Capitalism dictates that cheapest goods win... and who is the king of cheap goods?

Re:Why would China do this? (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25603429)

your a retarded cwock. China doesn't own shit. If China dumped their money here, their money would quickly become useless as their economy rapidly vaporized, just as is happening now in China. Who do you think is being hurt the worst in the long run here with the financial collapses. After the dust settles, you'll see a much weaker EU and China, and the US will rapidly outstrip it competitors as it has always done. Do you really think they didn't see this coming?

China's advantage (5, Informative)

daveschroeder (516195) | more than 5 years ago | (#25602719)

"Information Warfare" (IW), sometimes called Information Operations (IO), spans several arenas, from the purely technical to the social and psychological. The goals and missions of IO and intelligence in general, particularly against and within non-free societies, will constantly be at odds with the democratic nature of the United States and the West. Even so, the United States currently doesn't appear to acknowledge the scope of the information campaigns China has executed against it. The thought in some circles that China isn't the danger others believe it to be is apparently proof that China's long-standing information campaigns to convince Americans of just that appear to be working quite well. China's motives are strategic rather than tactical in nature; that is, they do not necessarily serve any direct or immediate specific purpose, but rather serve to create influence in its own favor over long periods of time. For this reason, many in the US see China as something of a misunderstood ally, while China simultaneously builds out its military capability.

While cyber warfare is now routinely considered in various analyses of China and other nations, the larger question of why China is so diligently pursuing this path is overlooked. China's activities in this realm are assumed to be part of a natural technological progression. However, a study of literature examining China's efforts in Information Warfare viewed against the backdrop of the importance of the Information Revolution which is sweeping the globe paints a picture of a nation looking to the information realm as a critical and key mechanism to modernize its military capabilities. Similar to how the Industrial Revolution ushered in a new era and greatly enhanced nations' abilities to wage war, the Information Revolution again could change the face of conflict. China's motivations for expanding its cyber warfare capabilities against the United States may transcend that of simple technological evolution, and warrant a deeper examination. Why, then, can China be expected to expand its Information Warfare capabilities, particularly with respect to the United States?

The US Army War College's Strategic Studies Institute encapsulates these findings in one simple thought: to China's leadership, it could mean a pathway to modernization that would obviate the need for costly and time-consuming interim modernization. "IW offers opportunities to win wars without the traditional clash of arms" (Yoshihara 2001). Indeed, China appears to be focused on the notion of such asymmetric warfare. Yoshihara (2001) goes on to explore the current state of Chinese IW and IO philosophy. The focus of Chinese theoreticians appears squarely focused on the possibility of IW offering China a decisive option to defeat a superior adversary by crippling its command and control capabilities. Moreover, Yoshihara (2001) notes that some Chinese military scholars consider the notion of victory without conventional battle; not only via disabling information-based attacks in the electronic realm, but even via more subtle psychological operations (PSYOP) designed to alter and shape an adversary's thinking.

Part of China's motivations for the intense focus on the information realm stems from China's fascination with recent conflicts driven by information. China witnessed the decisive US tactical victory in the Persian Gulf War, and wondered how such practice could be applied by its own military. China is cognizant of the fact that it, too, will be subject to information-based attacks as it becomes more dependent on information-based systems. China's focus is on building a high technology war-fighting machine, with the prospect of skipping costly interim steps to modernize its military capabilities.

Pervasive in the Chinese writing on IW is the notion of shaping the environment to facilitate military objectives; critically, the Chinese "view information warfare as a tool to counter the overwhelming military superiority of the United States" (Armistead 2001). It is this thought process that summarizes China's core motivations and thinking on IW.

The most recent Report to Congress of the US-China Economic and Security Review Commission finds that China's emphasis on Information Warfare capabilities stems from their intensive "search for asymmetric capabilities to leverage against US vulnerabilities" and "represents a serious form of irregular warfare preparation" (Bartholomew et al. 2007). This strategy appears directed at obtaining capabilities that can deter or defeat the US in a limited engagement. One common theme in Chinese scenarios is a potential conflict over Taiwan.

As one Chinese military expert put it, such an asymmetric information-based attack would render US military forces "blind," "deaf," and "paralyzed" (Cliff 2007). Direct, large scale attacks against US computer and information systems, either via disabling electromagnetic weapons or hacking, would be a part of this attack strategy.

The will of the American public can be shifted against pursuing a conflict with China by a combination of attacks designed to sway public opinion in favor of avoiding conflict, against the backdrop of a wave of devastating surprise attacks that would cripple US command and control (Cliff 2007). The asymmetry is important in Chinese strategy, as one Chinese expert believes China facing the US in a conventional conflict would be akin to "throwing an egg against a rock." Thus, gaining the advantage using the information realm is viewed as a cornerstone in Chinese thinking in this area.

China will continue to expand and enhance its Information Warfare capabilities because such capabilities will enable it to skip a costly generation of military-industrial modernization, and will enable it to carry out asymmetric warfare against information-dependent states, such as the United States.

Yoshihara, Toshi. 2001. Chinese information warfare: a phantom menace or emerging threat? Strategic Studies Institute. Carlisle Barracks, PA: US Army War College.

Armistead, Leigh, editor. 2004. Recent Information Operation Campaigns. In Information Operations: Warfare and the Hard Reality of Soft Power. 91-116. Norfolk, VA: National Defense University. http://www.iwar.org.uk/iwar/resources/jiopc/io-textbook.pdf [iwar.org.uk]

Cliff, Roger, Mark Burles, Michael S. Chase, Derek Eaton, and Kevin L. Pollpeter. 2007. Entering the Dragon's Lair: Chinese Antiaccess Strategies and Their Implications for the United States. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation. http://rand.org/pubs/monographs/MG524/ [rand.org]

Bartholomew, Carolyn, et al. 2007. Report to Congress of the US-China Economic and Security Review Commission. Washington, DC: US-China Economic and Security Review Commission. http://www.uscc.gov/annual_report/2007/report_to_congress.pdf [uscc.gov]

Re:China's advantage (1)

porpnorber (851345) | more than 5 years ago | (#25603157)

Am I forgiven if I would prefer a hypothetical US/China war to take place without too much killing? I always find it odd how such paradigm shifts are somehow read as ingenuity if they come from ones own side and cheating if they come from the other. But this seems like a step in a sensible direction from a purely humanitarian standpoint, at least when set against the alternative.

Not, you understand, that I share the view that, for example, Taiwan is a 'natural' part of China. I don't happen to think that nations are 'natural' at all.

Re:China's advantage (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25603195)

A war of feelings is better than a war of killing.

--
k

Re:China's advantage (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25604159)

Short-sighted twit. The worst, bloodiest, most prolonged wars are the ones where people "feel" the strongest about what they're fighting for. If you start with a war of feelings, you'll undoubtedly end in bloodshed.

Re:China's advantage (1)

khallow (566160) | more than 5 years ago | (#25603721)

Am I forgiven if I would prefer a hypothetical US/China war to take place without too much killing?

I suppose so. But wars often have a habit of not stopping when you think they should. A war that starts with information warfare could very well end with an exchange of nuclear weapons. That's the perils of escalation.

Re:China's advantage (1)

Hasai (131313) | more than 5 years ago | (#25603225)

Excellent analysis of the situation. The "egg against a rock" appraisal is pretty-much the universal conclusion of most people who don't fall prey to the "counting noses" fallacy (i.e.: First Persian Gulf War).

I wonder, however, if this research on the part of the Red Chinese also includes an unbiased analysis of the impact of IW upon their military's own, highly-rigid C3I infrastructure and whether they will dare an attempt to fix it, given the typical totalitarian state's paranoia toward its own armed forces.

Finally, just for the heck of it, I'd like to point out that IW has actually been around for a while, just not recognized as a distinct discipline. As evidence of this, I'd like to submit two items: the writings of Sun Tsu, and the typical military sniper's targeting priorities (shoot the guy with the radio FIRST).

];)

Re:China's advantage (1)

Afforess (1310263) | more than 5 years ago | (#25603443)

I think the Chinese will congratulate me when I say "So what?"

RTFA before you summarize? (3, Informative)

argStyopa (232550) | more than 5 years ago | (#25602755)

"Useful idiots" in this document is referring SOLELY to the 'patriotic hackers' - ie unofficial pro-China hackers who cheerfully attack anti-Chinese or other targets of opportunity without official support or sanction.

The Useful Idiots that the summary refers to have been around forever: people who are easily manipulated by professional intelligence services without a great deal of effort because they are naive, idealistic, or simply ignorant - such as the Red Army Faction, the German anti-nuke movement, and protests against Reagan in the 80s.

Re:RTFA before you summarize? (2, Informative)

Watson Ladd (955755) | more than 5 years ago | (#25602823)

Or the ex-Nazi's who bombed Piazza Fortana in 1968. Or the American public who supported a gang of thugs who attempted to topple a democratically elected government in Nicaragua. If this is sophistication, pray for the sake of the world that we have more naivety.

Re:RTFA before you summarize? (1)

afabbro (33948) | more than 5 years ago | (#25603069)

Or the ex-Nazi's who bombed Piazza Fortana in 1968.

I'm unfamiliar with this attack and Google doesn't show any info on it. [google.com]

???

Re:RTFA before you summarize? (1)

Plunky (929104) | more than 5 years ago | (#25603115)

try Piazza Fontana bombing [wikipedia.org]

Re:RTFA before you summarize? (1)

Chris Mattern (191822) | more than 5 years ago | (#25603913)

And it happened in 1969, not 1968.

Re:RTFA before you summarize? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25602913)

RE: Useful Idiots

All I can think of is 4chan when I read this

Re:RTFA before you summarize? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25603515)

Except with 4chan it's Japan they adore. And I'm not so convinced about their usefulness.

Re:RTFA before you summarize? (1)

HangingChad (677530) | more than 5 years ago | (#25603103)

The Useful Idiots that the summary refers to have been around forever: people who are easily manipulated by professional intelligence services without a great deal of effort because they are naive, idealistic, or simply ignorant

This has been going on in industry for years. PR and advertising firms manipulate public discourse in social media at the service of industry and political causes, including here at Slashdot. What the Chinese are doing is simply capitalizing on the very large effect that can a small number of coordinated individuals can have on social dialog.

In their case that component probably pales in comparison to the wealth of data they can collect from common industrial espionage. It's not pretty but they don't have to be particularly elegant to be effective.

Re:RTFA before you summarize? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25603207)

As opposed to you, you cunning intellectual powerhouse, eh? YOU would never fall for any agenda! You see right through everything... you magnificent jedi, you.

Re:RTFA before you summarize? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25603555)

1. add obama fanboys
2. vote
3. profit!

Re:RTFA before you summarize? (1)

Jawn98685 (687784) | more than 5 years ago | (#25603627)

"Useful idiots" in this document is referring SOLELY to the 'patriotic hackers' - ie unofficial pro-China hackers who cheerfully attack anti-Chinese or other targets of opportunity without official support or sanction.

Interesting. So they're sort of like fans of Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, or Bill O'Reilly, then. Those who can be motivated to believe in and support a certain cause with only the most superficial and contrived version of "the truth". So what you're really saying is that Fox News and the rest of the right wing propaganda machine have taken their lessons from Chinese Communists? Useful idiots indeed.

Why bother? (-1, Troll)

tjstork (137384) | more than 5 years ago | (#25602821)

In two days, their left wing buddies will be elected and they will be able to just ask for it.

Re:Why bother? (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25602899)

Obama is only "left wing" when you're looking at him from out of Rush Limbaugh's monstrous asscrack. To the rest of the world, he's solidly right-of-center.

Re:Why bother? (0, Troll)

Teun (17872) | more than 5 years ago | (#25603511)

This is not a troll's statement, indeed by European standards Obama is (very) right wing and conservative.

Creatures like Rush Limbaugh can't even be classified along common European political lines but there are some psychological descriptions fitting his demeanour...

Re:Why bother? (3, Informative)

schnikies79 (788746) | more than 5 years ago | (#25603663)

He isn't running for election in Europe or the rest of the world, he is running in the U.S. Only U.S. citizens have a say-so.

It really doesn't matter what anyone else thinks or classifies him or his opponents as.

Re:Why bother? (1)

NeutronCowboy (896098) | more than 5 years ago | (#25604165)

It matters in the context of the original poster's comment. According to him, Obama and Hu are ideological buddies. If you'd ask either of them about this, they'd laugh you out of the room.

Re:Why bother? (3, Funny)

MinistryOfTruthiness (1396923) | more than 5 years ago | (#25602963)

The problem is that the lemming general public is unaware of the information warfare that is going on, and will continue to be swayed by it.

If you want to know who to elect, look at the people who are the diametrical opposite of everything you want the US to be, and see what they want:

Venezuela
Russia
Most of Europe
Iran
North Korea

These folks don't want someone who stands up for what's right because they want to do what's wrong and get away with it.

That's why Obama's got sacks of cash from undisclosed overseas sources. That's why there are pro-Obama robocalls coming from Romania. That's why Acorn and the DNC are appealing to "idiots" and criminals in poor communities and prisons to "get the vote out." (By the way, "Educate the Idiots" was the Democratic slogan for a get-out-the-vote campaign aimed at low-income people and high-school dropouts.)

Do you really want a president who's preferred by "idiots", criminals, and hostile foreign governments?

No (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25604009)

I prefer a president that is preferred AND financially backed by China, Talibahn, North Korea, Al Qaeda, Abramhoff, W, cheney, rove, delay, hastert, Turkey, Pakistan, and Keating. I want a president that is SO dumb that he get's 5th to last in a free ride.

Re:Why bother? (3, Insightful)

CRCulver (715279) | more than 5 years ago | (#25603059)

I'm aghast in the rise of these spiteful comments over the last couple of days. Do you really think this kind of sniping is going to have an effect on the election, now two days away? I now reside overseas and no longer participate in the American political process, so I've got no dog in this fight, but I'd really like to see discussion fora stay civil even when election day is coming up.

Re:Why bother? (1)

evilviper (135110) | more than 5 years ago | (#25603251)

I can assure you, tjstork (137384) is a year-round, ultra-right wing, shill. Ditto for pudge (3605).

Re:Why bother? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25603333)

Pretty brave of them, considering this pit of vipers.

Does it really matter? (4, Insightful)

cyberkahn (398201) | more than 5 years ago | (#25602829)

It's a lot easier to perform the manufacturing for a competing country and then just copy their design. It amazes me how naive American companies are when they outsource to China and then are amazed when their products are copied.

Re:Does it really matter? (1)

Jeff DeMaagd (2015) | more than 5 years ago | (#25603363)

Products can be copied without having outsourced them in the first place.

Re:Does it really matter? (2, Insightful)

Coward Anonymous (110649) | more than 5 years ago | (#25603867)

And yet by doing that, you are always copying yesterday's design and never quite catching up to the competition. That's what the Soviets discovered the hard way and the Chinese are set to rediscover. You can't pretend to innovate by copying. You have innovate independently to get ahead.

tags on slashdot (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25602845)

What's the deal with tags on the front page? On older stories it's an overlapping mishmash of words that's pretty useless. Does Malda consider this to be a "feature"?

so lets increase copyright laws and stiffle..... (1)

CHRONOSS2008 (1226498) | more than 5 years ago | (#25602991)

so lets increase copyright laws and stifle innovation now!!!
We need more laws to through smart people in jail, we have to gouge our people into not affording stuff so we CEO's can then sell ( short term gain ) to the Chinese who will then just loan us cash back when we need it. Yes and then they can tell us later what laws we need more of.

Should be about 1/2 its length and GPS info wrong (2, Informative)

JohnnyComeLately (725958) | more than 5 years ago | (#25603119)

Very good write up, but repeats itself and occasionally goes off on tangents. The US GPS info is wrong. GPS is not used for communications. L-Band is one way with no receivers on the bird. It (GPS) does cross-link NUDET data, but again, this isn't comm. There also aren't "five alternate constellations." There's just one constellation of 24 satellites. There are 6 orbits, with 4 birds per orbit. As he mentions, if you knock one out, then there is no way you're taking another satellite from another orbit and bringing it over. It would defy the law of physics (aka orbital mechanics) and even if those could be overcome, there's no where near enough hydrazine on the satellite to pull it off. There is a possibility they'd knock one satellite out that had an on-orbit spare nearby, but that would be an exception not norm.

This is hardly a Chinese problem (2, Interesting)

0xdeadbeef (28836) | more than 5 years ago | (#25603145)

What do you think freepers are? They may be dumb as bricks, but they know how to stay on message and work as a team.

Now they're really starting to lose it as Obama is practically a shoe-in. Expect them to start lashing out in the coming months, online and off-line. Everything from website vandalism to murdering people like that guy in Tennessee.

Re:This is hardly a Chinese problem (1)

0xdeadbeef (28836) | more than 5 years ago | (#25603241)

Context for the unfamiliar. [knoxnews.com]

Welcome to the future.

Oh noes America is facing a .... gap! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25603185)

Please fill in the gap above with the latest buzz-fear word.

I got it! (1)

DG (989) | more than 5 years ago | (#25604035)

Mine Shaft!

DG

Yellow peril (1)

Nazlfrag (1035012) | more than 5 years ago | (#25603325)

This is propagandising at worst, fearmongering bullshit at best. Most of the attacks in the second link were unattributed or only loosely attributed to China, the pdf assumes from the start that China is developing asymetrical warfare capabilities then ponders on what they might be. Logically, of course every large nation has some form of cyber warfare capability, it's just that I doubt that China has any real advantage in this sphere.

The problem is not just China (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25603343)

The real problem is that govs like USA have pushed MS in place in SPITE of the security issues. NSA and CIA were REQUIRED by the white house to convert their web site to Windows even though they fought it. In addition, they have not locked down certain tech.

At this time, the western gov MUST create its own secured network that is separate from the internet. In fact, it is already happening. Verizon, ATT, and QWest won a big part of that. It is quietly being extended to certain allies (namely Britain, Canada, Australia, and Israel). It will most likely be extended later to the rest of NATO.

Make no mistake. We are in a cold war with CHina. They are building 2-4 new nuke subs/year. They are about to launch their long march 5 next year, even though they keep claiming 2014 for launch. That is due to a LOT more money in the space program than is widely known. In fact, more money flows there than NASA ever had, because the chinese program is controlled by their military. Even now, they DO have space weapons in place (though so does Russia and USA).

LOL (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25603359)

LOL. Anything China does in the military or IT has been done by the US 30-100 years prior. Please save us all the comical anti-US bragging foreigners are so intent on. The Chinese economy is headed to the toilets, so forget your boasts about it ever equaling the US which is comical in itself.

More issues (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25603411)

America and Russia back in the 60's put in place a red phone. It was used for communications between our nations to avoid mistakes with catostrophic consequences. We also opened up our sides to each other to inspect. Neither of us wanted to have a war. More importantly, we both showed a lot of info to each other. It was kept somewhat quiet. Finally, we had spies on each other. What was interesting is that we knew it, and allowed it. In both cases, it was more about systems then little items. It all made sense since it kept us from attacking each other. That is why when the cold war ended, we did help them
Both America and Russia have approach China with similar deals. China will not allow it. We have had to find out on our own about their hidden sub base. They actually bore into an island QUIETLY, and have hidden entrances to it, so as to try and hide their try number of boomers and attack boats. China has tried hard to hide exactly how much money is being spent by their military. More importantly, their spying is not geared towards knowing what the other side has, but trying to obtain the info on the system to implement the same.
China is gearing up for a war. They are not trying to prevent it. This is why totalitarian has issues. There is a small group of ppl who are trying to build a true total world domination.

National debt of usa 10 trillions US $ (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25603491)

The national debt of USA is 10 trillions US $ and grows by 4 billions every day.

From this, China owns 4000 billions US $ in a governement bank somewhere, and this has doubled since 5 years.

The economic victory of China is only a matter of time.

Re:National debt of usa 10 trillions US $ (2, Interesting)

Creepy Crawler (680178) | more than 5 years ago | (#25604085)

You realize that the trade imbalance is in OUR favor?

The T-bills are only promises to pay them. BTW, what happens if the USA defaults on a foreign enemy in presence of wartime?

It's just the Chinese then is it? (0, Troll)

Conspicuous Coward (938979) | more than 5 years ago | (#25603629)

Why does this kind of tendentious fearmongering regularly make the front page at slashdot?

Every week there's some story about evil Chinese hackers or evil Russian hackers stealing others' secrets. The equivalent stories about evil US/UK/French government hackers doing this are mysteriously absent though. That despite the fact that these countries have larger and much longer established electronic intelligence programs than the Chinese could hope to (Echelon anyone?).

I'll go along with the idea that the electronic intelligence gathering programs of major Governments are a worrying development, though calling this "cyber warfare" and pretending it's somehow qualitatively different from traditional spying seems a little silly. But why is there the pretense that other major governments are somehow less keen to exploit electronic intelligence than the Chinese? The American foriegn policy bias on this site is worrying. If this level of paranoia was directed at the US government there'd be a hundred posts complaining of "anti-americanism", yet I see no posts decrying the "anti-chinese" or "anti-russian" bias of these types of articles. Funny that...

Who understands this part? (1)

bcn17 (1390121) | more than 5 years ago | (#25603711)

Software Skeleton Keys "People's Liberation Army cyberwarfare units now have the source codes for America's ubiquitous office software, which Microsoft provided to the Chinese government as a condition of doing business in China. This means that they essentially have a skeleton key to almost every networked government, military, business, and private computer in America. But Chinese government hackers do not restrict their operations to U.S. targets." How does having the source code to Office give you access to every networked computer in America?

Re:Who understands this part? (0)

Creepy Crawler (680178) | more than 5 years ago | (#25604071)

I can mail a doc file that looks legit, smells legit, scans legit, and hits a buffer overflow in a specific part of the parser that runs a trojan.

You wouldn't know.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>