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!

Google Investigating Chinese Employees

CmdrTaco posted more than 4 years ago | from the i'm-such-a-voyeur dept.

Google 181

BluePeppers writes "The Guardian is reporting that Google China is investigating its staff about The Incident. '"We're not commenting on rumor and speculation. This is an ongoing investigation and we simply cannot comment on the details," a Google spokeswoman said. Security analysts told Reuters the malicious software or malware used in the attack was a modification of a trojan called Hydraq. A trojan is a hidden program allowing unauthorized access to a computer. The analysts said the sophistication in the attack was in knowing whom to attack, not the malware itself.'"

cancel ×

181 comments

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

Google is more powerful than I thought.. (5, Funny)

brokenin2 (103006) | more than 4 years ago | (#30809424)

I didn't know they could go back in time and undo the incident. Very impressive!

Re:Google is more powerful than I thought.. (2, Funny)

raburton (1281780) | more than 4 years ago | (#30809516)

I was concerned for a moment there about declining standards at the Guardian, but you'll be pleased to know the phrase "in lieu" does not appear anywhere in their article.

Re:Google is more powerful than I thought.. (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30809530)

Unfortunately only organic matter could be sent or machines covered with organic matter.

Re:Google is more powerful than I thought.. (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30809910)

Yeah, let's hope they never figure out how to send back a plasma rifle covered in steak.

Re:Google is more powerful than I thought.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30809710)

Good point.

Incident (0, Troll)

camperdave (969942) | more than 4 years ago | (#30810094)

I didn't know they could go back in time and undo the incident. Very impressive!

It must have worked. Apparently something so significant happened that people can just call it "The Incident" and expect others to know about it. Yet I've never heard of anything happening to Google, or originating from Google significant enough and shocking enough to be titled "The Incident". (The worst I've heard is about their camera cars going up the occasional private road). Their temporal cleanup crews must be pretty good.

...Although, if they had done a thorough job, there wouldn't be this Slashdot story, would there?

Re:Incident (5, Informative)

Arthur Grumbine (1086397) | more than 4 years ago | (#30810582)

Apparently something so significant happened that people can just call it "The Incident" and expect others to know about it. Yet I've never heard of anything happening to Google, or originating from Google significant enough and shocking enough to be titled "The Incident". (The worst I've heard is about their camera cars going up the occasional private road).

Seriously?! You've been posting regularly on /. for this last week [slashdot.org] yet you somehow managed to miss nine of the most commented on stories?! Well, here they are in chronological order:
Google Hacked, may pull out of China [slashdot.org]
Google.cn has already lifted censorship [slashdot.org]
Google.cn attack part of broad spying effort [slashdot.org]
China emphasizes law as Google defies censorship [slashdot.org]
Google attackers identified as Chinese government [slashdot.org]
IE 0-day flaw used in Chinese attack [slashdot.org]
Code used to attack Google now public [slashdot.org]
German government advises public to stop using IE [slashdot.org]
Another attack, on law firm suing China [slashdot.org]
This is also all over the mainstream and business news [google.com] (although, like all other news stories, it's secondary to the Haiti coverage).

Re:Incident (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30811028)

So....which one of those stories is "The Incident"

Spies everywhere (4, Insightful)

WindBourne (631190) | more than 4 years ago | (#30809468)

Why should Google be surprised. The funny thing is that all Google will be able to do is fire that person. And then they will get to take a job with a Baidu (or may already be working for them).

Re:Spies everywhere (3, Insightful)

demonlapin (527802) | more than 4 years ago | (#30809506)

I rather strongly suspect that there are a lot of new Google "employees" and "corporate security" who just happen to draw a paycheck from the FBI. It's about mapping out the threat.

Re:Spies everywhere (4, Insightful)

Wyatt Earp (1029) | more than 4 years ago | (#30809586)

And I suspect alot of Google China employees draw a paycheck from the People's Liberation Army and other Chinese Government agencies.

Re:Spies everywhere (4, Insightful)

GiveBenADollar (1722738) | more than 4 years ago | (#30809736)

But the real question is how many Chinese Government officials are drawing a Google paycheck. I suspect that Google now has more spies than the Vatican.

Re:Spies everywhere (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30810970)

And I suspect alot of Google China employees draw a paycheck from the People's Liberation Army and other Chinese Government agencies.

Duh - like all. China is a communist country.

In China, you are either a member of the Party or a nobody.

Also, there are no corporate entities that are not owned by the state. (At least a majority share.) That goes for foreign corporations, too.

Think China has become open and capitalist? Go read what the Party has been saying for the last 30 years.

Re:Spies everywhere (2, Insightful)

Yvanhoe (564877) | more than 4 years ago | (#30809942)

IANAL but I think that if Google cannot do much, the USA can do : If it is proven they broke into computer systems in order to aid a foreign country against the interests of the United States, it can be considered as the crime of treason. (I am assuming they are American citizens). If they are citizens of China, they can still be judged on the ground of breaking into a computerized system and on the ground of conspiracy.

USA has no extradition treaties with China so I think they have no obligations to let China judge them.

Re:Spies everywhere (3, Insightful)

m.ducharme (1082683) | more than 4 years ago | (#30810266)

If it is proven they broke into computer systems in order to aid a foreign country against the interests of the United States, it can be considered as the crime of treason. (I am assuming they are American citizens).

It's very unlikely that the culprit is American.

If they are citizens of China, they can still be judged on the ground of breaking into a computerized system and on the ground of conspiracy.

Why exactly would they be tried for obeying orders from their government? They might be punished for getting caught, but we won't likely hear about that.

USA has no extradition treaties with China so I think they have no obligations to let China judge them.

Except that the investigation is in Google China, which is in...wait for it...China.

Anything the US gov can do will be diplomatic in nature, and given how closely tied the economies of the US and China are, any diplomatic action the US can take will be largely symbolic. Though there may be plans for a more covert retaliation in the works as we speak, those plans won't likely involve wasting time trying to extradite the hackers/mole/whoever.

Re:Spies everywhere (1)

Yvanhoe (564877) | more than 4 years ago | (#30810412)

Except that the investigation is in Google China, which is in...wait for it...China.

Ooops, missed that part. Mod me offtopic then... I thought it was about Chinese developers in USA. Indeed, if that is the case nothing can really be done and Google had really no other choices than closing its offices there.

Re:Spies everywhere (1)

DrXym (126579) | more than 4 years ago | (#30810202)

Unless this person were working for Baidu to start with, I bet Baidu wouldn't touch then with a 20ft pole. Who on earth would hire someone who had just planted a trojan in their last place of work?

Re:Spies everywhere (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30810666)

Wrong. This is China - where the "normal" rules Westerners are accustomed to don't apply.

Re:Spies everywhere (1)

whisper_jeff (680366) | more than 4 years ago | (#30810572)

I believe that industrial espionage is a crime. And I'm sure several other laws were broken along the way (computer hacking itself is a pretty serious crime). I don't know about the laws in China, but I suspect Google can do something beyond just firing the person.

well I'm not surprised (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30811002)

..about the treachery. I'm surprised at the naiivity of Google. Having Chinese people work for you in China is like have nazis in nazi germany work for u. What are they, stupid?

In lieu of? (1)

bluestar (17362) | more than 4 years ago | (#30809498)

I do not think that word means what you think it means.

Re:In lieu of? (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30809512)

His grammar is down the lieu.

Re:In lieu of? (4, Informative)

garg0yle (208225) | more than 4 years ago | (#30809524)

I think they meant "in light of" (as in, in response to). "In lieu of", as you know, means essentially "instead of", and would not make sense in this context. So, you are correct. I just hope you don't get modded down as "grammar police".

Re:In lieu of? (1)

Monkeedude1212 (1560403) | more than 4 years ago | (#30809534)

Unless he meant it in the proper meaning, in which case, Google has some very peculiar business practices.

Re:In lieu of? (1)

Tim C (15259) | more than 4 years ago | (#30809932)

Not to mention the ability to travel in time.

Re:In lieu of? (1)

JustNilt (984644) | more than 4 years ago | (#30809552)

Damn, beat me to it. It took me a second to realize it wasn't my lack of comprehension due to a lack of coffee but was instead the complete lack of proofreading.

Re:In lieu of? (3, Insightful)

John Hasler (414242) | more than 4 years ago | (#30809604)

This is Slashdot. Every summary must have at least one grammatical error.

Re:In lieu of? (5, Funny)

Rary (566291) | more than 4 years ago | (#30809674)

This is Slashdot. Every summary must have at least one grammatical error.

And "investigating it's staff" wasn't good enough?

Re:In lieu of? (1)

DeVilla (4563) | more than 4 years ago | (#30809984)

This is Slashdot. Every summary must have at least one grammatical error.

And "investigating it's staff" wasn't good enough?

emphasis added

Re:In lieu of? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30810020)

Oh come on - if you look at the orginal submission [slashdot.org] , you can see that the "editor" already had his work cut out fixing the title. By the time he got halfway through that first sentence he probably was already exhausted and had to go have a lie down.

Re:In lieu of? (2, Insightful)

stumblingblock (409645) | more than 4 years ago | (#30810470)

Well, you know how well informed those English majors are about engineering topics, right? How could it be any other way with an engineer's usage of the language?

Re:In lieu of? (3, Funny)

wall0159 (881759) | more than 4 years ago | (#30810836)

C'mon, go easy - I wouldn't call failing to capitalize IT a grammatical error!

Re:In lieu of? (1)

Bluesman (104513) | more than 4 years ago | (#30809630)

No, when an organization is investigating it is staff, there perfectly reasonable to do it in lieu of.

And to present the results... (3, Insightful)

gpeters (7094) | more than 4 years ago | (#30809504)

After the investigation, of course they will invite every Google China employee to join them in the USA for a presentation of the results...!

Actually, that's the whole investigation. People who have "family obligations" or who are "afraid of airplanes" are the ones to look at!

Re:And to present the results... (0, Flamebait)

KudyardRipling (1063612) | more than 4 years ago | (#30809722)

Did he mean "famiry obrigations" or "aflaid of ailpranes"? Oh, wait, I forgot about the FEDERAL DEB&#*|~
NO CARRIER

trojan definition (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30809514)

Thank God you explained what a trojan does. I almost thought I was on a tech website and the community would know that definition.

it's aftermath! (4, Funny)

bigmaddog (184845) | more than 4 years ago | (#30809520)

Irregardless of the actual story content, I find the poster's use of "in lieu" to be the penultimate atrocity vis-a-vis the English language.

Re:it's aftermath! (1)

IANAAC (692242) | more than 4 years ago | (#30809650)

That took a minute to realize you were joking.

Re:it's aftermath! (2)

Aladrin (926209) | more than 4 years ago | (#30809720)

Actually, he's not. What that statement says is that instead of having The Incident happen, Google is launching an investigation.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/in+lieu+of [reference.com]

Obviously, that's not what is going on because we don't have time travel.

Re:it's aftermath! (1)

h4rm0ny (722443) | more than 4 years ago | (#30810460)


I assumed the joke was someone starting a post criticizing word usage with 'irregardless'.

Re:it's aftermath! (1)

John Hasler (414242) | more than 4 years ago | (#30809664)

> I find the poster's use of "in lieu" to be the penultimate atrocity
> vis-a-vis the English language.

The ultimate one being use of "irregardless"?

Re:it's aftermath! (1)

snarkh (118018) | more than 4 years ago | (#30809728)

No, that's antepenultimate.

Re:it's aftermath! (1)

NitroWolf (72977) | more than 4 years ago | (#30810884)

No, that's antepenultimate.

So then what would the ultimate and the last one be?

While "irregardless" may not the be ultimate atrocity vis-a-vis the English language, it's definitely at the top of the list for "words" or phrases that scream "I'm from the rattiest trailer park in the country and have actually found a way to obtain a negative education level. I actually suck the intelligence out of people that are within earshot of me." Hmm... perhaps it is the ultimate.

Re:it's aftermath! (1)

bantab (1723504) | more than 4 years ago | (#30809670)

This is actually an alternate reality fiction board. I think it's pretty imaginative stuff.

and (2, Insightful)

snarkh (118018) | more than 4 years ago | (#30809682)

the ultimate atrocity is the poster's use of "it's"?

Re:it's aftermath! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30809744)

Of course, the first few responses are about nitpicking, rather than the actual point of the article.

Re:it's aftermath! (1)

Tim C (15259) | more than 4 years ago | (#30809924)

Yes.

See how much correct, clear use of language matters, and how much incorrect and/or unclear use of language impedes constructive debate?

Re:it's aftermath! (1)

Hal_Porter (817932) | more than 4 years ago | (#30809956)

It takes a while for the hive mind to digest the summary. Then its finely honed insight will amaze and scare you.

Re:it's aftermath! (1)

demonlapin (527802) | more than 4 years ago | (#30809796)

I believe you used vis-a-vis correctly there. Try vice versa.

Re:it's aftermath! (1)

bigmaddog (184845) | more than 4 years ago | (#30810118)

Dammit, you might be right, although I never did like the "in relation to" usage of vis-a-vis. Anyway, the text of the story has now been improved, which saddens me and makes this exercise in internet-enabled douchebaggery moot.

Re:it's aftermath! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30809826)

google.com in Liu of google.cn?

Re:it's aftermath! (0, Offtopic)

TXFRATBoy (954419) | more than 4 years ago | (#30809884)

I find your use of "irregardless" an atrocity when criticizing one's use of the English language. http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/IRREGARDLESS [merriam-webster.com]

Re:it's aftermath! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30810106)

And to anyone labelling this as "flame bait", it is not. The above statement is completely inflammable [merriam-webster.com] .

What's that sound? (1)

gbutler69 (910166) | more than 4 years ago | (#30810272)

WHOOSH!

Re:it's aftermath! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30810264)

Irregardless of the actual story content, I find the poster's use of "in lieu" to be the penultimate atrocity vis-a-vis the English language.

You know what also is an atrocity? You using the word "irregardless". Double negative much?

Re:it's aftermath! (1)

dwiget001 (1073738) | more than 4 years ago | (#30810426)

Atrociously irregardless, maybe?

Google employee here (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30809538)

Full disclosure: I'm a Google employee in China. The truth is that 95% of all Google employees in China work for the Chinese gNO CARRIER

Not "in lieu of"; you want "in light of" (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30809550)

If you're trying to say that Google China is investigating their staff after the recent security breach, then you should say that they're doing so _in light of_ the breach.

If they were interviewing staff _in lieu of_ the breach, then it would mean that they wanted to have the breach, but decided to cancel it and replace it with interviews.

I'll ignore the misused "it's" in the first line, too. :)

Loose lips sink ships. (4, Insightful)

Mal-2 (675116) | more than 4 years ago | (#30809624)

I bet it was your run of the mill social engineering. Someone on the attacking side befriended someone on the inside and either coaxed the information out, or just waited until they mentioned it in passing. Once they knew who to target, they could then pump this employee to see if the attack was having any effect, from the perspective of an insider.

It could be a Facebook friend, it could be a normal face-to-face friend, or it might be a "swallow" [jezebel.com] . Governments certainly use this method of social engineering, but I would be quite surprised if companies do not do it as well.

Mal-2

Re:Loose lips sink ships. (1)

DarkAce911 (245282) | more than 4 years ago | (#30810508)

I was thinking Rubber-Hose Cryptology, the Secret Police threatened to beat the passwords out of Google's employees.

I'm not sure I get it. (0, Troll)

Monkeedude1212 (1560403) | more than 4 years ago | (#30809654)

The analysts said the sophistication in the attack was in knowing whom to attack, not the malware itself

They were accessing mail, right?

C:\> ping mail.google.com

pinging googlemail.l.google.com [74.125.127.18]

Point of entry, anyone?

Re:I'm not sure I get it. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30809964)

By that they mean who to attack at Google to gain access to access to significant info. They were not doing a "brute force" attack on gmail itself, rather attacking computers of employee with high level of access to the gmail infrastructure and source code. Knowing who those individual are is not trivial.

Makes me think of movies where people barricade a door to death, while it sits in a plaster wall that anybody can bring down with a couple good kicks. In another word, attacking Google front servers is probably not the easiest way in.

Re:I'm not sure I get it. (1)

Dishevel (1105119) | more than 4 years ago | (#30810046)

Probably the IP is hardened against any normal attack. My guess is they found a system that has an attack vector into the gmail system that is not as difficult as the mail servers themselves.

the Chinese staffer's name ... (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30809696)

... is In Lieu, you insensitive clods!

...in lieu of... (0, Redundant)

Ephemeriis (315124) | more than 4 years ago | (#30809732)

The Guardian is reporting that Google China is investigating it's staff in lieu of The Incident.

I do not think those words mean what you think they mean.

Poor Choice Of Phrasing (1, Informative)

xdroop (4039) | more than 4 years ago | (#30809754)

Come on, guys, it's not "in lieu of". "In lieu of [wiktionary.org] " means "instead; in place of; as a substitute for". So that description makes absolutely no sense. The submitter probably means "in light of".

I know this is just slashdot, but we we have computers and the internet where all the grammar nazis have left us neat hints how to use language correctly, if not effectively. Articles like this make us all look like gibbering chimps.

Re:Poor Choice Of Phrasing (3, Funny)

nkcaump (1016816) | more than 4 years ago | (#30809918)

but we we have computers

Giggle... you said "we we"...

Re:Poor Choice Of Phrasing (1)

ArsonSmith (13997) | more than 4 years ago | (#30810330)

"You have got to be kidding me!!! Hold on I have to go take a wicked NO!"

-Peter G.

Re:Poor Choice Of Phrasing (2, Funny)

xdroop (4039) | more than 4 years ago | (#30809944)

Right, I get hit by my own irony stick. I deserved that. "we we" indeed.

The real WTF is... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30809808)

Why can't people tell the difference between it's and its?

Re:The real WTF is... (2, Funny)

LSD-OBS (183415) | more than 4 years ago | (#30809874)

Its the kind of bad grammer we sea alot of on slashdot. Blame there editers.

Re:The real WTF is... (1)

Sponge Bath (413667) | more than 4 years ago | (#30810158)

Blame there editers.

Blame them editers. As in "them's good eatin'". - Backwoods US Grammer Nazi

Re:The real WTF is... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30810210)

Everyone knows the possessive of "them" is "they's." Blame they's editers.

Re:The real WTF is... (1)

gregarican (694358) | more than 4 years ago | (#30810712)

It's enough to make you want to loose your mind...

Somewhere in Mountain View... (4, Interesting)

Animats (122034) | more than 4 years ago | (#30809860)

Somewhere in Mountain View, servers are now analyzing all activity of Google's employees in China. And their friend. And their friend's friends. And the people they email. And everyone who got in range of a Google security camera. And all the their friends. And the people they email.

Re:Somewhere in Mountain View... (4, Funny)

e2d2 (115622) | more than 4 years ago | (#30810178)

ENHANCE!

Re:Somewhere in Mountain View... (4, Funny)

Herkum01 (592704) | more than 4 years ago | (#30810434)

Oh my god, it was KEVIN BACON!

Re:Somewhere in Mountain View... (5, Funny)

NevarMore (248971) | more than 4 years ago | (#30810208)

..and showing them text advertisements for criminal defence lawyers.

Re:Somewhere in Mountain View... (1)

hellraizer (1689320) | more than 4 years ago | (#30810252)

"Somewhere in Mountain View, servers are now analyzing" servers that analize server traffic :D im getting dizzy ..... :P one server to analize them all :D ...

Re:Somewhere in Mountain View... (2, Funny)

CFBMoo1 (157453) | more than 4 years ago | (#30810608)

"Somewhere in Mountain View, servers are now analyzing all activity of Google's employees in China. And their friend. And their friend's friends. And the people they email. And everyone who got in range of a Google security camera. And all the their friends. And the people they email."

And then, suddenly the white vans with cameras and guys in colorful hats pulls up and surrounds someones house!

In communist china... (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30809906)

google googles you!

Espionage Big risk of Overseas Outsourcing (3, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30809914)

Espionage is a BIG risk in all Overseas Outsourcing. The overseas employees (or foreigners brought in on L-1 or H-1b visas) are ultimately loyal to their home country. If their country orders them to spy, turn over Intellectual Property, etc., don't be surprised! Google is not the big risk. Microsoft, for example, has a big tech center in China. One must wonder what sorts of spying, back doors, trojans, are being planted in Windows!

Re:Espionage Big risk of Overseas Outsourcing (1)

couchslug (175151) | more than 4 years ago | (#30810610)

Espionage is a tolerable cost of outsourcing because all that matters is profit. Some public embarassment will result now and then, but it is perfectly reasonable for people to put national loyalty far above any concern for a foreign corporation.

I'd cheerfully help the US find information about any foreign company I worked for, because I have no moral obligation to a corporation and least of all one from an enemy/competing (there is no difference!) country. It is ridiculous to expect people to be loyal to foreign employers, and China has every historic reason to view all such as economic colonials!

Welcome to the new world (5, Informative)

jonpublic (676412) | more than 4 years ago | (#30809946)

Chinese companies copied part for part GM cars and as far as I know, nothing came of it. You could literally take the door off the Chevy and put a door from the Chinese car company on it. We don't impose any trade sanctions, we just keep buying their stuff.

I'd find the link but I don't have time.

Hopefully this google flap will get people to pay attention to how they are catching up.

 

Re:Welcome to the new world (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30810200)

Why on earth would the US government be upset about a major foreign competitor deciding to copy GM cars?

Re:Welcome to the new world (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30810702)

here is the link... from 2005!

http://www.autoblog.com/2005/04/16/chinese-copy-cats/

Re:Welcome to the new world (1)

Inda (580031) | more than 4 years ago | (#30811016)

Why is everyone surprised at this? When I worked at Land Rover's design centre in Gaydon, England, there were always two cars from rivals, stripped down, Faro arms in each corner,... You could borrow the parts just like a lending library. Everyone does it. It's good to share.

Trojan (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30809988)

A trojan is a hidden program allowing unauthorized access to a computer.

Yes thanks! This is definitely news to the average /. reader. I never knew that!

Re:Trojan (1)

ArsonSmith (13997) | more than 4 years ago | (#30810502)

It was also a people that tricked a fortified enemy city with a giant horse as a gift with solders hidden inside.

A lesser known, at least on Slashdot, version is a condom used in an act known as 'sex' to prevent reproduction and infection transfers.

Re:Trojan (1)

H0p313ss (811249) | more than 4 years ago | (#30810644)

It was also a people that tricked a fortified enemy city with a giant horse as a gift with solders hidden inside.

Actually... the horse was made by Greeks, it fooled the Trojans. (Hence the phrase; "Beware of Greeks bearing gifts".)

Re:Trojan (1)

ArsonSmith (13997) | more than 4 years ago | (#30810720)

knew i should have looked it up instead of just using my hazy memory of the story.

Re:Trojan (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30810794)

Indeed, that form of trojan is to prevent spawning of child processes.

Re:Trojan (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30810568)

And it's wrong, too. A trojan (from "trojan horse") is a program which has hidden behavior(s). This hidden behavior may be enabling unauthorized access to the computer or it may be something else. The program as a whole is not hidden, but it pretends to do something non-malicious.

Google seems more Authority than Corp. (1)

stimpleton (732392) | more than 4 years ago | (#30810084)

"Google Investigating Chinese Employees"

Something occurred to me after I read this. I get a slight twinge that Google is more an Authority, instead of a private corporation. Its odd, If I read "Microsoft investigates..." I envision some staid corporate fumbling about, yet with Google, I feel they are almost Law Enforcement like, with big tenticles of power Joe Bloggs couldnt understand.

Sorry, I have watching "The Wire" [wikipedia.org] on DVD. Its ruined my perceptions on how things (might) work.

Hate to say this... (2, Interesting)

hesaigo999ca (786966) | more than 4 years ago | (#30810194)

Hate to say this...as it does sound racist, but I know for a fact that most of the chinese employees within a company that deals with
china, will side to help the chinese side of the deal rather then their own company that is dealing with china, also even went so far as to give out confidential info and deal breaking intel to manufacturers so as to be able to charge top dollar when they could, based on types of situations that came up.

For me, it might sound racist, but I truly believe that they have been brainwashed to really stand by their country, even when they are of different citizenship, and even live abroad...they will still report back to the motherland to help in anyway they can.

Is this wrong, the jews have been doing this for eons, so I guess not really, as it would be hypocritical to say this, but
I do believe that a religion and way of life, is much different then a country's dictator's point of view of what life should be.
I know i might get spammed with a lot of comments on my view points, but I have to say, we did this to ourselves.

If we allow muslems to come into our country and force us to change our country's ways to allow them to continue living the way they lived back home, then why did they leave int he first place. If you want to join the RCMP and then tell them that they are not allowed to ask you to remove your turban to put on the proper RCMP uniform, you should understand that this is part of the RCMP religion, to wear the RCMP hat.

As for chinese, if they come into the country and work for a canadian/amercian country, why would they try to still make china the
more profitable partner in the deal....they left that country, for what ever reason...seems like they are almost doing this on purpose as if told to do so by the dictator himself...?

Re:Hate to say this... (1)

antifoidulus (807088) | more than 4 years ago | (#30810618)

Part of the problem is that there is essentially no punishment(in most cases lots of rewards) for doing so. The Chinese government will make sure you are well taken care of if you help a Chinese company(and lets face it, though nominally capitalist the state essentially still "owns" all enterprises in China, you cannot get rich there if the state doesn't want you to be rich). Until significant sanctions are levied against China for this kind of stunt they will continue only to get more brazen with their violations of international law and trade agreements.

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30810498)

"...unauthorized access to a computer"

It's a good thing that this is put in the /. summary, I mean, some /. readers might not know it!

If Google wants to do this right... (1)

dwiget001 (1073738) | more than 4 years ago | (#30810632)

... they would interrogate these people like the ChiComs would. Make them feel right at home!

Bring the suspected employees to the States (1)

TexasTroy (1701144) | more than 4 years ago | (#30810678)

Anyone know if Google could bring their Google China employees to the US and then have them charged with industrial espionage? I think a quick way of narrowing the field of candidates is to float this out there and see which rats leave the ship.

What does this mean for Chinese seeking work? (2, Insightful)

vampire_baozi (1270720) | more than 4 years ago | (#30810982)

If Google finds anything, this could have serious reprecussions for foreign companies hiring in China and Chinese students seeking green cards/employment in the US, especially in high-tech areas. Does anyone else think that mandatory background checks might be put in place to screen candidates, beyond simply assessing technical skills?

If so, it's a good time to be Indian or Taiwanese/Korean, if you're competing with Chinese candidates.

Though I do hope if this doesn't result in hiring discrimination against Chinese candidates; most of them are bright cookies, and there may come a day when US tech companies need them more than they need us.

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>