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!

US To Charge Chinese Military Employees With Hacking

samzenpus posted about 4 months ago | from the don't-hack-me-bro dept.

United States 225

jfruh (300774) writes "The U.S. federal government will announce today indictments of several employees of the Chinese military with hacking into computers to steal industrial secrets. The indictments will be the first of their kind against employees of a foreign government. Among the trade secrets allegedly stolen by the accused are information about a nuclear power plant design and a solar panel company's cost and pricing data."

cancel ×

225 comments

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

Oblig frosty (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47037979)

Data wants to (should be) free!

Vs the NSA (4, Informative)

Rick Zeman (15628) | about 4 months ago | (#47037991)

Which just steals secrets from the states, vs corporate secrets and giving them to GM, Apple, General Electric, etc.

Re:Vs the NSA (1)

p51d007 (656414) | about 4 months ago | (#47038023)

Just thinking that myself!

Re:Vs the NSA (5, Insightful)

gl4ss (559668) | about 4 months ago | (#47038045)

yeah it's weird in that regard that they went for opening that pandoras box... the chinese will just indict in response.

Re:Vs the NSA (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47038235)

I think the Chinese will get a good laugh.

Re:Vs the NSA (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47038767)

Yeah, seriously. What does the US think it can really do against China once they've been told to fuck off? Trade sanctions? Embargo? War? The US would lose badly in any of those scenarios. Unlike the small countries that the US is used to picking on, China is big and bad enough to royally fuck the US up.

Re:Vs the NSA (3, Interesting)

erikkemperman (252014) | about 4 months ago | (#47038253)

TFS and TFA are both ridiculously vague.

How exactly does this work, in terms of jurisdiction? Is this a case for the ICC? WTO?

Or is it now (officially) the position of USJ that its jurisdiction covers the whole planet?

Re:Vs the NSA (4, Interesting)

Richard_at_work (517087) | about 4 months ago | (#47038267)

A country can claim jurisdiction anywhere on the planet, but the trick is to be able to enforce that claim of jurisdiction...

Re:Vs the NSA (3)

LifesABeach (234436) | about 4 months ago | (#47038335)

One has to wonder about several things. 1, how does the U.S. know whom to indite? 2. jurisdiction of the U.S.? 3. And are we finally seeing the ignoring of this Pin Headed concept of BRIC Nations?

Also, is the U.S. going after the person who said, "ya, it's good idea; do it." or just the teams of rank and file only?

Re:Vs the NSA (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47038399)

Likely it will just be "John/Jane Doe" indictments.

Re:Vs the NSA (3, Funny)

lister king of smeg (2481612) | about 4 months ago | (#47038731)

Likely it will just be "John/Jane Doe" indictments.

So we will be charging no suspect and prosecute them in absentia where they will have no defense, as such it is a forgone conclusion that they will be found guilty, so what is that plan have convictions made up with a "insert name here..." line? Yeah I feel safe living in country that thinks this is fine...

And beyond the obvious dubiousness of these proceedings isn't this a major pot calling the kettle black situation after everything Snowden has showed us in the past year of the NSA spying, hack/cracking, emplanting of back doors, stealing foreign secrets. We have no moral high ground to stand on in this fight.

Re:Vs the NSA (2)

Zumbs (1241138) | about 4 months ago | (#47038715)

... and what will happen when non-US entities decides to charge NSA operatives for similar crimes?

Re:Vs the NSA (3, Funny)

Lumpy (12016) | about 4 months ago | (#47038349)

Someone sent the DOJ a copy of "team america" and they believe it is their new mission.

Re:Vs the NSA (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47038629)

Someone sent the DOJ a copy of "team america" and they believe it is their new mission.

Fuck Yeah!

Re: Vs the NSA (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47038359)

The U.S can say whatever they want. The Chinese will not extradite one of their own people. SOL America. Ya take on China, good luck lol

Re: Vs the NSA (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47038963)

Why can't they just offer to hand over a couple of dudes? I assume that no-one high up in the hierarchy have been asked for.
In return China will ask for a similar the U.S. to hand over a couple of their spies.
The U.S. will then refuse and the Chinese won't need to bother further.

Re:Vs the NSA (0)

CrimsonAvenger (580665) | about 4 months ago | (#47038967)

How exactly does this work, in terms of jurisdiction? Is this a case for the ICC? WTO?

It looks like the purpose of this whole business is to say "Look! Over there! A Unicorn!" to the crowd of people looking at (and saying rude things about) the NSA.

Now, they'll be able to say "See! Other people do this too, so it's okay."

Big problem is that they're pointing at a group that, in general, they use as the "villain", and saying "See, they're doing it too", which makes either the USA look villainous (they're calling someone a villain for doing what we do), or the Chinese look virtuous (the Chinese are doing what we're doing, and it's okay when we do it, right?).

Either way, I expect this to quietly fade away without much fanfare, because they have absolutely no way of doing anything other than "viewing with alarm" about this.

Re:Vs the NSA (3, Interesting)

Bob9113 (14996) | about 4 months ago | (#47038263)

yeah it's weird in that regard that they went for opening that pandoras box... the chinese will just indict in response.

Weird enough that it has me trying to figure out why they would do it. The other thing that seems weird is that we're charging the guys who were just following orders. Why charge the foot soldiers instead of the generals who ordered the action? It's a pretty extreme tinfoil hat scenario, but could they be trying to establish a story frame of throwing the boots to the wolves, so Clapper and Alexander don't go down?

Re:Vs the NSA (2)

John.Banister (1291556) | about 4 months ago | (#47038433)

They could be trying to show to the public the NSA doing something the public will like. I imagine that showing documented evidence of who in China ordered the foot soldiers to do their job would involve revelation of capability that they don't want to reveal. Whereas, the current business shows a favorable result of spying on international connections to domestic businesses, demonstrating why the NSA wants the access they have to the domestic network.

Re:Vs the NSA (2)

AmiMoJo (196126) | about 4 months ago | (#47038801)

I think at this point they have just decided to go with "hay, everyone else is just as bad!"

Re:Vs the NSA (1)

NotDrWho (3543773) | about 4 months ago | (#47038665)

yeah it's weird in that regard that they went for opening that pandoras box..

They had to do something to distract people from the story [slashdot.org] that they're sabotaging Cisco routers coming out of the U.S.

Re:Vs the NSA (5, Funny)

captainpanic (1173915) | about 4 months ago | (#47038173)

At least that makes for a bulletproof court case: NSA files show that the data is now stored on a Chinese government computer... Oh, wait.

Re:Vs the NSA (1)

dean.collins (862044) | about 4 months ago | (#47038449)

chuckles :)

Re:Vs the NSA (1)

gtall (79522) | about 4 months ago | (#47038537)

Really? Do you have any evidence this has actually occurred or is this just another one of those "There is nothing the NSA cannot do" stories?

Re:Vs the NSA (1)

slashmydots (2189826) | about 4 months ago | (#47038859)

That has never happened.

Re:Vs the NSA (1)

Karl Cocknozzle (514413) | about 4 months ago | (#47038879)

Which just steals secrets from the states, vs corporate secrets and giving them to GM, Apple, General Electric, etc.

Actually, a couple of NSA's sub-programs relate specifically to industrial-espionage in the oil industry. So it is total hypocrisy.

Jurisdiction (4, Insightful)

Richy_T (111409) | about 4 months ago | (#47038019)

The US govt doesn't know the meaning of the word. Sovereignty's another.

Re:Jurisdiction (3, Insightful)

Impy the Impiuos Imp (442658) | about 4 months ago | (#47038171)

These are political moves. Said actual people better not leave China or Chinese-friendly (extradition-wise) nations.

Yes it won't do much but it is a statement that your government ordered it is not gonna help you.

Re:Jurisdiction (3, Informative)

Zontar_Thing_From_Ve (949321) | about 4 months ago | (#47038421)

The US govt doesn't know the meaning of the word. Sovereignty's another.

Neither does the EU or probably most if not all other countries in the world. Did you know that France makes Ebay restrict certain listings on every Ebay site in the world, not just the French Ebay site, so that French citizens are theoretically prevented (by IP address) from (gasp!) seeing them? Italy has also tried to enforce its law beyond its national borders. Spain went so far as to try people from crimes committed in Latin America that had nothing to do with Spanish citizens. Austria put a Holocaust denier in jail for a while for statements he made in the UK, not Austria. Once he came to Austria they simply nabbed him and charged them under their anti-Nazi laws for something that didn't even happen on Austrian soil. So spare me the usual US bashing.

Re:Jurisdiction (-1, Redundant)

dinfinity (2300094) | about 4 months ago | (#47038795)

I was going to say 'nice try', but your source-free anecdotes are just too underwhelming.

Firing Squad (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47038027)

To send a message that yo don't spy on us!

1940/50's tech and cost/pricing data??? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47038037)

thats the best you got???

Re:1940/50's tech and cost/pricing data??? (1)

aliquis (678370) | about 4 months ago | (#47038155)

That was all the could find at least ;D

"Hey, while browsing your processor design I saw it looked exactly like ours!"

Talk about (5, Insightful)

Ukab the Great (87152) | about 4 months ago | (#47038047)

the pot and the kettle.

Re:Talk about (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47038207)

Oh, Shut up. Seriously...

Re:Talk about (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47038271)

One was racist while the other was comfortable with his heritage

presumably... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47038059)

Presumably, they will also be arresting NSA officials for their industrial espionage as reported by Snowden?

I mean, they wouldn't be duplicitous or anything, right?

Re:presumably... (3)

NotDrWho (3543773) | about 4 months ago | (#47038741)

Allow me to summarize the American legal system when it comes to international affairs:

Anything done by the U.S. = Legal
Anything done by U.S. corporations = Legal
Anything done by any country the U.S. doesn't like = Illegal
Anything done by any corporation that doesn't play ball with the U.S. = Illegal

Does that mean ... (5, Insightful)

Alain Williams (2972) | about 4 months ago | (#47038063)

that I can sue the NSA for trying to crack my machines and that the USA will extradite the NSA employees to the UK so that they can be tried in our courts ? Do the people at the USA DOJ understand the meaning of the word ''irony'' ?

This is more outlandish than even something that most political satire writers would have dreamed up.

Re:Does that mean ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47038425)

Do the people at the USA DOJ understand the meaning of the word ''irony''?

Allegedly, yes. I am not aware of precedents though.

Do as I say, not... (5, Insightful)

ThomasBHardy (827616) | about 4 months ago | (#47038087)

Does anyone else find this particularly ironic and posturing after the "Cisco Complains To Obama About NSA Adding Spyware To Routers" article earlier?

Do as I say, not... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47038809)

Either ironic, or a purposeful misdirection. Sadly it seems to becoming a staple of American politics. When you get caught with your hands in the cookie jar, either throw mud at the person who caught you (traitor, endangered national security, etc) or find a similar crime being committed by someone else and parade it through the media to draw attention away from yours.

Good luck with that. (5, Interesting)

pla (258480) | about 4 months ago | (#47038103)

No doubt, China will cooperate fully in extraditing members of their active military so they can stand trial in the US for following their orders.

Not an Obama hater, but seriously, Russia and now China? Trying to start WWIII on two fronts, in case one backs down? 2016 can't come fast enough.

Re:Good luck with that. (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47038191)

"2016 can't come fast enough." You're an idiot if you think that changes ANYTHING AT ALL.

Re:Good luck with that. (2)

jargonburn (1950578) | about 4 months ago | (#47038721)

No, 2016 will change something.
It could easily be for the worse, and most likely won't be any better, but it will change.

Re:Good luck with that. (4, Interesting)

just_another_sean (919159) | about 4 months ago | (#47038209)

If the democrats are the ones currently instigating WWIII than 2016 ain't going to help. If a Republican gets elected (unless it's Ron Paul, and I'm not holding my breath for that!) than their just going to look at the previous 8 years as laying the ground work. And any democrat that gets elected is going to assume that their election is voter approval of the current administration's policies, otherwise the voters would have ousted the Dems and brought in a Rep.

In other words, in a two party system, you're damned if you do, damned if you don't...

Re:Good luck with that. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47038469)

Than [reference.com]

Then [reference.com]

I advise you learn the basic rules of English before attempting to discuss political matters.

Re:Good luck with that. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47038245)

Maybe we could all file class-action suits against China too. My servers fight off thousands of attacks from China every day. I'd say that each attack is worth about $5 of energy, lost time, etc. And that's not even accounting for "pain and suffering"....

Re:Good luck with that. (1)

Zontar_Thing_From_Ve (949321) | about 4 months ago | (#47038471)

No doubt, China will cooperate fully in extraditing members of their active military so they can stand trial in the US for following their orders.

Not an Obama hater, but seriously, Russia and now China? Trying to start WWIII on two fronts, in case one backs down? 2016 can't come fast enough.

The response against Russia has been so weak that I am completely shocked that today Putin gave the order to pull back from the Ukrainian border. I am baffled about what this is supposed to accomplish in regards to China unless the real reason is to make the accused afraid to travel to the USA or possibly certain US friendly countries that might extradite them. Since the high ups in China love their foreign trips to "decadent" Western democracies, just stopping certain people from traveling and severely annoying them may be the real purpose here. I wouldn't worry about WWIII.

Re:Good luck with that. (3, Insightful)

SuricouRaven (1897204) | about 4 months ago | (#47038619)

There isn't much that can be done in response to Russia. Military action is out of the question: One does not start an open war with a nuclear superpower lightly. Economic sanctions hurt both sites, and Europe needs Russia as much as Russia needs Europe. They supply the gas that keeps the lights on.

Re:Good luck with that. (2)

gerardrj (207690) | about 4 months ago | (#47038947)

So stop complaining that we did the wrong thing and tell us what we should have done. Put up or shut up. There's a LOT going on politically behind the scenes with ambassadors and such chatting in isolated rooms.

There are three options I can see:
1. Ignore it and let the EU sort it out
2. Sanctions and hard rhetoric, some military posturing in the region
3. Invasion to reclaim the occupied lands. we (US, GB, etc) invade, China assists Russia, India assists us, Pakistan, Iran and the reset of the nuclear nations join in short order... see where this goes?

We chose the middle ground, what's your plan?

Re:Good luck with that. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47038561)

It's simple! Just send in Batman to break into a building in Hong Kong, capture the guilty parties inside, foist them up onto a clandestine airplane, and leave Chinese airspace without being forced to land or worse. Then they can be dumped in front of the Gotham City Police Department doorsteps and charged with whatever you want.

Re:Good luck with that. (2)

tquasar (1405457) | about 4 months ago | (#47038625)

The USofA isn't a monarchy, The House and Senate are controlled by special interest groups esp. the World Domination Industry, so cyber war is good(for) business.

say it aint so! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47038111)

Not cost and pricing info!! We're doomed! Doomed, I say!

Re:say it aint so! (1)

RockClimbingFool (692426) | about 4 months ago | (#47038639)

This data is exactly how the Chinese put most of the US based solar panel makers out of business.

Very Bad Precedent (4, Insightful)

HighOrbit (631451) | about 4 months ago | (#47038113)

Except for the special cases of crimes against humanity and "non official cover" spies, soldiers and civil servents should not be held criminally liable for doing their jobs or executing policy set by their superiors. Since we don't want our own military and government employees charged with 'crimes' for carrying out their duties, this is a very bad idea because it sets the precedent.

Re:Very Bad Precedent (5, Insightful)

jbmartin6 (1232050) | about 4 months ago | (#47038233)

On the contrary, every person should be held criminally liable for their actions regardless of instructions from "superiors". This would be an excellent precedent, let's get rid of the idea that a person can hide behind an organization or some other conspiracy and not be responsible for their own actions.

Re:Very Bad Precedent (4, Interesting)

radja (58949) | about 4 months ago | (#47038283)

There is already a precedent. German soldiers were tried and sentenced for carrying out orders in the concentration camps.

Re:Very Bad Precedent (2)

bickerdyke (670000) | about 4 months ago | (#47038489)

But it wasn't that simple.

If they just had tried soldiers for carrying out orders, they would have had to hold the same measurements against their own soldiers (who of course were responsible for quite a number of civilian casualities, too) To escape that quandary, the "crimes against humanity" were invented. Which kept allied soldiers from prosecution for simply killing people, but allowed to sentence the leading german heads for industrial mass-killing.

(To be fair: the allied forces concentrated on hanging the head honchos and turned a blind eye to the common grunts)

Re:Very Bad Precedent (1)

qbast (1265706) | about 4 months ago | (#47038627)

Which kept allied soldiers from prosecution for simply killing people, but allowed to sentence the leading german heads for industrial mass-killing.

(To be fair: the allied forces concentrated on hanging the head honchos and turned a blind eye to the common grunts)

... was simple fact that allies won and Germany lost.

Re:Very Bad Precedent (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47038301)

This would be an excellent precedent

...That was set long ago. Nuremberg, anybody?

Re:Very Bad Precedent (3, Interesting)

HighOrbit (631451) | about 4 months ago | (#47038329)

That opens the door to politically motivated prosecutions of civil servants who carried out a policy you just disagree with. Again, there are special crimes against humanity that everybody gets held responsible for, but do you really want to prosecute a worker-bee at the IRS because you disagree with an 'unjust' tax policy?

Re:Very Bad Precedent (4, Insightful)

mlyle (148697) | about 4 months ago | (#47038443)

If it's unjust enough, yes.

First, if we hold people immune/not morally responsible for whatever they do as part of misbehaving organizations, we've removed one of the final checks and balances from these organizations. We've effectively capitulated, saying that when you get enough people together they can turn into a crushing, evil leviathan, as long as there's not a blatantly clear organizational criminal conspiracy. People should be people, making (and held accountable for) moral judgments about the actions they take.

My former boss made a mistake with the whole AMT thing. He exercised below market rate stock options and held the stock until the value went to 0. He made no actual money, but ended up with a tax liability and IRS employees systematically liquidating his assets. There are supposed to be things in the organization to protect against this-- an ombudsman, proscriptions against proceeding with such blatantly unfair and unaffordable collection practices, etc. He's in his late 60s and they just took everything. I think the people who didn't pull the organizational lever to stop the process, presumably because it wasn't helping them meet their collection targets, should be in prison.

Re:Very Bad Precedent (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47038497)

Good thing he's your former boss because by your standards you'd be liable for his actions!

Re:Very Bad Precedent (1)

iggymanz (596061) | about 4 months ago | (#47038671)

"unjust" is totally a subjective concept. "Your racial equality is my reverse discrimination racism", etc.

Re:Very Bad Precedent (0)

HornWumpus (783565) | about 4 months ago | (#47038807)

So you think someone who leveraged themselves into poverty should not have to pay taxes based on the same rules as the rest of us?

This is not a game for children. Don't pay your taxes and get caught, expect to be financially sodomized.

Your boss should have had his assets in a family trust anyhow.

Re:Very Bad Precedent (1)

wiredog (43288) | about 4 months ago | (#47038659)

And when you get indicted for saying something which is perfectly legal to say where you are, but a capital offense in some other country?

Re:Very Bad Precedent (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47038287)

Gawd! Your generation. (sigh)
Did they no longer teach the lessons of Nuremburg anymore. You know, those trials against Nazis who claimed they were only following orders. The U. S. did not accept that excuse then. It cannot use that excuse now.

Re:Very Bad Precedent (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47038453)

Never heard of Hannah Arendt, right?

Sanctions (1)

jbmartin6 (1232050) | about 4 months ago | (#47038135)

Next up is sanctions against the individuals in question. No more iPhones for you !

Re:Sanctions (4, Funny)

pla (258480) | about 4 months ago | (#47038317)

Next up is sanctions against the individuals in question. No more iPhones for you!

I can hear the quote from Zhang Gaoli already: "After analyzing the sanctions against our military officers, I suggest to the USA to make their iPads using cardboard and trained fireflies".

Oh, wait, China makes most of the world's cardboard, too. Hmm... Woven cat hairballs? I think we still have at least some domestic production of those, if Fluffy hasn't outsourced it to a Mexican Hairless (don't ask) yet...

Re:Sanctions (1)

sjames (1099) | about 4 months ago | (#47038403)

Good luck with that, they make all the iPhones.

These indictments are pure lip service. (5, Interesting)

Apharmd (2640859) | about 4 months ago | (#47038139)

How will the US enforce them? This will just make our government look weak.

Re:These indictments are pure lip service. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47038201)

Obama's entire policy is centered around doing exactly that, so this plays in perfectly with his plan.

And the "Official" Buildup to WWIII Begins (0)

CanHasDIY (1672858) | about 4 months ago | (#47038195)

Storm's a'comin'...

Interesting Strategy (4, Informative)

diakka (2281) | about 4 months ago | (#47038257)

Surely they're not going to get any cooperation from the Chinese government on this, but by naming these individuals, they could be limiting the future career choices of those individuals. Want to work at a foreign compa ny? might be tough. Want to travel to the US or country that has extradition with the US? Better think twice about that. Even if you want to work at a local Chinese company, you might not be able to command as high of a salary if you can't get competing offers from foreign companies. A high percentage of well moneyed and educated individuals in China have plans to emigrate to foreign countries with the growing pains China has on the horizon, and some talented folks might be dissuaded from this career path. How this will play out in the real world is hard to say, but If the US didn't think it would have some effect, I don't think they'd do it.

Re:Interesting Strategy (1)

Intrepid imaginaut (1970940) | about 4 months ago | (#47038437)

Quote the opposite I'd say, these people are likely to be lionised in China and have their careers furthered by being prosecuted. And if they really want to go abroad they can have new identities manufactured wholesale by their government. Global politics are a whole other level.

Re:Interesting Strategy (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47038849)

> Want to travel to the US or country that has extradition with the US?
It's unclear whether even the US courts would recognise US jurisdiction in this matter (or whether the executive would actually want them to).

You can safely assume that no other country would do so.

Re:Interesting Strategy (1)

BradMajors (995624) | about 4 months ago | (#47038891)

Diplomatic passport.

The US complains about spying... (1)

cbreak (1575875) | about 4 months ago | (#47038279)

Now THAT is precious... Since when is spying illegal in the US? They even tamper with other people's hardware, suck up the data of whole countries, deploy MITM attacks on the backbone and more. Really, they should just shut up and at least not become a bunch of spineless hypocrites.

China is hacking? There's a surprise (3, Interesting)

bobbied (2522392) | about 4 months ago | (#47038339)

I'm just going to have a heart attack and DIE from that surprise..

This is SO STUPID. If you cannot get your hands on the hackers to arrest them, then why bother with saying anything? Just keep the honey pot in place and keep tracing where the attacks are coming from. Then, when you can get your hands on them it's special rendition time. This tell the public what happened only serves to notify everybody that you got hacked and then trying to take legal action to punish the hackers which has no hope of doing anything says you are inept and clueless too.

You knew I would drink from the glass in front of me, so you switched the glasses so the one in front of me has the poison... BUT, you knew I would think that so CLEARLY the glass in front of you has the poison.... etc.. We are right at the "Never get in a land war in Asia.. " Line being spoken by this administration, only they are not wearing the mask.

Re:China is hacking? There's a surprise (1)

Amouth (879122) | about 4 months ago | (#47038477)

Personally i always like seeding and feeding the honeypot very valuable information that looks legit but is actual wrong in a way that only lots of time and money spent trying to implement reveals..

Just submitted a comment to NYTimes (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47038361)

Of course, I didn't copy it before I submitted it but it went something like this:

All I can say is:

Go after those f*****s

When China complains that the U.S. is spying also, it behooves them to remember that the U.S. has not (publicly) used what it knows to undermine China. If Snowden's revelations were only a tiny bit true, the NSA has an immense amount of data on the Chinese leadership. Maybe enough (if released publicly) to overthrow them.

Consider this: the NSA recorded and retained EVERY phone conversation made in an ENTIRE country for 30 days. It hacked into Huawei and saw the source code for the routers networking China (no word on if they put in any backdoors). It obtained the e-mails of some of world leaders (sorry Merkel!), showing that even Germany's security, hardly a technological lightweight, wasn't good enough against them. It subverted critical worldwide security standards. It has put in hardware backdoors into critical networking and computer equipment.

Remember that the Internet (as well as computers!) and its supporting technologies (Intel, Cisco, Facebook, Twitter, Apple and, of course, Google and Microsoft) are American inventions. Think of all the traps that may lay in wait for China. Every CPU every packet could be compromised.

What sweetheart deals have been given to the families of China's steering committee? Who are their mistresses and where do they keep their money? What political assassinations (literal) have been executed? There is a digital trail that is there to be followed. The NSA can.

If the Chinese were wise, they would stop attacking US and consider who would lose in an all out cyber-war.

Re:Just submitted a comment to NYTimes (1)

socode (703891) | about 4 months ago | (#47038549)

Computers are not an American invention. You did well though to nab Germans to build rockets for you.

Re:Just submitted a comment to NYTimes (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47038727)

Modern computers are, since the transistor was invented in America. And yeah, getting some German rocket scientists was good, that's not exactly relevant here, is it?

Re:Just submitted a comment to NYTimes (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47038783)

And in the real world, people would be asking, "Why is it OK for the US government to commit exactly those same crimes and get away with it?"

You're a dope, and you make the rest of us Americans look bad. Please keep your stupidity to yourself.

its not hacking. (1)

nimbius (983462) | about 4 months ago | (#47038365)

this is industrial espionage, which can sometimes include the act of hacking however is not necessarily hacking in and of itself.
competent [world-nuclear.org] is an understatement when referring to a country thats manufactured twenty power plants and is in the process of creating another twenty eight. To think they would express any interest in reactor technology from a country that hasnt built a single reactor in more than 30 years is rather suspect. on the other hand, is entirely reasonable to suggest America is punishing china for failing to source their reactors and plants from say, General Electric. As exposed in cablegate, the US routinely becomes very litigious when faced with reluctant or recalcitrant markets that enjoy domestic manufacture of their heavy industry goods and services, especially in the case nuclear independence.

Re:its not hacking. (1)

iggymanz (596061) | about 4 months ago | (#47038657)

the NSA reworking network shipped out of the country also is industrial espionage

Net neutrality sucks (1)

NMBob (772954) | about 4 months ago | (#47038377)

The NSA was pissed, because all of the Chinese espionage traffic was slowing down their espionage traffic, and with everyone only getting an equal slice of the bandwidth...well Holder had to to something.

Hilarity ensues (3, Interesting)

Virtucon (127420) | about 4 months ago | (#47038387)

For decades now we've treated the Internet like an open house with everybody welcome and everybody allowed to come in and browse. As more and more technologies/designs/secrets have been put into computer systems they've been linked via Intranets within organizations and more importantly, and stupidly, on the Internet in the name of saving time or they've just been exposed because the people who are supposed to protect that information are incompetent idiots. That's the root cause here, not protecting the information that's held in those systems. China and other governments have employed script kiddies and any other tactics like purchased vulnerabilities to dig in, but again it's up to the holders of that data to protect it and to know what kind of enemies they're up against. Industrial espionage is nothing new, it's been around for centuries so why are we all shocked that this is allowed to happen? The secrets of the A-Bomb were leaked out of Los Alamos by sympathetic spies and some were executed for it. The B-29 bomber, a program that cost more than the A-Bomb to develop, was completely reverse engineered from one aircraft that made an emergency landing in the Soviet Union. It was copied right down to the same overheating engine problem that destroyed many of the aircraft. Chinese spies have recently been sent to prison for espionage [newyorker.com] so why is this suddenly news?

While I'm glad that the US Govt. is trying to do something about all of this it's a bit late and ultimately it's up to all the industries that have technology worth stealing to start taking steps to protect their IP and their confidential information. This also means protecting yourself from the US government because as we all know the NSA is also passively watching everything you do. My suggesting is that there should be sufficient air gaps between your R&D/Competitive information and Intranets/Internet for starters and also start employing a risk mitigation strategy in your data handling practices because chances are your sensitive information is probably already public knowledge somewhere.

That's a bold stratgey cotton... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47038435)

What an interesting way to tax the Chinese without taxing goods. Obama is looking slicker than Willy by the moment.

Well well well (1)

bickerdyke (670000) | about 4 months ago | (#47038505)

Look who is calling who a thief....

Do you hear that? (3, Funny)

jeff13 (255285) | about 4 months ago | (#47038523)

Do you here that? It's the sound of a billion people on the other side of the world loling.

Lé LOL (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47038653)

They'll sue pots and kettles left and right, these big-headed fools.

Shocked! Shocked! (1)

dlenmn (145080) | about 4 months ago | (#47038673)

I am shocked! Shocked! to learn that the Chinese are hacking us! We would never do such a thing!

Re:Shocked! Shocked! (1)

NMBob (772954) | about 4 months ago | (#47038735)

If only we could shut down Eric's like they did Rick's.

Liam Claim (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47038713)

And just how many US citizens have been ripped off by US Corpers in the 20th century ? A LOT ! How many in the 21st ? A LOT ! And the NSA does for the US Government what ?

Dry eyes in the house Holder; tough tittie.

Hay, old Russian proverb: the enemy of my enemy is my ally ! Look whose is the new Best Friend of US citizens !

Ha ha
FU

Dave Aitel (CEO Immunity, Inc.) says it best (3, Informative)

mysidia (191772) | about 4 months ago | (#47038751)

@daveaitel [twitter.com] All espionage is illegal in the country you do it against.

And since everyone in the world in any country, especially banks [irs.gov] (under FACTA) and foreign officials are under US jurisdiction, why not indict?

About time! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47038843)

Its about time.

Though I think its just a ploy for midterm elections so I don't think anything will actually come of it.

Universal jurisdiction: coming to your country (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47038899)

IANAL, but I have the impression that many common law countries who do not claim universal jurisdiction are moving towards the universal jurisdiction of civil law countries via an intermediate route of extraterritorial laws, which used to be regarded as suspect. That began with sex tourist legislation (think of the children) and a multiplication of extradition treaties also driven by think of the children inter alia.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?