7 ms·

Chinese Hackers Target Universities in Pursuit of Maritime Military Secrets

106 points by malshe 8y ago

themodelplumber 8y ago
We are pretty open here in the US, sure. I mean I'd never expect things like [0] from China, let alone (what I'd expect to be) comparatively loud work coming from academia. I say let them keep trying, with some security tweaks here and there as needed/justified. But redouble our connections with academia. We need to harness massive growth in the face of such a conservative opponent, not more excuses to slow things down and stabilize around security so soon. 0. https://madsciblog.tradoc.army.mil https://madsciblog.tradoc.army.mil
- DeonPenny 8y ago
  This sounds crazy
  - Something1234 8y ago
    Sounds more like a Chinese agent trying to steal American secrets.
    - Workaholic_87 8y ago
      Ding Ding...we have a winner. I work in the maritime technology space for several large corporations and over the past 18-24 months it is crazy how many LinkedIn requests, cold emails, etc from pretty obvious fabricated profiles from China (and some RU) I've been receiving. side-note - completed a graduate program @ MIT
      - themodelplumber 8y ago
        Dear MIT graduate, please join our espion...err LinkedIn group thank you
- remarkEon 8y ago
  >not excuses to slow things down and stabilize around security so soon. What sort of signal in the noise would tell us that it is indeed time to slow things down and stabilize around security?
  - themodelplumber 8y ago
    Your enemies have more resources to gamble on openness than you do. Which they don't, not even close. Or their espionage _and_ replication skills, given the tech and human gap, are good enough to make up for it. Which, based on the domestic defense tech we are seeing from China, is not yet even close to proven. It's not a time to be cocky. But we must continue to leverage our comparatively open processes. That was a key lesson of the cold war.
    - kevin_thibedeau 8y ago
      Our open processes let the Chinese collect detailed records on every cleared person in the US when the OPM didn't bother to follow the NSA security guidelines.
      - themodelplumber 8y ago
        Even better reason to keep pushing forward on new plans and sacrificing security rather than doubling down on security. Make the information obsolete. There's always a hole or a mole somewhere, so you widen the economic-technological gap. Also in this arena it strikes me that western cyber forces are fortunate indeed that their potential adversaries have a famously centralized governing style. I wouldn't be surprised to hear that we already had some hilariously complete records of that sort from our own expeditions.
        remarkEon 8y ago
        >Make the information obsolete. You can't be serious. "Make private information public" is an absurd reaction to what is a clearly offensive operation.
- rangibaby 8y ago
  > let alone (what I'd expect to be) comparatively loud work coming from academia. The US was able to use their lead in computers to design stealth aircraft based on Soviet mathematics: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petr_Ufimtsev https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petr_Ufimtsev
  - simula67 8y ago
    This would prove the OP's point, wouldn't it ? Soviet Russians had interesting discoveries in semiconductors also [1]. However, they were never able to parlay it to economic success as US and other western powers were able to [1] https://hsm.stackexchange.com/questions/6367/did-russia-have-their-own-discoveries-in-the-development-of-semiconductors-and-t https://hsm.stackexchange.com/questions/6367/did-russia-have...
    - rangibaby 8y ago
      I wasn't trying to correct anyone, I just thought it was an interesting factoid
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
witcherchaos 8y ago
Why is US pretending to be friend with an enemy that is out to steal anything in US that isn’t locked down? Least of which, an enemy that is a dictatorship that has oppressed religion, democracy, free speech, and free will in its domain?
- devoply 8y ago
  Because business, the US business interest developed China for making a profit -- you have a billion smart people that work long hours for peanuts to exploit. But those people saw that as an opportunity to rule. The new strategy however seems to be one of containment by automating and moving manufacturing back to the mainland... What do you expect China to do with a billion people that have gotten used to a $6,000 average yearly wage. It's going to do everything it can to survive and grow... and the Chinese are as smart as Americans. Man vs. Man.
  - witcherchaos 8y ago
    Yeah its a shame. Most multinationals have already diversified out of China (usually less than 30% of capacity is left in China now). It’s the middle sized and small sized businesses that were too stupid not to diversify out of China, and now have to beg and plead for mercy from a malevolent Chinese government. And drag the US down with them. I hope the current administration can stand up against them.
- chibg10 8y ago
  Apart from reasons already mentioned (business), I suspect another large contributor is that the these types of articles only reach a relatively small audience in the US (albeit an audience that has outsize influence on FP matters). If these articles reach 10% of the population, I tend to believe the other 90% is probably far more worried about whatever domestic outrage storm (left or right) happens to be occurring on Twitter that day and probably has no idea why they should care about China one iota or how China will affect them. (They do know that China = marginally lower prices though) I believe this is a tragic mistake that will be looked on with regret in 20-30 years (or maybe less), but it is what it is.
- 8y ago
malshe 8y ago
Off topic but relevant: I posted this story today morning at around 9 am EST. It was flagged within 5 minutes and never got any visibility. This is a repost because that submission is effectively dead.
- early 8y ago
  Why are you posting link to pay to view articles? Referral bonus?
  - malshe 8y ago
    Oh you caught my little scam! /s There is no rule against posting a paywalled article on HN when there is a workaround. FWIW I had posted an outline link in the comment on that posting. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsfaq.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsfaq.html
neurotech1 8y ago
Non-Paywall version: https://outline.com/s9tgAF https://outline.com/s9tgAF
joejerryronnie 8y ago
The US is going to be in a hot war with China within 10-15 years. The only way to avoid this is to crush the Chinese economy through trade wars, forcible containment of Chinese expansion (e.g. Huawei ban, undermine belt and road), and covert ops - and that may not work. China is clearly an enemy of the US and is on the cusp of becoming an existential threat. Forget about breaking up big tech, is it time to start thinking about breaking up China? This is clearly an extreme position, but how extreme do you think it will be in 5 years?
- ackbar03 8y ago
  Why can't we live in peace bro
  - joejerryronnie 8y ago
    Because while you’re living in peace, the other guy will come for you in the night. It’s unfortunate but that’s how it’s been throughout human history. The only societies which have enjoyed peace are those that have the overwhelming means to destroy their enemies.
    - ackbar03 8y ago
      I guess that's why we are trying so hard to have those overwhelming means (I'm Chinese)
      - joejerryronnie 8y ago
        Yeah, I understand your position. It’s too bad, and quite scary that geopolitics may force us to pick sides one day.
    - ummonk 8y ago
      China has an ICBM arsenal that can hit the US and is developing a healthy conventional military as well. Therefore, given that they have overwhelming means to destroy us, as long as our leadership doesn't go completely crazy we won't try to come for them in the night and will be able to continue to live in peace.
jorblumesea 8y ago
In hindsight, I think US having good or even decent relations with China will be seen as a historic strategic mistake. The Sino-Soviet split seemed like a brilliant move at the time but birthed a monster. Giving even one ounce of legitimacy to the CCP was clearly a long term miscalculation. The soviet union would have fallen eventually anyways, there was no need to court demons. We used to cut these countries off and isolate them, now we do business with them while they steal our tech and manipulate our population. Now it looks like we have a vehemently anti-western authoritarian superpower in the making.
outline_bot 8y ago
Outline Link: https://outline.com/s9tgAF https://outline.com/s9tgAF
- themodelplumber 8y ago
  That didn't work here, unfortunately. This is probably begging for downvotes, but while I'd love to "pay for quality journalism" I barely have the attention span to justify the spend on a single source like the WSJ when my Twitter feed is full of blunt and yet highly educated speculation by the very people who write these kinds of articles. I can then get those authors' latest books through my library, or read other news sources through my library, etc. I wish there was a better system for the WSJ to use.
- dang 8y ago
  No bots posting to HN, please.

106 points by malshe 8y ago

We are pretty open here in the US, sure. I mean I'd never expect things like [0] from China, let alone (what I'd expect to be) comparatively loud work coming from academia. I say let them keep trying, with some security tweaks here and there as needed/justified. But redouble our connections with academia. We need to harness massive growth in the face of such a conservative opponent, not more excuses to slow things down and stabilize around security so soon. 0. https://madsciblog.tradoc.army.mil https://madsciblog.tradoc.army.mil

DeonPenny 8y ago
This sounds crazy
- Something1234 8y ago
  Sounds more like a Chinese agent trying to steal American secrets.
  - Workaholic_87 8y ago
    Ding Ding...we have a winner. I work in the maritime technology space for several large corporations and over the past 18-24 months it is crazy how many LinkedIn requests, cold emails, etc from pretty obvious fabricated profiles from China (and some RU) I've been receiving. side-note - completed a graduate program @ MIT
    - themodelplumber 8y ago
      Dear MIT graduate, please join our espion...err LinkedIn group thank you
remarkEon 8y ago
>not excuses to slow things down and stabilize around security so soon. What sort of signal in the noise would tell us that it is indeed time to slow things down and stabilize around security?
- themodelplumber 8y ago
  Your enemies have more resources to gamble on openness than you do. Which they don't, not even close. Or their espionage _and_ replication skills, given the tech and human gap, are good enough to make up for it. Which, based on the domestic defense tech we are seeing from China, is not yet even close to proven. It's not a time to be cocky. But we must continue to leverage our comparatively open processes. That was a key lesson of the cold war.
  - kevin_thibedeau 8y ago
    Our open processes let the Chinese collect detailed records on every cleared person in the US when the OPM didn't bother to follow the NSA security guidelines.
    - themodelplumber 8y ago
      Even better reason to keep pushing forward on new plans and sacrificing security rather than doubling down on security. Make the information obsolete. There's always a hole or a mole somewhere, so you widen the economic-technological gap. Also in this arena it strikes me that western cyber forces are fortunate indeed that their potential adversaries have a famously centralized governing style. I wouldn't be surprised to hear that we already had some hilariously complete records of that sort from our own expeditions.
      - remarkEon 8y ago
        >Make the information obsolete. You can't be serious. "Make private information public" is an absurd reaction to what is a clearly offensive operation.
rangibaby 8y ago
> let alone (what I'd expect to be) comparatively loud work coming from academia. The US was able to use their lead in computers to design stealth aircraft based on Soviet mathematics: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petr_Ufimtsev https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petr_Ufimtsev
- simula67 8y ago
  This would prove the OP's point, wouldn't it ? Soviet Russians had interesting discoveries in semiconductors also [1]. However, they were never able to parlay it to economic success as US and other western powers were able to [1] https://hsm.stackexchange.com/questions/6367/did-russia-have-their-own-discoveries-in-the-development-of-semiconductors-and-t https://hsm.stackexchange.com/questions/6367/did-russia-have...
  - rangibaby 8y ago
    I wasn't trying to correct anyone, I just thought it was an interesting factoid
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]

witcherchaos 8y ago

Why is US pretending to be friend with an enemy that is out to steal anything in US that isn’t locked down? Least of which, an enemy that is a dictatorship that has oppressed religion, democracy, free speech, and free will in its domain?

devoply 8y ago
Because business, the US business interest developed China for making a profit -- you have a billion smart people that work long hours for peanuts to exploit. But those people saw that as an opportunity to rule. The new strategy however seems to be one of containment by automating and moving manufacturing back to the mainland... What do you expect China to do with a billion people that have gotten used to a $6,000 average yearly wage. It's going to do everything it can to survive and grow... and the Chinese are as smart as Americans. Man vs. Man.
- witcherchaos 8y ago
  Yeah its a shame. Most multinationals have already diversified out of China (usually less than 30% of capacity is left in China now). It’s the middle sized and small sized businesses that were too stupid not to diversify out of China, and now have to beg and plead for mercy from a malevolent Chinese government. And drag the US down with them. I hope the current administration can stand up against them.
chibg10 8y ago
Apart from reasons already mentioned (business), I suspect another large contributor is that the these types of articles only reach a relatively small audience in the US (albeit an audience that has outsize influence on FP matters). If these articles reach 10% of the population, I tend to believe the other 90% is probably far more worried about whatever domestic outrage storm (left or right) happens to be occurring on Twitter that day and probably has no idea why they should care about China one iota or how China will affect them. (They do know that China = marginally lower prices though) I believe this is a tragic mistake that will be looked on with regret in 20-30 years (or maybe less), but it is what it is.
8y ago

malshe 8y ago

Off topic but relevant: I posted this story today morning at around 9 am EST. It was flagged within 5 minutes and never got any visibility. This is a repost because that submission is effectively dead.

early 8y ago
Why are you posting link to pay to view articles? Referral bonus?
- malshe 8y ago
  Oh you caught my little scam! /s There is no rule against posting a paywalled article on HN when there is a workaround. FWIW I had posted an outline link in the comment on that posting. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsfaq.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsfaq.html

neurotech1 8y ago

Non-Paywall version: https://outline.com/s9tgAF https://outline.com/s9tgAF

joejerryronnie 8y ago

The US is going to be in a hot war with China within 10-15 years. The only way to avoid this is to crush the Chinese economy through trade wars, forcible containment of Chinese expansion (e.g. Huawei ban, undermine belt and road), and covert ops - and that may not work. China is clearly an enemy of the US and is on the cusp of becoming an existential threat. Forget about breaking up big tech, is it time to start thinking about breaking up China? This is clearly an extreme position, but how extreme do you think it will be in 5 years?

ackbar03 8y ago
Why can't we live in peace bro
- joejerryronnie 8y ago
  Because while you’re living in peace, the other guy will come for you in the night. It’s unfortunate but that’s how it’s been throughout human history. The only societies which have enjoyed peace are those that have the overwhelming means to destroy their enemies.
  - ackbar03 8y ago
    I guess that's why we are trying so hard to have those overwhelming means (I'm Chinese)
    - joejerryronnie 8y ago
      Yeah, I understand your position. It’s too bad, and quite scary that geopolitics may force us to pick sides one day.
  - ummonk 8y ago
    China has an ICBM arsenal that can hit the US and is developing a healthy conventional military as well. Therefore, given that they have overwhelming means to destroy us, as long as our leadership doesn't go completely crazy we won't try to come for them in the night and will be able to continue to live in peace.

jorblumesea 8y ago

In hindsight, I think US having good or even decent relations with China will be seen as a historic strategic mistake. The Sino-Soviet split seemed like a brilliant move at the time but birthed a monster. Giving even one ounce of legitimacy to the CCP was clearly a long term miscalculation. The soviet union would have fallen eventually anyways, there was no need to court demons. We used to cut these countries off and isolate them, now we do business with them while they steal our tech and manipulate our population. Now it looks like we have a vehemently anti-western authoritarian superpower in the making.

outline_bot 8y ago

Outline Link: https://outline.com/s9tgAF https://outline.com/s9tgAF

themodelplumber 8y ago
That didn't work here, unfortunately. This is probably begging for downvotes, but while I'd love to "pay for quality journalism" I barely have the attention span to justify the spend on a single source like the WSJ when my Twitter feed is full of blunt and yet highly educated speculation by the very people who write these kinds of articles. I can then get those authors' latest books through my library, or read other news sources through my library, etc. I wish there was a better system for the WSJ to use.
dang 8y ago
No bots posting to HN, please.