5 ms·

WikiLeaked Cables Confirm China’s Politburo Was Behind Google Hacking Incident

145 points by abraham 16y ago

iwr 16y ago
This is not a new finding, Google is competent enough to realize who is behind such kinds of attacks. That's why they kicked up a big storm (threatening to leave China etc).
- shib71 16y ago
  There is a vast difference in "knowing" who was doing it, and having proof.
  - iwr 16y ago
    The cables are not necessarily proof.
    - shib71 16y ago
      Granted. But they're a lot more substantial than the crowd-sourced judgement of the ignorant masses.
  - deleted 16y ago
    [deleted]
cosmicray 16y ago
If you read that cable (which I have not) who will actually verify the authenticity of the content ? I don't see the US or China confirming or denying anything.
tptacek 16y ago
No, it confirms US suspicion of Chinese state sponsorship of that attack. But that's not news, even a little bit.
- aptimpropriety 16y ago
  To be fair, government confirmation of a 'contact' 'inside the Chinese parties involved' seems like at least somewhat of a new development. Maybe not 'proof', but definitely stronger evidence - maybe even a step beyond suspicion.
  - tptacek 16y ago
    The cables simply do not "confirm" China's involvement in the attack. Such confirmation, it seems to me, would be a blockbuster story worthy of the front page of CNN.
    - rtra 16y ago
      if the sources were deemed extremely reliable one would imagine that it would be enough confirmation.
    - waterlesscloud 16y ago
      Have you found the relevant cables somewhere online? I've been looking and am unable to locate the actual cables involved in this particular story.
- kvs 16y ago
  People who can authoritatively talk about such attacks can't or don't talk. So, information out there is mostly anecdotal at best or just plain speculation. These cables add to that stack of information but from a much higher level of involvement. It may not be new or news but it's certainly from more credible source than what we usually hear from.
  - tptacek 16y ago
    I'm objecting to the wording of the headline. I'm sorry if it seems like I'm arguing that there's no story at all. The "China's official involvement in Google hack confirmed" headline is a serious overreach.
danielharan 16y ago
TC manages to sensationalize a NYT story and get it all wrong. I really wish reporters would link to or provide citations to the relevant cables.
irq 16y ago
Has someone found the actual cable yet? All the cables released so far have been posted on http://cablegate.wikileaks.org/ http://cablegate.wikileaks.org/ but after sorting through them for a while, I can't find the one referencing Google.
- irq 16y ago
  Looks like Google has indexed the new release, and a quick site: search shows a few references to Google, but none of them seem to be the one referenced in this story. http://www.google.com/search?q=google%20site%3Acablegate.wikileaks.org http://www.google.com/search?q=google%20site%3Acablegate.wik...

145 points by abraham 16y ago

iwr 16y ago

This is not a new finding, Google is competent enough to realize who is behind such kinds of attacks. That's why they kicked up a big storm (threatening to leave China etc).

shib71 16y ago
There is a vast difference in "knowing" who was doing it, and having proof.
- iwr 16y ago
  The cables are not necessarily proof.
  - shib71 16y ago
    Granted. But they're a lot more substantial than the crowd-sourced judgement of the ignorant masses.
- deleted 16y ago
  [deleted]

cosmicray 16y ago

If you read that cable (which I have not) who will actually verify the authenticity of the content ? I don't see the US or China confirming or denying anything.

tptacek 16y ago

No, it confirms US suspicion of Chinese state sponsorship of that attack. But that's not news, even a little bit.

aptimpropriety 16y ago
To be fair, government confirmation of a 'contact' 'inside the Chinese parties involved' seems like at least somewhat of a new development. Maybe not 'proof', but definitely stronger evidence - maybe even a step beyond suspicion.
- tptacek 16y ago
  The cables simply do not "confirm" China's involvement in the attack. Such confirmation, it seems to me, would be a blockbuster story worthy of the front page of CNN.
  - rtra 16y ago
    if the sources were deemed extremely reliable one would imagine that it would be enough confirmation.
  - waterlesscloud 16y ago
    Have you found the relevant cables somewhere online? I've been looking and am unable to locate the actual cables involved in this particular story.
kvs 16y ago
People who can authoritatively talk about such attacks can't or don't talk. So, information out there is mostly anecdotal at best or just plain speculation. These cables add to that stack of information but from a much higher level of involvement. It may not be new or news but it's certainly from more credible source than what we usually hear from.
- tptacek 16y ago
  I'm objecting to the wording of the headline. I'm sorry if it seems like I'm arguing that there's no story at all. The "China's official involvement in Google hack confirmed" headline is a serious overreach.

danielharan 16y ago

TC manages to sensationalize a NYT story and get it all wrong. I really wish reporters would link to or provide citations to the relevant cables.

irq 16y ago

Has someone found the actual cable yet? All the cables released so far have been posted on http://cablegate.wikileaks.org/ http://cablegate.wikileaks.org/ but after sorting through them for a while, I can't find the one referencing Google.

irq 16y ago
Looks like Google has indexed the new release, and a quick site: search shows a few references to Google, but none of them seem to be the one referenced in this story. http://www.google.com/search?q=google%20site%3Acablegate.wikileaks.org http://www.google.com/search?q=google%20site%3Acablegate.wik...