I agree that the Times can't prove absolutely that the Chinese government was behind the attack. But they do provide a few strong pieces of evidence: (1) the un

I agree that the Times can't prove absolutely that the Chinese government was behind the attack. But they do provide a few strong pieces of evidence: (1) the university computers used in this attack were the same machines used in past attacks that were linked to China's military; (2) the attacks coincided directly with policy issues affecting Chinese officials. The article also had a relatively even-handed tone. It discussed the broader trend of hacks originating in China without linking the trend to the Chinese government, and it included an eloquent rebuttal quote from a Chinese official.