7 ms·
China Cyberspies Outwit U.S. Stealing Military Secrets
- wpnx 13y agoIt seems like we read articles like these almost every week. Can the US do anything but besides lodge complaints?
- ChuckMcM 13y agoOf course they can, what makes you think they aren't? But a more interesting question is to look at what information is presented and what is missing. How much is new, how much is old. Then on policy stories like this one I sometimes pop over to the senate web site and look at what's coming up on the senate calendar [1] and oh look, on May 7th they are having a hearing to talk about Hearings to examine the Department of the Air Force in review of the Defense Authorization Request for fiscal year 2014 and the Future Years Defense Program. Hmm, who is in charge of Cyber Command? Why it's the Air Force! Who would have guessed. (yes I can be that cynical) [1] http://www.senate.gov/pagelayout/committees/b_three_sections_with_teasers/committee_hearings.htm http://www.senate.gov/pagelayout/committees/b_three_sections...
- DannyBee 13y agoIt's not cynical when it's basically correct. You can usually tell what hearings are coming up just by looking at what ads are currently plastered in and around metro stations
- enraged_camel 13y agoIt's not cynical at all. You just demonstrated an example of a phenomenon that was well-documented in the 80s by people like Noam Chomsky. His book Manufacturing Consent talks in great detail about how mass media is used to manipulate public opinion.
- tptacek 13y agoThe logic here seems to be that because the mass media can be used to manipulate public opinion, it is used exclusively to manipulate public opinion.
- venomsnake 13y agoThat is the reason for existing of Fox news.
- enraged_camel 13y agoPlease point out where I said - or even implied - the "exclusively" part.
- Taylorious 13y agoToo Chomsky's lost all of his credibility by aligning himself with all of the New World Order crackpots out there.
- PavlovsCat 13y agoHow so? Be precise. Otherwise, how much credibility do you think a blank assertion like yours has?
- glurgh 13y ago>Hmm, who is in charge of Cyber Command? Why it's the Air Force! Is that really the case, though? Their own verbiage makes it sound different. "Who is assigned to USSTRATCOM? The men and women of USSTRATCOM come from all four services —Army, Navy, Marines, Air Force— and include Guard and Reserve members, Department of Defense civilians and contractors. Thus, the command is a unified command. This concept allows USSTRATCOM to adapt to the changing international political and military landscape with all military branches providing key input and recommendations."[1] and "Organization USCYBERCOM is a sub-unified command subordinate to U. S. Strategic Command (USSTRATCOM). Service Elements include Army Cyber Command (ARCYBER); 24 AF/ Air Force Cyber Command (AFCYBER); Fleet Cyber Command (FLTCYBERCOM); and Marine Forces Cyber Command (MARFORCYBER)"[2] Cyber Command seems to be headquartered at an army base, Fort Meade. [1]http://www.stratcom.mil/faq/#faq2 http://www.stratcom.mil/faq/#faq2 [2]http://www.stratcom.mil/factsheets/Cyber_Command/ http://www.stratcom.mil/factsheets/Cyber_Command/
- rdl 13y agoThe Air Force and defense industrial complex are using this as a budget point, but they are also facing legitimate threats to both government and private industry. Just like during the cold war, there were legitimate threats from the Soviets, but it also became a self-perpetuating thing. The irony is this time we're borrowing money to defend ourselves from the Chinese from...the Chinese. So at some point a marginal dollar spent on defense actually reduces our security! But I think infosec is one of the more efficient means of spending defense dollars; tens or hundreds of billions of dollars of other stuff I'd cut first.
- deleted 13y ago[deleted]
- btilly 13y agoIf you're going to assume that they are trying to manipulate public opinion, it seems more likely to me that they are pushing for CISPA to pass than an obscure Senate hearing. For those who don't see the connection, CISPA is intended to allow the government to help with exactly this type of situation.
- est 13y agoIt's just the same politics game played by other countries. Whenever Chinese military needs money, spread news outlets about horrifying US threats
- jamieb 13y agoIts not what they stole that worries me. Its what they modified and left behind.
- jussij 13y agoSo now we no why the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter is so far over budget. The Chinese tweaked the plans so when they tried building the thing nothing would fit.
- Irishsteve 13y agoAh the metric system could have caused that.
- pyre 13y agoThe metric system is a group of measures that was poorly thought out and people using said system cannot built fighter jet parts that fit together?
- a_p 13y agoThe only thing as breathtaking as the amount of information the Chinese military has stolen is how dysfunctional their military is. Here [1] is an excellent article about corruption in the Chinese military. The Chinese government is a bizarre mix of authoritarianism, greed, patronage and nationalism, and it has no clear structure. The military is no different. It doesn't matter how much technology they have; as long as the military has no internal cohesion and accountability, they will never overtake the United States. Here's a quote from the article, citing a 'princeling': " "China no longer has a paramount leader who can hammer down authority at crucial junctures. "Gangs" of patronage and bribery are congealing together, he said, adding that "Corruption is the glue that keeps the whole system together, after the age of idealism." " And another: " A third princeling, whose father once ran China's security apparatus, blames Jiang for sabotaging the last leadership transition in 2002 by refusing to relinquish control of the military. He said Jiang promoted dozens of generals who are, as he put it, either "henchmen" or "morons." The result is that nobody is really in control, he said. " [1] http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2012/04/16/rotting_from_within?page=full http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2012/04/16/rotting_fro... Note: You don't have to sign up for foreignpolicy.com to read the article. Just disable JS or stop the page from loading before the popup shows up.
- Asterick6 13y agoSuch articles like the OP's seem to cater to alarmism and hyperbole as these kind of events occur all the time. The difference here is that the US gov is being quite unprofessional by resorting to publicizing these events. Also, it's quite trivial/foolish to care whether or not any country will overtake the US (or another country). The way I see it - decreasing the US' influence may actually be beneficial. Rather than a unipolar/bipolar world, there can be a multipolar world. Maybe it'll reduce the crap that the US gov does/causes domestically and internationally, as it seems the fed believes it can ignore accountability because of supposed exceptionalism.
- ericd 13y agoThere has existed a multipolar world in the past, in Europe. That world was very frequently in a state of overt war, so it's not clear that that's a better state of affairs than an unchallenged dominant nation.
- venomsnake 13y agoWell ... if you don't want something hacked don't expose it to the internet. Is there a reason why corporations does not have inner network that is electrically disconnected from the internet where the sensitive data is stored and manipulated? Buying a second pc for every person is pocket change.
- yuliyp 13y agoPeople want to work remotely. They want email on their iPhones/Androids/Blackberries. They want to e-mail people at other companies. Every once in a while you need a nontrivial amount of information to cross that airgap. Then you have Stuxnet-style attacks to worry about, too.
- Vivtek 13y agoMaybe if they want to work remotely, they're just going to have to suck it up and admit that you can't do that with sensitive information. There have in fact been times when military secrets were considered more valuable than people's lifestyle or convenience. I'm thinking that if these secrets are not more valuable than the lifestyle and convenience of military consultants, then they're not actually all that live-or-die, are they? Instead, they're used as fodder for alarmism.
- raverbashing 13y agoYes I'd find it very hard pressed to find a place where you can work remotely. (Especially with all the useless crap IT pushes usually) Or make it easier, you can work remotely only by remote desktop access (like Google does internally). (Yes, you can capture a video of the data, but it's one thing to see a picture of a cad drawing, another one to have the file)
- lutze 13y ago'“When it comes to cyber security QinetiQ couldn’t grab their ass with both hands, so it cracks me up that they won,” Bob Slapnik, vice president at HBGary' I love the smell of irony in the morning.
- willvarfar 13y agoThe HBGray fiasco really clearly delineated that there were two HBGray companies. Yes, one was a moron. And the other was a moron for employing that moron :)
- gluegeorge 13y agoI wonder what the 1) US government has done against Chinese government industrial complex, 2) how much false information is spread this way.
- batgaijin 13y agoCapitalism only works when there are security precautions to make sure that business between corporations and individuals is safe. This is true on the physical level, and sadly, will have to be true at the digital level as well. If companies are infamous for being unable to do long-term accounting, why the fuck are we expecting them to suddenly hold themselves accountable to other long-term risk? I think it's stupid to cast this as the super whiz kid Chinese hackers and the poor SOB admins looking at the logs. There usually isn't even a proper budget for admins to be looking at logs.
- alan_cx 13y agoI find it surprising that it would seem that the only country on the face of this planet hacking foreign countries and business are Chinese. I'm so pleased that no one in the US, UK, Israel, Russia, South Africa, Pakistan, India, Japan, Canada, etc would clearly never dream of such things. On top of that, I cant even begin to imagine why countries other than the US would seek intelligence to help them in defence. Good job that no one is using computer or the internet to launch attacks on research and production facilities in foreign countries.....stuxnet.......oh. This might be new to some, but it it turns out countries spy and thieve off each other. But all we seem to see is lots of articles about the evil red commie Chinese, who we all happily do business with, including allowing to own our debt, hack the US. Strange that.
- Vivtek 13y agoFor the record, the Chinese don't actually own that large a portion of the US national debt, which is almost entirely held by American organizations. Propping up our currency, now, that's a looming problem - but one that will hurt China a lot more than it'll hurt us when it hits the fan.
- zimbatm 13y agoSources please ?
- adventured 13y agoThe Fed is the #1 individual holder of US debt (for sovereigns or banks). Social Security holds $2.7 trillion. China has about $1.1 trillion, just in front of Japan. China's holdings are actually not a big deal. If pressed to do so, the Fed could print a trillion dollars tomorrow and buy it all back (with some obvious consequences, but non-the-less). "The breakout of foreign-held debt shows that China was the largest holder, at $1.161 trillion (as of October 2012, most recent data). Japan came in second, at $1.134 trillion." http://useconomy.about.com/od/monetarypolicy/f/Who-Owns-US-National-Debt.htm http://useconomy.about.com/od/monetarypolicy/f/Who-Owns-US-N... There's a massive number of sources, but here you go: http://finance.townhall.com/columnists/politicalcalculations/2013/01/21/who-really-owns-the-us-national-debt-n1493555/page/full/ http://finance.townhall.com/columnists/politicalcalculations...
- Vivtek 13y agoThis just makes my brain hurt. "Cyber pillage" of the nation's "most closely guarded secrets" - so secret they were exposed on the Internet without, apparently, keeping up the security updates? I think maybe the fault lies not with the Chinese superhackers, but with your definition of "closely guarded."
- UnoriginalGuy 13y agoI grow weary of reading these "hacking," "cyberspy," etc articles. They always read like a plot of a bad action movie (Hackers, Swordfish, etc) rather than what people who actually work in the sector (IT, Security, even programming) have to deal with day to day. Just once, I'd love to read an article that talks in specifics, like how they got in (e.g. via exploit XYZ), how they spread (e.g. via hole in network policy XYZ), and what was done about it. Also, if this super-top-secret information is so vital to the US's national security then why was it in the hands of a private company? I might be misunderstanding something here, but it seems less like information vital to national security and more like information vital to that company's future success (i.e. industrial espionage). I cannot help but wonder if someone at this company (e.g. former CIA director) made a few phone calls and turned an industrial espionage incident into a national security incident in order to cover their arses.
- JonnieCache 13y agoThey're here to ease the passing of specific US legislation in aid of the military industrial complex. See https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5642408 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5642408 I really wish people would stop posting them.
- rdtsc 13y agoThat aspect often escape people. If this was too serious they probably wouldn't be writing articles about it, as that just tells others (say enemies) more information. This is looking like buttering up for a contract or new legislation.
- unclebucknasty 13y agoThere is virtually no distinction between the government and these private companies where national security is concerned, hence the term "military-industrial complex". National security is a profit machine.
- kaybe 13y agoSeriously, does anyone of you reading this here ever use the word 'cyber'?
- mechashiva 13y agoI worked, long ago, at the group in QinetiQ that got hacked. A couple of observations: 1. The Talon project (the robot pictured) is not, in fact, super secret. I worked with the Talon platform, and while my projects were "confidential", it wasn't some super secret thing. Would the government rather not have the Chinese have that IP? Of course. Is it at a security disaster? Hardly. That's not to say that they didn't have other, much more secretive, projects that were also compromised; it's just that the stuff being reported in this article isn't, like, nuclear launch codes. 2. IT security there (and, as I understand it, at similar government contractors) really was laughable. Total cowboy land. Assuming it hasn't revolutionized its security and culture, this attack didn't need to be some amazing exploit; it may have been a phishing attack or something similarly straightforward. So while the article lacks details, I'm not sure there's anything interesting to find here about the merits of the attack. FWIW.
- rdtsc 13y agoAs someone already pointed out above this smells like a PR piece for a new 'cyber-security' enhancement project (read: hand-out) and/or legislation.
- bluedino 13y agoAren't there any active packet-inspection devices out there (Palo Alto?) that can detect this kind of stuff? * Joe's working from home, but logged in? Disconnect! * Joe's transfered 80GB today when he normally does 2GB? Disconnect! * Joe's connecting from a VPN server in Croatia? Disconnect!
- squozzer 13y agoIt's foolish to either ignore this stuff or to panic. Learn your lessons and continue developing technology. We'll starve in the streets before the government stops trying to develop another billion-dollar superweapon. Even if the Chinese didn't have good hackers, they could do as the Russians used to do and turn Americans into spies with offers of money and sex. That said, China has a major social flaw that has persisted throughout its' history -- success can be just as fatal as failure. Any wagers as to how long Comment Crew will continue to operate before they turn on their government or are snuffed out pre-emptively?
- Kekeli 13y agoInteresting