backtop


Print 72 comment(s) - last by ninus3d.. on Dec 4 at 4:08 PM

Leaks include documents which raise serious questions about China's cyber-aggression

On Sunday the U.S. Congress and White House's reasons for backing Google so heartily in its conflict with the Chinese government over cyber-attacks and internet freedoms became much clearer.

A leaked U.S. diplomatic cable states:

A global computer hacking effort: China’s Politburo directed the intrusion into Google’s computer systems in that country, a Chinese contact told the American Embassy in Beijing in January, one cable reported. The Google hacking was part of a coordinated campaign of computer sabotage carried out by government operatives, private security experts and Internet outlaws recruited by the Chinese government. They have broken into American government computers and those of Western allies, the Dalai Lama and American businesses since 2002, cables said.

Silence Under Fire:  Why Didn't the U.S. Publicly Air its Suspicions?

If the information in the cable is to be believed, the central controlling body of China's government perpetrated what was perhaps the most serious online attack on a U.S. corporation in our nation's history.   The Politburo of the Communist Party of China, commonly referred to as the Politburo, is a 24-member council that controls China's most important decisions.

The cyber-attacks in question were dubbed "Operation Aurora" in the security community and occurred from mid-2009 through December 2009.  Their highest profile target was Google, who had its "secret recipe" -- its search engine source code -- stolen.  Other victims of the assault included Adobe Systems, Juniper Networks, Rackspace, Yahoo, Symantec, Northrop Grumman and Dow Chemical.

But if the U.S. government had strong evidence to believe that the Politburo masterminded the attack, why not just come out and say it, or take action?  

The answer is likely a combination of a complex set of factors.  First, China owns much of the U.S. government's debt obligations and is one of the largest trading partners of the U.S. commercial sector.  Economic action against the nation would be virtually infeasible.  Also, the U.S. is desperately seeking China's cooperation on a number of geopolitical issues including Korean stability, terrorism in the Middle East, and global warming.

The leaked cable is somewhat embarrassing to the U.S. government, regardless, given its relative inaction.  It will doubtless increase the East-West tension that exists between the two global superpowers.

And perhaps that's precisely what the perpetrators of this leak were hoping for.

Leaks: Preventing Wrongdoing, or Espionage?

It's little secret that 
Wikileaks, masterminded by convicted cyber-criminal Julian Assange, is no fan of the U.S. government.  Mr. Assange has accused the U.S. military of "murdering" innocent Afghani and Iraqi citizens.

Over 90 percent the documents aired since 2006 by 
Wikileaks targeted the U.S. or its Middle Eastern allies.  That percentage ballooned further on Sunday with the release of 251,287 leaked U.S. documents, of which the Google-related cables were part of.

A key topic of debate is whether this new leak was truly geared at preventing wrongdoing or represented an cyber-espionage attack against the U.S. 

The newly leaked documents indeed largely deal with the Middle East, which could lend some support to 
Wikileaks' claims.  On the other hand, documents like this one, while certainly fascinating for the light they cast on the inside of U.S. foreign policy, seem to have little effect on preventing military wrongdoing and are more likely to hurt the U.S. financially and diplomatically.

Mr. Assange in his early days in the hacking community was a vocal proponent of anarchy -- the philosophy that the world would be better off if its largest governments -- including the U.S. government -- collapsed.  The recent leaks, while damaging to the U.S. gov't and its diplomatic relationships, aren't likely damaging enough to achieve such a goal.  However, they are arguably Mr. Assange's most successful attack on the stability U.S. government yet.  And unlike past damage he inflicted on the U.S. government's credibility, this one seems to have a great deal of meat that has little to do with the war on terrorism.

Adrian Lamo -- the convicted ex-hacker who turned in Bradley Manning, the young soldier who leaked these documents -- condemned 
Wikileaks actions and called for the U.S. government to be more vigorous in pursuing charges against the leaks' masterminds, including Mr. Assange.

He writes in a press release:

Known co-conspirators reside in districts competent to arrest, prosecute, and punish these people for their involvement in one of the greatest breaches of trust in the history of our intelligence community.  [I]t would be irresponsible in the extreme for us to not use all the tools available to us in bringing them to justice.

Mr. Assange resides in Iceland, which has offered him protection from foreign charges.  He is currently wanted on an outstanding arrest warrant for unrelated sex crimes charges in Sweden.  

Wikileaks Taken Down

Wikleaks was coincidentally the target of a distributed denial of service (DDoS) attack over the weekend.  While it's tempting to suspect that China or the U.S. governments were responsible for this effort, that ultimately seems less likely.  As 
Wikileaks aptly pointed out, it had already passed the cables to news efforts, so attempts to take down the site would not prevent their release.

As of 10 a.m. EST on Monday the site appeared to be up and responding normally to requests. 
Wikileaks is hosted by a worldwide collection of servers and is blocked in some nations, including China.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: Much ado about nothing
By KingofFah on 11/29/2010 3:23:41 PM , Rating: 4
Your viewpoint is exactly the reason why I doubt there's much hope for the US: because I believe there is a significant amount who agree with your view and are typically more likely to vote. While there may very well be individuals or small groups of people who would indeed want to kill all US citizens (psychopaths perhaps), it is more accurate to say there are terrorist groups that want to take down the US government or at least stop them from interfering in other people's matters.

What did the average Russian citizen have against the average US citizen during the cold war, and vice versa, that wasn't borne out of government propaganda? There is a war on terror simply because the US was putting its nose where it didn't belong, yet again, and the violent groups in those areas retaliated. How dare they!? And they had the gall to attack US citizens with planes instead of the civilised, long-range-missile way!

You may say that there were terrorist attacks before, but the US was doing things before then which instigated those actions. Besides, there will always be people who try to take down what is perceived as morally wrong; they will be labeled as terrorists by one side, and righteous by the other.

It would kill most people to look at things from different perspectives. Under today's definition of terrorists, the founding fathers of the US could have been labeled as terrorists against Britain. To the victors go the spin of historical data. I'll add that, and this is purely my opinion, the founding fathers of the US would be appalled and shamed at the state of the US today: run by an oppressive, border-line totalitarian government, creating a surveillance state and eating away civil liberties on almost a daily basis. It exists to serve itself and its interests, not its citizens.

I have respect for the honour and courage it does take to be a soldier, don't get me wrong. However, the higher up in rank you go, the more corruption you find -- it's one of the universal laws of power when in the hands of any human.

Anyway, I'm not going into the concepts of human morality, power, greed, governments, idealism, etc. I rarely posted here in the past, and the rarity becomes greater as time goes on.

Pigheadedness, complacency, and ignorance will most likely be the harbingers of the end of the US as it is today, not intelligence, leadership, fortitude, or valour -- the latter list of things usually happens after the former has brought an irreconcilable state.

One final note: I used to believe that people who say "if you don't like it, then leave" were wrong simply because that's against the original American ideal. However, I've thought more and realised that perhaps they are right. Maybe people who don't share that patriotic, "the federal government is good and just", and "question everyone else before questioning our government" view should indeed leave as they truly are no longer American since what it is to be American has changed so much since its beginning.


RE: Much ado about nothing
By Dr of crap on 11/30/2010 8:34:59 AM , Rating: 2
A fine writen point!
If only more had this view.
Thanks, and post more when the points given on here are crap, like they can be.


"I want people to see my movies in the best formats possible. For [Paramount] to deny people who have Blu-ray sucks!" -- Movie Director Michael Bay














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki