U.S. Brands China as Largest Cyberspace Threat

[TeraMedia]

@booyaah:

So besides social engineering or internal threats

If the data is sufficiently valuable, and those are the only workable attack vectors, then those are the vectors that the attacker will successfully use at some point in time. I would argue in your system's case that the easiest vector might be the disgruntled and underpaid employee.

Suppose: An agent already started cultivating the relationship while the guy was in college (just look at what the KGB did...). While out at a bar, the guy divulges his unhappiness, or perhaps a financial problem. Or perhaps the agent even surreptitiously causes the financial problem, and then provides a helpful ear. The agent convinces the guy that he should do something - for any number of reasons - and the guy does. Even if the guy gets caught, the agent is still able to siphon the data back to home base.

Data security is an illusion. There are things you can do so that you know you were breached, and how, and by whom, but if the system is inherently designed to make the data accessible to someone, then that data can be exposed by at least that one person.

 

[thecolorblue]

[citation][nom]TeraMedia[/nom]FWIW, I having nothing against the people of China; I only have issue with some specific acts of its government.[/citation]
obama proudly boasts of the united states commiting acts of computer warfare against other nations (using the definition put forward by the united states govt)... acts that the us has says grants rights for full military retaliation. of course in its hypocrisy, when other countries do it the very same acts are magically redefined as terrorism... and the us media is universally silent on the matter.

think on that

 

[TeraMedia]

@blue: I have no specific reason to think that the US government was not involved in Stuxnet or Flame. Stuxnet itself seems to have been targeted primarily at slowing down and hampering the uranium enrichment program in Iran. When I see videos showing thousands of Iranian civilian men crammed into a "mosque" chanting "Death to America!! Death to Israel!!" that image is difficult to ignore. I know there's a lot more to that story, but yet it does exist. And just in case you forgot, Iran has already committed numerous acts of warfare against the US, starting with the unjustifiable capturing of our embassy and kidnapping of our citizens therein, and continuing through instigation of, support for and terrorist act support during acts of local government aggression in several neighboring countries. So since Iran has already decided to be at war with the US covertly, I really don't have a serious problem with the US fighting back... covertly. And in this case, without intended harm to human life or theft of civilian property. We endeavored to take out a centrifuge so that Iranians couldn't fry 100,000 civilians. They endeavored to kill or maim solders and civilians in an effort to do what exactly?

I don't think the hacking attempts by individuals located in China are terrorism, nor do I believe that the US government has labeled them as such. Nowhere in the above article do I see any form of the word "terror". What I DO see is the phrase "industrial espionage". Which again points to an indication that the US considers these acts to be economic acts, not terrorist. And since the government of China IS business in China, that points to state-sponsored economic warfare. I don't want this to be the case, but I can't afford to bury my head in the sand about it either.

 

[thecolorblue]

The point is that what the US is doing are acts of war by the definition proffered by the Obama administration and the Pentagon. If any country did to the US what the US openly boasts of doing abroad, there would be a US military response. Do you see Iran launching bombs? No. Who is committing acts of open warfare?

Your comment to mosques and people chanting is a bit obtuse... try turning on the television. National US network "news programs" are rife with calls for acts of open warfare against foreign nations ALL THE TIME. I think a little perspective is in order Terra.

A little more from Chomsky on this:
" Iran too has carried out aggression -- but during the past several hundred years, only under the U.S.-backed regime of the shah, when it conquered Arab islands in the Persian Gulf.

Iran engaged in nuclear development programs under the shah, with the strong support of official Washington. The Iranian government is brutal and repressive, as are Washington's allies in the region. The most important ally, Saudi Arabia, is the most extreme Islamic fundamentalist regime, and spends enormous funds spreading its radical Wahhabist doctrines elsewhere. The gulf dictatorships, also favored U.S. allies, have harshly repressed any popular effort to join the Arab Spring.

The Nonaligned Movement -- the governments of most of the world's population -- is now meeting in Teheran. The group has vigorously endorsed Iran's right to enrich uranium, and some members -- India, for example -- adhere to the harsh U.S. sanctions program only partially and reluctantly.

The NAM delegates doubtless recognize the threat that dominates discussion in the West, lucidly articulated by Gen. Lee Butler, former head of the U.S. Strategic Command: "It is dangerous in the extreme that in the cauldron of animosities that we call the Middle East," one nation should arm itself with nuclear weapons, which "inspires other nations to do so."

Butler is not referring to Iran, but to Israel, which is regarded in the Arab countries and in Europe as posing the greatest threat to peace In the Arab world, the United States is ranked second as a threat, while Iran, though disliked, is far less feared. Indeed in many polls majorities hold that the region would be more secure if Iran had nuclear weapons to balance the threats they perceive. "

I'll end by suggesting non-US Corporate media sources for you... as well as the advice to ignore Washington rhetoric completely and focus instead on the policies and actions therein... they are completely different and unrelated things.

"The United States is openly carrying out extensive cyber war against Iran. That's praised. The Pentagon regards cyber war as an equivalent to an armed attack, which justifies military response, but that's of course when it's directed against us. The leading liberal figure in the State Department, Harold Koh -- he's the top State Department legal adviser -- he says that cyber war is an act of war if it results in significant destruction -- like the attacks against Iranian nuclear facilities. And such acts, he says, justify force in self-defense. But, of course, he means only attacks against the United States or its clients. "

-Noam Chomsky 2012 from a talk titled "Who Owns the World"

 

[TeraMedia]

@blue:

You clearly have strong opinions about this. Some of your statements are certainly valid: what the US purportedly did with stuxnet in covert warfare represents an act that the US would conceivably label an act of war in reversed roles. And US support of dictators around the world during the cold war is bizarre, confusing and deeply upsetting at best. But I think we are both guilty of diverting this thread from the topic of the article, and I'm too busy, old and tired to get into a p*ing war with someone about US middle-east policy on a tech forum.

Back to the topic at hand. If hackers in China are attacking military systems, I have to ask why? Are these script-kiddies in search of cred, or is it something else? Sec-State Clinton has all but openly stated that they are acts committed by or at least with the coordination and support of the government. I'm not saying the US hasn't, isn't, or won't also be found guilty of trying to hack other countries' economic and/or military systems, but I am concerned that China is so brazenly open about it. This leads me to believe that the Chinese government holds the opinion that they can commit such acts with impugnity. In spite of what @blue says, we haven't dropped any bombs on China. We haven't declared open war. Any time a body in power (yes, @blue, that includes the US too) believes that it can commit illegal acts without repercussions, bad things happen. Those bad things end up being a blight upon humanity, no matter what entity commits them.