Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
China Government Security United States Politics

China Says It Is the Target of US Hack Attacks 242

Posted by Soulskill
from the don't-worry-it's-just-1s-and-0s dept.
An anonymous reader writes "Officials at the Chinese Defense Ministry say hackers from the U.S. have been attacking Chinese military websites. 'The sites were subject to about 144,000 hacking attacks each month last year, two thirds of which came from the U.S., according to China's defense ministry. The issue of cyber hacking has strained relations between the two countries.' This follows recent hacks from people in China on high-profile U.S. sites, as well as a report accusing the Chinese government of supporting a hacking group. '[Defense Ministry spokesman Geng Yansheng] called on U.S. officials to "explain and clarify" what he said were recent U.S. media reports that Washington would carry out "pre-emptive" cyber attacks and expand its online warfare capabilities. Such efforts are "not conducive to the joint efforts of the international community to enhance network security," he said.'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

China Says It Is the Target of US Hack Attacks

Comments Filter:
  • About time. (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 28, 2013 @10:40AM (#43034057)

    About time. And preemptive my ass. China has been making state-orchestrated cyber attacks for years now. There's a war in cyberspace, did they just think the U.S. wouldn't show up?

    • Re:About time. (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 28, 2013 @10:47AM (#43034145)

      So it's wrong when they do it but not when the US does it, is that what you're saying?

      • by DynamoJoe (879038)
        It's wrong to do it. It's more wrong to NOT do it.
      • by Baloroth (2370816)

        So it's wrong when they do it but not when the US does it, is that what you're saying?

        That depends. Self-defense is not wrong, so if the US is doing it in self-defense, then yes. Since we know the Chinese have been launching attacks against the US for many years now, it seems likely that the US is in fact doing it in self-defense, so yes, it is OK when the US does it but not when they do it. Ideally, neither one would do it, but in the case of war the aggressor is in the wrong (barring any other extenuating circumstances, like the defender attacking it's neighbors, or committing genocide).

        • Re:About time. (Score:5, Insightful)

          by BasilBrush (643681) on Thursday February 28, 2013 @11:38AM (#43034789)

          Self defense? He started it! No, he started it! No I didn't! Yes you did! It's the stuff of children.

          In Britain, we used to have a "War Office". in 1947 they changed that to "The Ministry of Defence". They still do the same thing. It's words. Propaganda.

          If you honestly think when China does hacking it's attack, and when the USA does it it's defense, you've fallen for the propaganda.

          Do you know what real defense to hacking looks like? It looks like like patching up vulnerabilities. It looks like using better encryption. It looks like not connecting things to the internet that don't need to be connected to it.

          • Re:About time. (Score:5, Insightful)

            by fafaforza (248976) on Thursday February 28, 2013 @01:16PM (#43036171)

            Defense also looks like trying to get your own data to see what the other side found out from their hacks of you. Satellite photos of the other side arming? Decrypting their communication? Would those not count as steps towards your own defense? Or would you just close your eyes and plug your ears, build the biggest wall you can, and call that defense?

            Besides, China's hacking has been very much in the news lately. How do you know this isn't just China's PR push? How do you know China isn't simply counting a hacked home box sitting on a cable connection as a governmental hack? Don't you think the US would be a bit better about hiding their source?

            • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

              by BasilBrush (643681)

              Defense also looks like trying to get your own data to see what the other side found out from their hacks of you.

              It might involve hiring outside hackers to probe your own defenses and report any breaches they find. But hacking into some foreign government computers to see what they have in case anything of what they have is yours - that's attack, not defense.

              Or would you just close your eyes and plug your ears, build the biggest wall you can, and call that defense?

              Don't confuse two different issues.
              1) What I, you, they or anyone else WOULD do or SHOULD do.
              2) The nature of the action. (In this case attack or defense).

              Just because you may think your side should do something does not make it defense.

              Besides, China's hacking has been very much in the news lately. How do you know this isn't just China's PR push?

              How do you know China's hac

            • by cusco (717999)
              China's hacking has been very much in the news lately.

              Keep in mind which country spends several hundred million dollars a year on Madison Avenue marketing specialists. I'm not at all surprised that the US press corpse runs regular stories about Chinese hacking, we pay them very well to make sure that happens.

              I wonder what percentage of these attacks are actual government actions, and what percentage are random cyber-criminals looking to score. China is one quarter of the world's population, that
            • by Lesrahpem (687242)

              How do you know China isn't simply counting a hacked home box sitting on a cable connection as a governmental hack?

              Perhaps we should be asking the same of our government? Whose to say that many of these "Chinese hackers" we keep hearing about aren't, in fact, hackers from elsewhere using compromised machines on Chinese networks?

        • So it's wrong when they do it but not when the US does it, is that what you're saying?

          That depends. Self-defense is not wrong, so if the US is doing it in self-defense, then yes. Since we know the Chinese have been launching attacks against the US for many years now, it seems likely that the US is in fact doing it in self-defense, so yes, it is OK when the US does it but not when they do it. Ideally, neither one would do it, but in the case of war the aggressor is in the wrong (barring any other extenuating circumstances, like the defender attacking it's neighbors, or committing genocide).

          Considering how the US conducts itself in the world, thinking that the US is launching cyber-attacks only in response to Chinese action is incredibly naive. The US has likely been conducting espionage via computer since the capability existed. It amuses me that the US can complain publicly about the Chinese or Iranians without anyone pointing out that the pot is calling the kettle black.

          • The US has likely been conducting espionage via computer since the capability existed.

            The US/UK were spying on Israel using compromised mainframes as long ago as the 1960's, they also didn't tell their allies they could break WW2 encryption methods.

          • by cusco (717999)
            Even more amusing is that when the US catches Israel doing the same thing the FBI just quietly deports them back home.
      • by Jawnn (445279)

        So it's wrong when they do it but not when the US does it, is that what you're saying?

        Who said that? If you want to argue that war is wrong, fine. I agree, but please, don't even try to suggest that overtly hostile activity, sponsored by a foreign state's military, is not deserving of, at least, response-in-kind. As the GP pointed out, this is a war.

      • Its wrong for you to walk up and punch me in the mouth. Its generally considered OK for me to defend myself.

        Likewise, if Canada one day decided it didnt like us and invaded, it would be considered "unprovoked" and "problematic". For us to then respond with military force would not.

      • Re:About time. (Score:4, Insightful)

        by Shoten (260439) on Thursday February 28, 2013 @01:16PM (#43036161)

        So it's wrong when they do it but not when the US does it, is that what you're saying?

        There's a difference between taking action against a military target and taking action against a civilian entity. When Country A has its military attack civilian and military entities of Country B, but Country B's military only attacks Country B's military, this means two things: 1, Country B is following widely-accepted norms around military action (and Country A is not), and 2, Country B is unlikely to be the primary (initial) aggressor. Counterforce actions have almost always been the realm of a defending nation, while countervalue actions have belonged to aggressive nations.

        • by AmiMoJo (196126) *

          Maybe you didn't notice but there has been a cold war going on for ages now. The US has been spying on China pretty aggressively, and China regularly blocks US spy satellites with blinding lasers. The CIA is a para-military organization, not part of the military but doing missions similar to what other country's military intelligence branches do. The US also launched the first salvo in the cyber war.

      • We're not talking about the same types of attacks though. I think it's safe to assume all major governments conduct military and diplomatic espionage. However, the US complaint is that the Chinese military is conducting industrial espionage and gives the stolen secrets to their own industry.

    • Re:About time. (Score:5, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 28, 2013 @11:09AM (#43034413)

      About time. And preemptive my ass. China has been making state-orchestrated cyber attacks for years now. There's a war in cyberspace, did they just think the U.S. wouldn't show up?

      So has the USA. More facets of the Stuxnet story are slowly being unearthed and it now appears the thing was already under intense development in 2005 [arstechnica.com]. It makes one wonder how widespread this kind of thing really is and how early the various intelligence services started doing it... Post 9/11? In the early 90s? Stuxnet was a pretty sophisticated piece of kit, especially in 2005. It makes these Chinese hack and snatch attacks look a bit crude. Stuxnet was only discovered when the spooks tried to make it 'more aggressive' to increase the infection rate and found out that it's really easy to make it too aggressive and when that happens and your spyware starts infecting civilian computers in large numbers you also blow the lid off the operation.

      • About time. And preemptive my ass. China has been making state-orchestrated cyber attacks for years now. There's a war in cyberspace, did they just think the U.S. wouldn't show up?

        So has the USA. More facets of the Stuxnet story are slowly being unearthed and it now appears the thing was already under intense development in 2005 [arstechnica.com]. It makes one wonder how widespread this kind of thing really is and how early the various intelligence services started doing it... Post 9/11? In the early 90s?

        Yes, of course. The US and any other country has been doing this since the capability was realized. The fact that people get all bothered about the Chinese while seeming to think other countries, including the US, don't do the same thing, indicates to me that a lot of people don't really understand how the world works.

      • More facets of the Stuxnet story are slowly being unearthed and it now appears the thing was already under intense development in 2005 [arstechnica.com]. It makes one wonder how widespread this kind of thing really is and how early the various intelligence services started doing it... Post 9/11? In the early 90s?

        Possibly earlier than that - it's a pretty well established idea that all the cool tech we see coming out today, was being designed and implemented by secretive government organizations for at least a decade prior. The SR-71, the internet, Stuxnet, and uncountable other technologies were used to wage war against the enemies of the US government long before the public even knew such things existed.

    • by Luckyo (1726890)

      If you seriously think that West hasn't done several times more of the same long before China clued in, I have land on the moon to sell you.

      But we're also much better at propaganda. It's valuable to scream "I'm a victim" on every corner after you've beaten the shit out of someone much weaker then you who doesn't know that he's supposed to vocally complain. That's one of the things that East really loses in - they are afraid to lose face so they don't complain. As a result it starts to look like they're the

    • My guess is we've been at it for longer and much better since you *aren't* hearing anything about it.

  • On the contrary... (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 28, 2013 @10:41AM (#43034075)

    ...this kind of stuff will absolutely enhance network security. It's geopolitical stability that's in danger in the long term. But if we didn't destroy ourselves with nukes during the cold war, I think we'll come out of this one okay too.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 28, 2013 @10:42AM (#43034085)

    Sorry, can't find it in me to feel at all sorry for them.

    • by magarity (164372)

      Indeed; this is definitely a case of needing to call the Waaambulance.

    • That is the exact same thing I thought. It's kind of like Apple claiming someone else is patent trolling or Microsoft claiming someone else is engaging in anti competitive practices.
  • Tor Nodes (Score:3, Funny)

    by dfn5 (524972) on Thursday February 28, 2013 @10:44AM (#43034103) Journal
    U.S. claims Tor nodes were running on their machines and so not responsible.
  • by Anonymous Coward

    While China continues to loot the US.

  • What if.. (Score:4, Interesting)

    by houbou (1097327) on Thursday February 28, 2013 @10:48AM (#43034153) Journal
    If the US is under cyber attack from China and China is under cyber attack from the US.. Anybody ever thought that maybe it's a 3rd party group doing the work? spoofing IPs? etc.. Sheesh.
    • by chainsaw1 (89967)

      You mean like this?
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tomorrow_Never_Dies [wikipedia.org]

    • by Rob Riggs (6418)

      Anybody ever thought that maybe it's a 3rd party group doing the work? spoofing IPs? etc.. Sheesh.

      Really? Do you think that the IPs have not been spoofed? The hard part is tracking down the source of the attacks through all the various agents running on infected hosts -- and finding the sources that do not originate from an IP. Besides, what is the point of doing that? What do you think is the strategic goal of such a scenario?

    • Re:What if.. (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Anubis IV (1279820) on Thursday February 28, 2013 @12:09PM (#43035227)

      Anybody ever thought that maybe it's a 3rd party group doing the work? spoofing IPs? etc.. Sheesh.

      Or maybe they hacked our Internets and burned down our firewall? Seriously, IP spoofing is not as useful as the movies make it out to be.

      Spoofing IPs is easy, but it's only effective in a few situations, such as when you're sending a message with no expectation of a reply (e.g. spam e-mail, DDoS attack, etc.). If you're trying to break into someone's system, you need to be able to get a response back, and that means providing an IP address you can be reached at to your target. Now, you may try to anonymize your IP address somehow, such as through the use of proxies, VPNs, and other such technologies that can allow you to hide behind or within someone else's system, or you may spoof an IP address of a zombie computer you control and can use to route return packets to you, but at some point, an IP address you control needs to be provided to someone else, otherwise you have no way of getting back a response, and that address can be traced.

    • by jafac (1449)

      SPECTRE.

      It's SPECTRE - on both sides. They're attacking BOTH sides, trying to start a cyber war, so they can profit by selling both sides new cyber war weapons. It's genius, I tell you. And now, Mr. Bond, I expect you to die.

  • World is changing (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 28, 2013 @10:50AM (#43034171)

    This is a pretty good option for small nations who want to get back at larger ones.

    Step 1: buy server time with bitcoin from someone in China
    Step 2: hack some highly visible US companies with basic java exploits.
    Step 3: stand back and watch them hack each other for the next 10 years with professional grade stuff.

  • for a typical point of entry, that's usually a daily total, guess the US is not trying hard enough.
  • by crazyjj (2598719) * on Thursday February 28, 2013 @11:04AM (#43034359)

    Don't make me have to stop this car and separate you two!

    • Don't make me have to stop this car and separate you two!

      This is far more profound a commentary that it appears.

      Two wrongs never, ever make a right, no matter how much one may try to justify it.

      • by gstoddart (321705)

        Two wrongs never, ever make a right, no matter how much one may try to justify it.

        So, explain the death penalty then. Or, for that matter, the entire Iraq, er, 'conflict' since it ultimately had nothing to do with the stated reasons. Some people believe god has told them that revenge is good (an eye for an eye).

        People try all the time to commit a second wrong in response to the first one.

        It's a nice platitude, but it's far from universally applied. People like revenge and retaliation. Infer what you wil

        • Two wrongs never, ever make a right, no matter how much one may try to justify it.

          So, explain the death penalty then.

          It's wrong - I know some people will bitch about the cost of lifetime imprisonment, but what those people fail to realize is A) it's actually more expensive to execute a prisoner than to keep them locked up for life, [deathpenalty.org] and B) if our nation didn't focus so much treasure on incarcerating non-violent drug offenders and the like, there'd be plenty of money for lifetime imprisonments.

          the entire Iraq, er, 'conflict'

          Also wrong, for so many reasons...

          Some people believe god has told them that revenge is good (an eye for an eye).

          People have used 'god told me to' as a justification for fucked up behavior for millennia. Still w

          • by gstoddart (321705)

            Not being universally applied does not make it a "trite, meaningless statement." It just means that there are a lot of people out there who have absolutely no respect for one another.

            I'm not saying there isn't value to the expression ... but it's not a natural law or anything like that, and people don't seem to follow it for the most part.

            It's a moral observation that it would be better if we played nicely, but in the end, it's a sound bite -- which pretty much makes it a platitude. It's a nice sentiment,

            • I'm not saying there isn't value to the expression ...

              Then you shouldn't have used the term 'platitude.'

              It's a moral observation that it would be better if we played nicely, but in the end, it's a sound bite -- which pretty much makes it a platitude. It's a nice sentiment, I just see no evidence for it in actual human behavior in general.

              Go visit a prison. I'm certain you'll meet all sorts of people who wronged someone who wronged them, and are thus suffering the punishment, no matter how right they thought they were at the time.

              Then there's the whole thorny issue of who gets to decide 'right' and 'wrong' -- the Amish, or the Pastafarians?

              Shouldn't be all that thorny; the concept of Mores and Folkways [wikipedia.org] is pretty well established in human culture.

              It basically boils down to one simple question: Would you like it if someone did that to you? If the answer is 'no,' perhaps you should reconsider your actions

  • by Culture20 (968837) on Thursday February 28, 2013 @11:05AM (#43034383)

    hackers from the U.S. have been attacking Chinese military websites.

    Wake me up when the U.S. military is hacking Chinese civilian/banking computers or trying to SSH into everything.

    • hackers from the U.S. have been attacking Chinese military websites.

      Wake me up when the U.S. military is hacking Chinese civilian/banking computers or trying to SSH into everything.

      Wake you up when they're doing it, or wake you up when it comes out that they're doing it?

    • by Infiniti2000 (1720222) on Thursday February 28, 2013 @12:51PM (#43035863)
      For the record, it would be difficult for outsiders to discern the difference between true Chinese civilian and Chinese government-owned companies.
  • by Grayhand (2610049) on Thursday February 28, 2013 @11:12AM (#43034463)
    They're claiming an original art patent on spying on foreign governments using hackers.
  • Big Difference (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 28, 2013 @11:14AM (#43034489)

    Even if this were true (and all signs point that it's just a knee-jerk reaction by China), what the Chinese are reporting is attacks against their military infrastructure from US IPs. This is way different than what the NYT and Mandiant claim the Chinese are doing which is leveraging the capabilities of it's cyber army (god I hate that term) against private corporations for the betterment of it's government controlled businesses.

    That's a huge difference. Yes the US is probably targeting the Chinese army but it sure as heck isn't specifically targeting Huawei and giving the information over to Cisco.

    Seriously China, grow up.

    • by Cenan (1892902)


      while(!done) {
            string usIPAddress = addressList[random.Next(addressList.Length)];
            logFile.WriteLine(usIPAddress + ": connection established.. blah blah blah");
            done = logFile.Length == 144000;
      }

      PresentLogFileAsProof(logFile);

  • We need a leader who is willing to quote Kang saying "You've committed a wanton act of war!"

    Seriously, what is it going to take before people in our government are willing to publicly accuse China of acts of war?

    • by jadv (1437949)
      You mean, the USA needs drawers? Like, they have a lot of wardrobes or cupboards but no drawers on them? I believe the word you are looking for is COJONES.
      • by geekoid (135745)

        And the phrase YOU are looking for is "tener cojones"

      • Okay, so this gringo doesn't know the correct spelling. At least the intent is there unlike pasty white people who roll their R's in order to pander to activist latino groups. Pronouncing it "Dorrrrrrrritos" doesn't make them Mexican food.

    • Seriously, what is it going to take before people in our government are willing to publicly accuse China of acts of war?

      A sudden and marked decrease in free-trade lobbying dollars.

    • by cusco (717999)
      It will take having people running our government who don't have multi-millions invested in companies that depend on Chinese production for a large portion of their income.
  • YAWN (Score:4, Interesting)

    by benjfowler (239527) on Thursday February 28, 2013 @11:24AM (#43034619)

    Wake me when American military hackers are targeting Chinese civilians.

    What's probably happened, is that they got all butthurt at being found out for the criminal hacking and economic espionage, went rummaging through their logs, found a ping sweep from some US IP and said "we're morally equivalent to you, we get hacked too".

    The Red Chinese *still* come across as idiots and piss-weak Third World losers. That hasn't changed in the slightest.

    • by bmacs27 (1314285)
      That's because they are. They pretend like they are holding the cards, but they're clinging to power by a thread. We have so many pressure points we haven't even touched. Maybe we ought to have the leaders of Tibet or Taiwan over for a drink, and maybe sell our island friends some new subs. Or, we could give Japan some islands. We could label the commies a currency manipulator and slap tariffs on all their cheap third world crap. Better yet, let's just let their people surf the internet and read about
    • by geekoid (135745)

      AS is their plan. They do NOT want to loose 3rd world status. It gives them many exemptions on the world stage.

      "The Red Chinese" wow, 1950 called, they want your mentality back.

    • China is very poor at public relation marketing and packaging. The government hasn't really needed to spit out anything other than blunt propaganda that nobody in China believe (go check out comments in any Chinese news forum to see.) As their society becomes modernized with more and more PR, marketing people and lawyers trained in the West, they will eventually refine their PR just like us. They will enter the era of marketing just like us.

      The USA, on the other hand, has been very very good at that, both g

  • "Tear down this firewall."
    • by geekoid (135745)

      It would have been nicer if he had the balls to say it BEFORE it already started happening. Or even answered Russia request to help the transition.

      Worst. President. Ever.

    • Reagan would've just funneled arms to China through Israel to bribe them to stop. Then, made a half-assed ambiguous apology on national TV when he was caught.

      • I don't know what Reagan would do, I don't care, he's dead.

        But we do need someone to point out that what China is doing is wrong, that they don't allow free speech, that they are horribly oppressing the Tibetans and other minorities, and that they are hurting the environment. Instead we get politicians who go to China and hope they will continue to trade with us if we ignore their human rights violations.

        Would it be too much if once in a while, when he was talking about China anyway, he added something
        • by cusco (717999)
          A century ago the Chinese didn't have free speech, and millions of them died every year of starvation because they were too poor to buy food. Today they don't have free speech. China has over five thousand years of history, and this is the first period in all that time when portions (or all) of the country were not wracked by war, famine, or plagues. They'll get free speech eventually, just like they eventually got freedom from famines. Just because it's not on your externally-imposed timeline isn't act
          • They got freedom from famine when they stopped doing stupid communist things (ie, lysenkoism, great leap forward).

            they don't really give a shit what outsiders think.

            Believe it or not, they do.

            • by cusco (717999)
              Wow, I never knew that China has been communist for 5,000 years. Amazing the things you learn on SlashDot.
              • You're clearly in the bottom half of the people mentioned in your sig, but the point is, the Chinese people should be free to choose what kind of government they want. It shouldn't be imposed on them by the ruling class and the princelings. Without freedom of speech, they will not be able to do that. This isn't a cultural problem.
                • by cusco (717999)
                  It shouldn't be imposed on them by foreigners, either. Western-style democracy is not the universal and unique solution to every situation everywhere. It IS a cultural problem, at least in that their culture has never, in fifty centuries, allowed the free expression of speech and ideas to the majority. The majority don't expect it as a 'right' the way that we do, the idea that one can speak truth to power is still viewed with suspicion by many. It's as new to their culture as the idea of granting homose
                  • What part about my post made you think I wanted to impose anything on anyone?

                    Also, is your point really that they haven't had freedom of speech for 5,000 years, so they can't handle it now?
  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 28, 2013 @11:33AM (#43034743)

    The point of this announcement is to distract from the criticism they are receiving for launching hack attacks by painting a picture of everyone does it. So whether its true or not they would make this claim. I would believe they are receiving hack attacks from the US, but 2/3rds of them having a US origin sounds suspicious.

  • Behind this is the larger problem that we have no particular way of resolving international disputes on the internet. The net maps poorly to international boundaries. And if national law on hacking is young, clunky and often pretty awful, effect international action is pretty much nonexistent.

    • by bmacs27 (1314285)
      You can still apply pressure to states in order to squelch state sponsored overt theft. That's the benefit of spending all that scratch on things that go boom, and building international alliances with other developed nations. China lacks those advantages.
  • coughBULLSHITcough (Score:4, Insightful)

    by jon3k (691256) on Thursday February 28, 2013 @12:14PM (#43035297)
    The Mandiant report links the attacks to the Chinese government. To a specific group in a specific location during business hours Beijing local time. The Chinese see attacks from US IP address and blame US.
    • I see intrusion attempts from China and I blame China. Check your SSH logs dude!

      • by jon3k (691256)
        Of course, so do I. My point is the US has relatively solid evidence that the attacks are from the Chinese government. the Mandiant report linked them to the Chinese beyond simply using the source address. The Chinese don't have any proof beyond the fact that they come from US address space. That could be anyone using a compromised computer in ARIN address space.
  • "US Hack attacks" and US based Hack Attacks are two separate things, and it's an important clarification.
    SO less then 50,000 attacks, all of last year from computers reporting to be from the US.
    I mean, people need to stop, and I don't want to excuse it, but lets not get; crazy in the head about this.

  • If Chinese checked their state forestry administration (SFA) web servers my guess they will see the same patterns of "attacks". e.g. random scans from botnets.

    There is a real problem with definition what constitutes an attack. We also routinely see US peeps in government and industry who should know better sit in front of congress and pop off scary specious figures to bend reality twoard their policy goals.

    With all of these "we're being attacked" rumblings from government, warnings from Penetta and Sunday

  • by sabt-pestnu (967671) on Thursday February 28, 2013 @01:38PM (#43036509)

    > Such efforts are "not conducive to the joint efforts of the international community to enhance network security," he said.

    Perhaps statements like "we're just defending ourselves" are not productive towards network security. But cyber-attacking China? China cyber-attacking the US? You must be kidding.

    Even bacteria "know" that being attacked causes the greatest advances in defenses. What greater motivator can there be than an active and verifiable threat?

  • The US government's complaints were stupid because you know full well they do the same thing.
  • So what? Who cares? To all the lowbrows and halfwits who criticize the Chinese military for hacking the USA and elsewhere:

    Evidently they are some deviants living in a cave, completely oblivious to the offshoring of all those jobs, all that technology, and all the investment to China, and Micro$oft opening their source code to them some years back, and Boeing's subsidiary, Narus, selling them the software to make it easier to arrest, torturne, incarcerate and/or execute the pro-democracy and rights acti
  • "American laws prohibit any action including hacking that damages Internet security." He added that "to accuse the American military of launching cyberattacks without solid proof is unprofessional and baseless."

    ;)

God made machine language; all the rest is the work of man.

Working...