Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Federal Charges Against Stanford University Researcher Expanded

justice.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 97 posts

Re: Federal Charges Against Stanford University Researcher Expanded

#41

Post by bowmessage »

astrange wrote: post #18
desine wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The file is still there. A regular delete just tells the disk that the segments of memory are available to be overwritten. Zeroing out (or /dev/urandom) the memory is an option, but even that is not 100% safe, especially when it comes to forensic labs with the ability to read and analyze platters removed from a complete, sealed disk. Really safe deleters will overwrite the segments of memory multiple times to scrambl…

> but even that is not 100% safe, especially when it comes to forensic labs with the ability to read and analyze platters removed from a complete, sealed disk. No, this is completely impossible and noone has ever done it. (An exception would be HDDs with bad block mapping because they might not actually erase some sector.) SSDs don't even have platters and you could probably recover things from the flash, but you can…

Once, I recovered 600MB of my /dev/null file from my zeroed out HD! It's like it was never deleted.

Re: Federal Charges Against Stanford University Researcher Expanded

#43

Post by thaumasiotes »

renewiltord wrote: post #34

Haha, their spies are undone by their bureaucrats. Amazing.

I have to admit, I wonder why she needs to submit documentation to the consulate specifying that Beijing Xi Diaoyutai Hospital is a front for PLA-employed doctors. Shouldn't they know?

Re: Federal Charges Against Stanford University Researcher Expanded

#44

Post by XorNot »

noir_lord wrote: post #17
desine wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The file is still there. A regular delete just tells the disk that the segments of memory are available to be overwritten. Zeroing out (or /dev/urandom) the memory is an option, but even that is not 100% safe, especially when it comes to forensic labs with the ability to read and analyze platters removed from a complete, sealed disk. Really safe deleters will overwrite the segments of memory multiple times to scrambl…

The world has moved on. You can’t transplant a platter into another reader, the old days of Guttman method don’t really apply anymore, density is so high that outside of research settings it’s just not practical. That said I still put a drill through mine before disposing of them, because close to zero isn’t zero.

The reality though is we have no idea what's possible here: we just know what's not commercially viable to offer as a service.

HDD recovery research is almost certainly a well-funded area of intelligence services, so I imagine their are a few electron microscopes and STMs which can do it.

There's certainly no military data destruction guide which doesn't start with "shred the platter to this grain size".

Re: Federal Charges Against Stanford University Researcher Expanded

#45

Post by soheil »

nradov wrote: post #23
Jtsummers wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As I understand it, the issue is the false claims in the visa application more than the military service. If they'd known she was an (apparently) active member of the Chinese military, she wouldn't have gotten the visa in the first place. In her visa application she admitted to prior military service and still received the visa so military service itself is not a fundamental blocker for Chinese visa applicants.

This is one reason why US visa application forms include a question which basically asks "Are you a spy?". Which might seem silly because obviously a real spy would never answer yes. But the real point of the question is that if the government finds later that someone lied on the form it becomes easier to charge them with a crime or deport them. Edit: some of you take comments way too literally so for your benefit he…

So you're saying when the government finds out a person is a spy that in itself is no big deal and that the government then still needs to find a horrendously more sinister thing they did like... lying?! in order to charge them with something?

Re: Federal Charges Against Stanford University Researcher Expanded

#46

Post by thaumasiotes »

president wrote: post #27

For every one of these cases, there are likely tons more that have gone undetected. Our open institutions don't work in a world filled with rich nation states with bad intentions and a populace and politicians totally misinformed about the current threat and/or unwilling to do anything about it. China has bested the US and we should at least be honest about it.

> Our open institutions don't work in a world filled with rich nation states with bad intentions

How does that sentiment apply here? Suppose the maximum possible malice on the part of the CCP, the PLA, and Song Chen. What could they have accomplished by getting a neurologist into a research project?

Re: Federal Charges Against Stanford University Researcher Expanded

#47

Post by HarryHirsch »

kevinventullo wrote: post #3

The superseding indictment alleges that she then attempted to delete a digital folder of documents on an external hard drive that she possessed containing records relating to her military service and visa fraud, including: - A digital version of a letter from Song, written in Chinese and addressed to the People’s Republic of China consulate in New York, in which Song explained that her stated employer, “Beijing Xi Di…

What exactly do they have on the lady, except that she is an officer in the PLA? OK, she's wearing uniform and is employed at a military hospital, but members of the US Medical Corps are officers at military hospitals. It's easy to understand why a physician might wish to work in brain disease. What secrets were exfiltrated?

Re: Federal Charges Against Stanford University Researcher Expanded

#48

Post by redis_mlc »

thaumasiotes wrote: post #36

> "This prosecution will help to protect elite institutions like Stanford from illicit foreign influences." ...how? I assume everyone was aware that if she said something, it was being said by her. Where does the illicit foreign influence come in? Suppose her cover story had been completely accurate -- instead of being a member of the PLA, she was someone who had "only" served in the PLA for 11 years. That person had…

I understand that you're trying to be open-minded, but it's not warranted when dealing with the CCP/PLA. They have been at war with us since Mao in the 1950's.

The US government primarily uses grant fraud charges against CCP spies, since there is fairly detailed paperwork around grants.

The CCP uses their spies and Thousand Talents Program to steal secrets and methods, patent inventions funded by foreign countries, and to control dissent.

When you hear of a PLA spy, they are some of the most motivated, most educated and smartest people in China - they have to be to get into the civil service (same with most developing countries - working for the govt is highly desirable in India and Indonesia also.)

So what your comment misses is that she was a CCP mole in our country, able to influence other people and a conduit for information back to the CCP.

Re: Federal Charges Against Stanford University Researcher Expanded

#49

Post by layoutIfNeeded »

noir_lord wrote: post #17
desine wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The file is still there. A regular delete just tells the disk that the segments of memory are available to be overwritten. Zeroing out (or /dev/urandom) the memory is an option, but even that is not 100% safe, especially when it comes to forensic labs with the ability to read and analyze platters removed from a complete, sealed disk. Really safe deleters will overwrite the segments of memory multiple times to scrambl…

The world has moved on. You can’t transplant a platter into another reader, the old days of Guttman method don’t really apply anymore, density is so high that outside of research settings it’s just not practical. That said I still put a drill through mine before disposing of them, because close to zero isn’t zero.

>You can’t transplant a platter into another reader

Then why do I get tons of results on YouTube of people doing exactly that, when searching for “HDD transplant”?

Re: Federal Charges Against Stanford University Researcher Expanded

#50

Post by [deleted] »

nradov wrote: post #23
Jtsummers wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As I understand it, the issue is the false claims in the visa application more than the military service. If they'd known she was an (apparently) active member of the Chinese military, she wouldn't have gotten the visa in the first place. In her visa application she admitted to prior military service and still received the visa so military service itself is not a fundamental blocker for Chinese visa applicants.

This is one reason why US visa application forms include a question which basically asks "Are you a spy?". Which might seem silly because obviously a real spy would never answer yes. But the real point of the question is that if the government finds later that someone lied on the form it becomes easier to charge them with a crime or deport them. Edit: some of you take comments way too literally so for your benefit he…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN