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

U.S. and key allies accuse China of Microsoft Exchange cyberattacks

axios.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 267 posts

Re: U.S. and key allies accuse China of Microsoft Exchange cyberattacks

#251

Post by jollybean »

dalbasal wrote: post #205
bradford wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd ask that we be more thoughtful on this and evaluate separate allegations on their own merits. Why do you think invoking Cheney's statement is relevant to this discussion? As an aside, I'm not sure what's more frustrating: Witnessing the Bush administration circa 2001-2004 be called out on these lies, by numerous entities, and still march inexorably toward armed conflict, or... having to witness these lies being u…

I sympathize with your sentiment, but dishonesty in that case is relevant to credibility in this one. What, besides credibility of the institutions making the allegations, are these allegations' "own merits"? Agreed that a reflexive "they lie!" position isn't useful, but... trust doesn't seem like a reasonable default either. In the same vein, it would be naive to trust the Chinese NBS to report unflattering economic…

"What, besides credibility of the institutions making the allegations, are these allegations' "own merits"?"

Because China hacking is fairly widespread and so this is not just about a single institution, it's about many.

There's broad consensus here, it's not just 'Dick Cheney & Co.', it's many governments, many agencies, many businesses, academic institutions and the spying/hacking takes a variety of forms.

Yes, this an 'escalation' of sorts, because making it 'NATO' makes it both firmly an issue of national security for not just the US, but for many 'important' actors.

If anything, I think there's not enough action here.

It's definitely worthwhile to keep a very close eye on misinformation and propaganda ... but I think so far we're on the right path.

Re: U.S. and key allies accuse China of Microsoft Exchange cyberattacks

#252

Post by jollybean »

GaltMidas wrote: post #145

I don't think Chinese cyber spying is really news to anyone. What's different about this now is that the U.S., a few others and notably, NATO are specifically calling out China for it. That's a pretty heavy diplomatic change. Especially the inclusion of NATO.

That's the important take from this, that it's NATO meaning 1) It's national security and 2) NATO countries are acting in unison on this.

Re: U.S. and key allies accuse China of Microsoft Exchange cyberattacks

#253

Post by jollybean »

whoknowswhat11 wrote: post #55

The amount of hot air on this topic is incredible. The US has denounced, accused, etc Russia on cyber attacks It is now calling out and accusing China of cyber attacks. My guess - ZERO concrete action. Meanwhile, China says relatively little and focuses on actual power - trade ties, threats etc.

There will probably big new military investments in cyber security and it will be a bigger branch of the military.

Re: U.S. and key allies accuse China of Microsoft Exchange cyberattacks

#254

Post by jollybean »

throwaway4good wrote: post #43
wyuenho wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apparently you haven't read it at all These activities can be linked to the hacker groups known as Advanced Persistent Threat 40 and Advanced Persistent Threat 31 and have been conducted from the territory of China for the purpose of intellectual property theft and espionage.

Which is quite different from saying it is being done by the Chinese government. Read the uk ditto for comparison.

It's a huge difference diplomatically to state specifically 'The Chinese Government' vs. 'Groups within China'.

That said, this is Germany. All those Chinese factories are built with Germany equipment. They are leading the 'softer language' position.

But the EU and NATO are not the same thing, so Germany can have it's cake and eat it too on this one.

Re: U.S. and key allies accuse China of Microsoft Exchange cyberattacks

#255

Post by jollybean »

jollybean wrote: post #254
throwaway4good wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which is quite different from saying it is being done by the Chinese government. Read the uk ditto for comparison.

It's a huge difference diplomatically to state specifically 'The Chinese Government' vs. 'Groups within China'. That said, this is Germany. All those Chinese factories are built with Germany equipment. They are leading the 'softer language' position. But the EU and NATO are not the same thing, so Germany can have it's cake and eat it too on this one.

Edit: here is the situation on Germany's stance on China [1] from a German news source.

"If jobs in Germany depend on how we deal with controversial topics, then we shouldn't add to indignation, but rather carefully consider all positions and actions,"

Germany is the 'big country' using the most careful language.

[1] https://www.dw.com/en/germanys-reluctance-to-speak-out-again...

Re: U.S. and key allies accuse China of Microsoft Exchange cyberattacks

#256

Post by jollybean »

throwawaycuriou wrote: post #158
mjreacher wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I always see this is trotted out as to say that Iraq did not possess WMDs, however technically it is wrong, as WMDs (chemical weapons in this case) were found after the invasion, (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_and_weapons_of_mass_destr... ). While there was no evidence of nuclear weapons or an active program I believe that a better quote should be used since the pretences that it is quoted for are technicall…

Of course, because WMD is a manufacturered phrase with tautological utility. A kitchen knife wielded in a sinister way is capable of mass destruction.

It's not a manufactured phrase.

A knife is not generally a weapons.

Saddam 100% had WMD's and was capable of making more.

But he didn't have an active program, stockpiles were small and there wasn't really a huge risk of him selling to 'terrorists' etc..

The misrepresentation was really one of magnitude and capabilities and especially how the information is presented.

"He Has WMD's" is very true and legitimate (different than 'he has a knife'), but obviously the misrepresented context makes it a giant lie.

To this end, I suggest that the US would do better in their public communications if they revealed some Twitterable/TikTokable visuals and graphics which highlighted the nature of some of the incursions, so as to more strongly make their case i.e. it's easier to believe 'something material' than accusations.

Re: U.S. and key allies accuse China of Microsoft Exchange cyberattacks

#257

Post by DiogenesKynikos »

Goety wrote: post #250
DiogenesKynikos wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The EU doesn't ever go to war. Individual EU countries do. The UK, Spain, Italy and a few other EU countries took part in the illegal invasion of Iraq.

Iraq had weapons of mass destruction (chemical) and they didnt find evidence of nuclear weapons outside the email trail inside their military. It was not illegal

An invasion of another country that is neither carried out in self-defense against an imminent attack nor authorized by the UN Security Council is illegal under the UN Charter. This is one of the central principles of the modern international system.

> Iraq had weapons of mass destruction (chemical)

Even the US government admitted after the war that it could find no evidence of an Iraqi WMD program. All the US found were a few misplaced ancient, rusting artillery shells from the 1980s. These things were unusable, and were more of a danger to the people handling them than anything else. This is not the WMD stockpile the US claimed Saddam had. Nobody would ever have accepted to go to war on the basis of, "We think there are still a few misplaced, unusable artillery shells with degraded chemical agents in Iraq."

Re: U.S. and key allies accuse China of Microsoft Exchange cyberattacks

#258

Post by singularity2001 »

whoknowswhat11 wrote: post #55

The amount of hot air on this topic is incredible. The US has denounced, accused, etc Russia on cyber attacks It is now calling out and accusing China of cyber attacks. My guess - ZERO concrete action. Meanwhile, China says relatively little and focuses on actual power - trade ties, threats etc.

knowledge IS real power, especially knowledge of how to control your opponents infrastructure

Re: U.S. and key allies accuse China of Microsoft Exchange cyberattacks

#259

Post by Abishek_Muthian »

billyhoffman wrote: post #61
dmix wrote: post #21

> Following Microsoft’s original disclosure in early March 2021, the United States Government also identified other vulnerabilities in the Exchange Server software. > Rather than withholding them, the United States Government recognized that these vulnerabilities could pose systemic risk and the National Security Agency notified Microsoft to ensure patches were developed and released to the private sector. Finally th…

The challenge the NSA has is it possesses 2 separate missions that are often in direct conflict: secure the communications of the United States, and to collect, eavesdrop, and compromise the communications of other countries. The United States Atomic Energy Commission of the 1950s and 60s had the same problem. Their mission was to both regulate nuclear power as well as research and promote the widespread adoption of…

I concur, One who is responsible for punching holes shouldn't be the one to patch it.

Right now adversaries are just playing treasure hunt because of this.

Re: U.S. and key allies accuse China of Microsoft Exchange cyberattacks

#260

Post by GordonS »

SpicyLemonZest wrote: post #208
GordonS wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It wasn't about sending message. The theory is that Kelly could have revealed he was told to fake evidence, and could have provided confirmation of who knew what, and importantly, when. It was about timing too - it was a critical point for Blair and Bush getting the war they so desired. Keeping in mind there was already huge opposition to the war, proper 1st hand evidence being revealed at that point could well have…

The timeline's definitely not right for that. The British had already joined the war; Kelly died 4 months after the invasion.

Then I must concede that I am mis-remembering the timeline.
Post reply on HN