Chinese Hackers Infiltrate New York Times Computers • Hacker News Board

Re: Chinese Hackers Infiltrate New York Times Computers

#131

Post by magicalist » Thu, Jan 31, 2013, 7:42 AM UTC

temphn wrote: post #128

mc32 wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "This is why the Chinese government feels that it is under attack by the United States, and it does not see a line between NGOs, the NYT/WSJ, and the US government..." They are neither incompetent nor ignorant. They can tell who's who. When they want Industrial info, they know where and how to get it. When they want advanced tech, they know how to get it. When they want to retaliate "cybernetically" they know how t…

I would say, as others have pointed out, that this is in retaliation to the pieces about graft and wealth building by CN officials counter to the spirit of the revolution because it could cause internal PLA dissent/strife -and to see if they could obtain info about sourc(e)s of that info. Absolutely. But the greater context is that they see this as a skirmish in the larger campaign to discredit the PRC's current lead…

You have presented nothing to connect that to this, except the obvious one: that state sponsored actions have state objectives behind them. You're arguing by insinuation and equivocation, and present nothing relevant to this event. It's like a comment section on the Stuxnet worm being inundated with comments about Iran sponsoring suicide bombers in Israel. Yes, it's related, but the volume of "evidence" you've added to this discussion suggests you just want to have a conversation about something else.

Re: Chinese Hackers Infiltrate New York Times Computers

#132

Post by mc32 » Thu, Jan 31, 2013, 7:43 AM UTC

temphn wrote: post #128

mc32 wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "This is why the Chinese government feels that it is under attack by the United States, and it does not see a line between NGOs, the NYT/WSJ, and the US government..." They are neither incompetent nor ignorant. They can tell who's who. When they want Industrial info, they know where and how to get it. When they want advanced tech, they know how to get it. When they want to retaliate "cybernetically" they know how t…

I would say, as others have pointed out, that this is in retaliation to the pieces about graft and wealth building by CN officials counter to the spirit of the revolution because it could cause internal PLA dissent/strife -and to see if they could obtain info about sourc(e)s of that info. Absolutely. But the greater context is that they see this as a skirmish in the larger campaign to discredit the PRC's current lead…

Perhaps. The bigger 'threat' is not so much from foreign media per se, but from internal Chinese (activists) who would translate and disseminate this information via various channels. It's not as though most Chinese know how/bother to avoid the GFC or know how to read English. It's the internal 'conspiracy theorists' and anti-propagandists who the gov't fear the most which is why they have introduced laws governing internet cafes, ISPs, blogs, microblogs, and hire thousands to scrub sites of offending info, etc.

The gov't mostly want to control internal communication. I think in this case they were looking for info on where the NYT got this information, so they could track down and rectify the sourc(e)s.

Re: Chinese Hackers Infiltrate New York Times Computers

#133

Post by [deleted] » Thu, Jan 31, 2013, 7:51 AM UTC

natrius wrote: post #35

jebblue wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe I should have highlighted the whole drivel of a comment ... my point ... remains what I wrote. America trying to teach Arabs about the virtues of Democracy is +not+ why China attacks American computer systems.

No one said what you're disagreeing with. Try reading the comment again.

[deleted]

Re: Chinese Hackers Infiltrate New York Times Computers

#134

Post by JumpCrisscross » Thu, Jan 31, 2013, 7:53 AM UTC

magicalist wrote: post #131

temphn wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would say, as others have pointed out, that this is in retaliation to the pieces about graft and wealth building by CN officials counter to the spirit of the revolution because it could cause internal PLA dissent/strife -and to see if they could obtain info about sourc(e)s of that info. Absolutely. But the greater context is that they see this as a skirmish in the larger campaign to discredit the PRC's current lead…

You have presented nothing to connect that to this, except the obvious one: that state sponsored actions have state objectives behind them. You're arguing by insinuation and equivocation, and present nothing relevant to this event. It's like a comment section on the Stuxnet worm being inundated with comments about Iran sponsoring suicide bombers in Israel. Yes, it's related, but the volume of "evidence" you've added…

I thought it was helpful to see a rational state objective behind why the Chinese military may be hacking the New York Times (the article leaves motive unanswered beyond insinuating general malevolence).

"It's like a comment section on the Stuxnet worm being inundated with comments about Iran sponsoring suicide bombers in Israel."

This may not be a news flash for Israelis or Americans, but I bet it would make for informed reading for an Iranian (or even for an American sitting next to an Iranian). I've found foreign articles on current events illuminating of my own cultural blinders.

Re: Chinese Hackers Infiltrate New York Times Computers

#135

Post by JumpCrisscross » Thu, Jan 31, 2013, 8:01 AM UTC

Volpe wrote: post #72

babarock wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Very good points! >> it does not see a line between NGOs, the NYT/WSJ, and the US government. Aren't we all doing the same mistake when we refer to them? All we know is that the attacks came from China, so we safely assume it came from the Government? Why is it that each time something comes from China (a country with approximately 5 time more people than the US - source Wikipedia) we blame their government and treat…

China pushes an alternative world view[0] to the US, it doesn't involve individual rights, and free markets. It seems the majority in the west (primarily the U.S) view this as a 'menace' or a 'threat' to their way of life... hence the constant propaganda. EDIT: Just in response to the down votes, I thought maybe it was due to no citation. [0] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialist_market_economy

On every parametric cultural ontology I've seen the U.S. comes out at the top for individualism, e.g. Hoftstede's IDV: {US, 91; China, 20} [1]. This is why we believe in free speech, even if it's hateful speech, to a level alarming to the rest of the world. As Americans we are likely to see society as a composition of individuals than a cohesive system, or of individuals as points on the fabric of society.

[1] http://geert-hofstede.com/united-states.html

Re: Chinese Hackers Infiltrate New York Times Computers

#136

Post by don_draper » Thu, Jan 31, 2013, 8:02 AM UTC

ChuckMcM wrote: post #118

It will be interesting if we see the first use of national firewalls used to keep a nation-state boxed in from the outside. I'm not sure what the 21st century equivalent of a blockade or siege is, but that would come close.

Interesting idea but difficult to implement. The hackers hide behind proxies. Unless you could cut off proxies everywhere they would still find ways to get in.

Re: Chinese Hackers Infiltrate New York Times Computers

#137

Post by wavesounds » Thu, Jan 31, 2013, 8:07 AM UTC

Seems like putting a password on their printer and thermostat as well as telling their employees not to click random links or better yet setting up a security rule on their email router to not allow links and attachments from outside the network would have prevented this.

In essence these big companies are leaving the door unlocked and keep acting surprised when people that don't like them open it up and poke around inside. There needs to be more education and common sense this sounds like a very easy attack to prevent.

Re: Chinese Hackers Infiltrate New York Times Computers

#138

Post by magicalist » Thu, Jan 31, 2013, 8:18 AM UTC

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #134

magicalist wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You have presented nothing to connect that to this, except the obvious one: that state sponsored actions have state objectives behind them. You're arguing by insinuation and equivocation, and present nothing relevant to this event. It's like a comment section on the Stuxnet worm being inundated with comments about Iran sponsoring suicide bombers in Israel. Yes, it's related, but the volume of "evidence" you've added…

I thought it was helpful to see a rational state objective behind why the Chinese military may be hacking the New York Times (the article leaves motive unanswered beyond insinuating general malevolence). " It's like a comment section on the Stuxnet worm being inundated with comments about Iran sponsoring suicide bombers in Israel. " This may not be a news flash for Israelis or Americans, but I bet it would make for i…

...except the GP provided no rational state objective for this except insinuating general malevolence as perceived by the Chinese government. That's my whole point. There's no argument here except equivocation.

> This may not be a news flash for Israelis or Americans, but I bet it would make for informed reading for an Iranian (or even for an American sitting next to an Iranian). I've found foreign articles on current events illuminating of my own cultural blinders.

Sure, but Stuxnet was built for very specific purposes, and sponsorship of suicide bombers is so far down the list of motives that it becomes essentially a non sequitur. However, it does achieve very well a change in conversation from the implications of introducing a computer worm to sabotage a nuclear program to a discussion of how evil a regime is. The former is a conversation worth having, no matter how much you feel Stuxnet was justified.

Here, we have a comment about the "context" of this action, which is summed up for us pretty well above as "they see this as a skirmish in the larger campaign to discredit the PRC's current leaders, foment discontent, overthrow the government, and set up a (US-controlled) democracy" (which, incidentally, sounds exactly like the greater context for the great firewall and state-controlled media, as well). This completely ignores the very specific correlation the Times points out with a series of articles they ran on Premier Wen Jiabao. That accusation is much more specific then the "context" found above.

Re: Chinese Hackers Infiltrate New York Times Computers

#139

Post by justincormack » Thu, Jan 31, 2013, 8:22 AM UTC

javajosh wrote: post #104

toomim wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because that's actually how it IS in China. China is a giant corrupt honeycomb. There are blurred lines between corporation/government. Corporations are often a face for government interests. It's totally corrupt, and everybody knows that the face of an organization is not the actual motives behind the organization. A single Chinese clan will control multiple branches of government and multiple corporations. They all…

In point of fact I think this kind of hacking attempt is a kind of ham-handed attempt to control what cannot be controlled. The Chinese are pissed, and so someone put some money and time toward attacking the NYT. And not doing a very good job, either. The US, by contrast, has more direct ways to express its displeasure.

Maybe but more likely one faction thinks another has leaked info and wants to get evidence. The power struggles over succession to the leadership are very serious. Indeed the whole business of staying in power is serious eg current case of poisoning.

Re: Chinese Hackers Infiltrate New York Times Computers

#140

Post by Volpe » Thu, Jan 31, 2013, 8:24 AM UTC

untog wrote: post #114

Volpe wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That was my point. If it takes 20 years to see a 'benefit' is it that bad now, that they should go through that kind of mess?

When looked at from the very long term position, the removal of dictators is indeed a good thing that is worth suffering through. I'm not sure that anyone can judge whether it's worth it, though- that a personal judgement.

Dictators... Are you saying wen jiaobao is a dictator?

Given the vast improvement in the way of life for Chinese since deng xiaoping, and their continuos prosperity. Are we really sure that's the "best" thing to do.