China accused of mass cyber spying – but working out the truth is just the start of the problem

[steven36]

Has China found a way to spy on computers used by the world’s top tech firms and perhaps even the US government by implanting them with tiny secret microchips?

That’s what was alleged in a recent article from Bloomberg Businessweek, which claimed the US is investigating some form of spy microchip thought to have been inserted into Chinese-made circuit boards used by a company that produces video data servers. Its products have, according to Bloomberg, been purchased by Apple, Amazon and many other large firms, as well as the US departments of Defense and Homeland Security, Congress and NASA.

 

 

If proved true, these allegations would have huge implications for all the parties involved, as well as for global security, trade, and international relations. But the supplier of the allegedly hacked hardware, the companies that bought it, and the Chinese government have repeatedly and strenuously denied that the chips exist or that any server hardware was compromised. US and UK officials have backed the denials, while the FBI has stated that it is their policy “to neither confirm nor deny the existence of an investigation.”

 

The problem is that, at this stage, it’s impossible to know who’s telling the truth. The chip described in the report is said to be disguised as an extremely small and otherwise unremarkable electronic component. Proving that it even exists, let alone what it does, would require careful reverse engineering and security analysis by somebody with access to the allegedly afflicted hardware.

 

Security technology researchers I have consulted are adopting a “wait and see” attitude until more information emerges. Bloomberg’s story relies entirely on unnamed sources. Until somebody comes forward with a credible and detailed technical report, there is little to be gained by speculating about this specific incident. But if it were true, the nature of the incident would make it very difficult for authorities to respond.

 

The alleged attack quickly captures the imagination because it highlights a well-known challenge in cybersecurity: maintaining the integrity of end-point hardware. End-point hardware in this context simply means any device used to transmit or receive electronic messages. This can include obvious items like smartphones, laptops and servers, but also the growing body of “Internet of things” devices such as smart home appliances, self-driving cars and connected industrial machinery.

 

If an attacker gains physical access to an end-point device, this can subvert multiple layers of security. A well-known example was publicised in 2013 when a criminal gang installed covert “KVM switches” onto computers in London bank branches. These simple and inexpensive pieces of equipment let attackers monitor what a computer is doing and then operate it remotely. In this way, accessing the physical equipment effectively gets around a variety of protective measures.

 

The chips described in the Bloomberg article are a much more technologically sophisticated example of the same basic idea. In this case, it is alleged that the offending hardware is a specially designed chip the size of a grain of rice, manufactured and distributed at a large scale.

 

Legal action

If a government was able to prove an attack like this was carried out by another state, there are a range of responses available. A conspiracy to install and operate a system of this type would constitute a crime under the domestic laws of most states. Jurisdictions such as the US and UK could attempt to prosecute people involved in this kind of conspiracy using laws that criminalise unauthorised access to a computer and interception of communications, among others.

 

But any such criminal prosecution would face three significant hurdles. You would need to identify and indict the suspects involved in the conspiracy and physically arrest or extradite them. You’d then have to present enough evidence to persuade a jury of guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

 

In recent years, US law enforcement officials have announced criminal indictments of individuals accused of international cyber-espionage. But there is no realistic prospect that any of the accused parties, as employees of a state security agency, would be extradited to face charges in a US court. Instead, it is widely believed that such public announcements are designed signal awareness of state cyber-operations and potentially to deter such operations.

 

If domestic law provides little hope of action, what about international law? Even if overwhelming evidence is produced to demonstrate that the chips exist and that the Chinese government directed their deployment, as a legal matter there is nothing to suggest that these actions actually constitute a “cyber-attack,” as that term is used in international law.

 

There is a sharp distinction between state acts of violence, and non-violent espionage or psychological (propaganda) operations. Principles of international law require that any state response should be proportional and therefore limited in this case to non-violent options such as a diplomatic complaint or economic sanctions.

 

Nothing in the reporting suggests an outbreak of actual cyberwar. At worst, what we see is the latest chapter in a still developing, complex, and poorly understood cyber “cold war”.

 

Source : Hong Kong Free Press

[knowledge-Spammer]

when things is poorly understood   its best not make comments if the people no understand it well crazy

 

plus with the comment for cold war  did u see what trump just did  not smart

 

now i see y putin said this days ago

Putin on Nuclear War: We’re Going to Heaven, But You Lot… You Won’t Even Have Time to Repent

i never seen putin talk like that  he seem off

 

[dMog]

hopefully both countries will ALWAYS  see if nukes are used they all lose.... and it will always be a deterrent to all out war between super powers as they all know id one country  is looking at immanent total defeat, that thy will launch... great reason to never go to war...biggest threat i the world right now and foreseeable future will be and is a crazed nutcase with nukes...AND NO  not talking about North Korea...they know if they ever launched they would totally  not exist 30 minutes later....just Russia  and the USA  know that about each other.... M.A.D. really is a deterrent

[knowledge-Spammer]

3 hours ago, dMog said:

hopefully both countries will ALWAYS  see if nukes are used they all lose.... and it will always be a deterrent to all out war between super powers as they all know id one country  is looking at immanent total defeat, that thy will launch... great reason to never go to war...biggest threat i the world right now and foreseeable future will be and is a crazed nutcase with nukes...AND NO  not talking about North Korea...they know if they ever launched they would totally  not exist 30 minutes later....just Russia  and the USA  know that about each other.... M.A.D. really is a deterrent

days ago usa   threatens   russia with Navy

 

The Washington Examiner reported that US Internal Secretary Ryan Zinke said that the United States could use its Navy to prevent Russia’s potential energy supplies to the Middle East.

y its not a good thing to do it hurt canada and india and china

if usa do this it will hurt usa and canada india and china but the  winer will be russia if usa do as they threatens

[plb4333]

Countering China and its unlimited military powers using their latest technology, and no limit of range for their missiles since they're not in the treaty, breaking this treaty is the best thing to happen. To counter China and its rising army this is definitely needed, and sooner the better. With China having the 'China 1st' strategy, World-Wide, they are going to be a force to reckon with, there needs to be a balance of power and USA not getting bound by a treaty that limits the potential of equilibrium. Face it..

[knowledge-Spammer]

3 hours ago, plb4333 said:

Countering China and its unlimited military powers using their latest technology, and no limit of range for their missiles since they're not in the treaty, breaking this treaty is the best thing to happen. To counter China and its rising army this is definitely needed, and sooner the better. With China having the 'China 1st' strategy, World-Wide, they are going to be a force to reckon with, there needs to be a balance of power and USA not getting bound by a treaty that limits the potential of equilibrium. Face it.. 

lets be real for one min ok

balance of power  what u think russia is doing

with new weapons its balance of power 

 

but its ok we wait for usa or trump to fix hehehee  come to their senses

as u will have a very long wait for russia 

usa not want balance of power   they want usa top dog  but i am not sure usa is nowdays maybe with money yes but like we think its just paper

 

 

[jbleck]

On 10/21/2018 at 5:00 PM, dMog said:

AND NO  not talking about North Korea...they know if they ever launched they would totally  not exist 30 minutes later...

WOW... just WOW!

with this kind of thinking u are destined to fall... even if u're / think u are / think u "deserve" on top... the only way is and will be down.

 

superiority ... hmmm ... what do i despise most?

 

big dick contest... let's say u have the biggest one... do i have to tell u where u're able to hide it ?