Special report: In cyberspy vs. cyberspy, China has the edge

Comments (17)
colonelP wrote:

Sure they’re ahead of us. We’re busy panicking at every hint of possible terrorism while combating it with full scale armies rather than the appropriate intelligence responses. We have no time to do anything else but be paranoid and respond inappropriately.

Apr 14, 2011 11:45am EDT  --  Report as abuse
leggett wrote:

China is the clear economic and moral leader of the world. The U.S. becomes more unstable for every day that passes. It’s a dangerous situation when a rogue state such as the U.S. has stockpiled so many arms. The world wont be safe until the U.S. military budget ia cut by 70%. Let us all hpe that it can be achieved peacefully.

Apr 14, 2011 2:17pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
effoff wrote:

This is an extremely big deal, and unfortunately represents patently aggressive and anti-social behavior on China’s part.

Apr 14, 2011 2:27pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
AdamSmith wrote:

This article is clearly one-sided. Why, like a good journalists, don’t the authors discuss the huge sums the US military is spending to infiltrate the Chinese networks? The journalists are being used as dupes by the US military, or are in cahoots with them.

The US has a giant budget in that area, and has developed the most advanced and lethal cyber-attack weapons, not just aimed at China, but at many countries.

In the past 50 years, what nation on Earth has murdered the most fellow human beings?

For the past 50 years, the United States has murdered more human beings than any other country on Earth.

When Hitler’s dead body went up in smoke in 1945, the evil in the German heart rose up and flew to America. Or am I missing something?

Just 3 months later, the US then dropped, not one, but two nuclear bombs, on Hiroshima and Nagazaki, populated almost entirely by women, children and elderly. The military aged men were gone. Japan was already defeated. It was brutal and unnecessary. General Eisenhower was against it.

The US invaded Vietnam, a country who never did us, or anybody else, any harm. American troops there burned, murdered, maimed, shot, strangled, poisoned and killed in the most brutal fashion over 1 million Vietnames human beings.

America invaded Iraq, another people that had never done anything against us. There, America used helicopter gunships, aerial bombs, artillery, aerial rockets, phosphorous bombs, and many more methods to murder and maim Iraqi men, women and children. The typical way of killing Iraqi children was shrapnel passing through their abdomens, limbs and heads.

Afghanistan? The same pattern. American young men, killing with wanton desire, using the term, “better get some, dude” to their fellows, meaning to kill some humans while you have the opportunity.

Meanwhile, America, itself the terrorist of mankind, vilifies other nations, like China or Iran or Venezuela, who over the past 50 years have invaded nobody.

Apr 14, 2011 4:33pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
avgprsn wrote:

It’s a bad thing if sensitive data is compromised, but it is in another regard a good thing if it acts as a catalyst for our own technology to evolve in ways that would not have come about otherwise.

Apr 14, 2011 6:20pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
ehross wrote:

All countries do it, the serious issue not talked about is the inclusion of controls built into “computer chips”

Apr 14, 2011 6:41pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
mgunn wrote:

No one hacks better that the US (quote from Richard Clarke).

Apr 14, 2011 7:25pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
upstater wrote:

OMG, President Obama, please save us from the Chinese cyber-hackers! Please spend hundreds of billions to make us FEEL safe from these attacks! Let’s hire every native-born US computer science grad and have them work for the NSA. Better to have them all working in the NSA than in the private sector. We need to be protected!

Apr 14, 2011 8:06pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
fromthecenter wrote:

What computer science grads? the corporations in America in search of cheap labor have sent most of those jobs to the BRIC and anyone else that can code a few lines and speak a little english.

Apr 14, 2011 8:15pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
greenacres wrote:

@ effoff wrote:

“This is an extremely big deal, and unfortunately represents patently aggressive and anti-social behavior on China‚Äôs part.”

As the US is also in the game but a tad back, doesn’t it also display anti-social behaviour?

Now the US military will allow one US serviceman or woman to control up to 10 separate identities based all over the world with the purpose of saying beautiful propaganda about the US.

Isn’t that downright dirty?

Apr 14, 2011 8:41pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
apollo1981 wrote:

You folks with your anti-US diatribes would definitely change your tune if China was the top country in the world.

As for “leggett” above, what’s it like working for the Chinese Communist Party and being able to spread anti-US and pro-Chinese propaganda in democratic countries? How much are they paying you?

Apr 14, 2011 9:12pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
THeRmoNukE wrote:

The Soviets were practically running Los Alamos, and we didn’t go to war. High technology will always be the target. I don’t recall ever having a particularly engaging relationship with USSR partially as a result of the manhatten project though, and I think this is a similar case. Let’s just spear-phish freedom propaganda and refuse to comply with domestic content filters. I’m tired of hearing how they have to moderate in order to maintain order and public safety. Yeah ya jackasses, why does any politician recommend blocking information?

Apr 14, 2011 9:33pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
NobleKin wrote:

And yet, US industry has sold its soul to Communist China in exchange for profit margins.

The patriotic jingoists who wave the US flag at every opportunity are also huge consumers of US/Chinese products that have only enabled China’s meteoric economic rise.

Who are the hypocritical traitors? (assuming you take the view that China is a looming threat)

Perhaps China will one day embrace democracy and freedom to a greater extent than today, but until then, how can American businesses and American consumers say they stand against communism and all that goes with it, and support their business as usual consumerism that will only continue to expand China’s growing power?

Apr 15, 2011 1:13pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
Chinesenobody wrote:

I think China and US should be friends. US is the only country in the west that has not done terrible things to China in the last 200 years! Think about the turmoils that China has gone through if you are familiar with that history. US was actually helping China to fight against Japan in WWII. US only made a mistake of choosing a wrong side during the Chinese civil war, and their budies in the Nationalist party fled to Taiwan. Today the reason most of time China and US are antagonizing each other(at least feels like so) is simply because US is in the way of Chine getting back to top. And any country, including the US, in this position is not going to simply back off. It will take some time for the 2 to get along.

Apr 15, 2011 2:02pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
Timelord wrote:

The decadence of the Roman Empire,
History repeats itself

T L.

Apr 15, 2011 4:43pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
xeriot wrote:

I think the U.S. and its reporters are very very adorable. During the 1996 Taiwan Strait crisis, the Chinese troops found their computers all froze up five minutes prior to the scheduled exercise. Unless the reporter can come up with something remotely close to this has been done by China to the U.S., I’d say the reporter is being adorable.

Another example, Gates once said he did not understand why China want wanted to build up its military power. ARE YOU KIDDING ME?

Apr 16, 2011 4:28pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
jmmx wrote:

Unfortunately the Bush administration rolled up so much debt to the Chinese that we no longer have any leverage against them.

The $1-2 Trillion invasion of Iraq is part of it.

Apr 19, 2011 11:18pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.