Anyone see a game changer here?
jgreco at ns.sol.net
Sat Jan 16 15:36:45 UTC 2010
> On Fri, Jan 15, 2010 at 2:07 PM, Bruce Williams
> <williams.bruce at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Mark Rasch, former head of the Department of Justice computer crime
> > unit, called the attacks cyberwarfare, and said it was clearly an
> > escalation of a digital conflict between China and the U.S.
> > As if the old threat models weren't bad enough...
> > Bruce
> It appears this is just western propaganda because:
> One analyst said Friday that he is not sure the attacks point to the
> Chinese government. Rob Knake, a cybersecurity expert with the Council
> on Foreign Relations, said his analysis of results from a technology
> firm investigating the attacks suggests that they "were not
> state-sponsored or the work of an elite, sophisticated group such as
> the Chinese military."
It's kind of a stretch to go calling it "western propaganda" just because
one cybersecurity expert "is not sure".
If another cybersecurity expert suggested that it seemed possible that
little green men might be responsible for the attacks, would you suddenly
believe in Martians?
There is almost always someone who will take up an opposing point of view.
It's certainly good to keep in mind that there's a margin for error in
these sorts of things. However, it's also smart to keep in mind that a
large number of people have looked at this issue, most certainly including
a slew of experts from the government, who would have had to agree with
the China assessment prior to the State Department decision to issue a
Joe Greco - sol.net Network Services - Milwaukee, WI - http://www.sol.net
"We call it the 'one bite at the apple' rule. Give me one chance [and] then I
won't contact you again." - Direct Marketing Ass'n position on e-mail spam(CNN)
With 24 million small businesses in the US alone, that's way too many apples.
More information about the NANOG