Clear and present danger of China’s Cyber-war
Cameron’s pact with India marks Britain’s growing concern over Beijing’s role as the leading perpetrator of internet crimes
When David Cameron, the British Prime
Minister, agreed to a new cyber-security pact with his Indian
counterpart, Manmohan Singh, on Tuesday, he was not just seeking to
protect the highly sensitive personal data of millions of British
households that is stored by Indian call centres and computer servers.
He was looking to establish a vital strategic alliance that would help
to protect Britons from the mounting threat posed by China’s formidable
cyber-warfare machinery. Of course, protecting individuals’ private
information is vital if Britain is to maintain its enviable position as a
world leader in online services. Untold damage can be done to personal
finances of Britons, and to Britain’s reputation, if access to such
information falls into wrong hands: It is estimated that a significant
proportion of the £73 billion (Dh409.85 billion) that Britain loses to
fraud each year is down to fake internet activity.
Yet, the threat to Britain’s
well-being caused by internet crime is relatively manageable when
compared with the havoc that would be wrought if Britain were to fall
victim to a sustained attack by China’s growing army of cyber-warriors.
In the unlikely event of a deterioration in relations between Britain
and China, experts believe the Chinese have the capacity to launch a
“clickskreig” against the British mainland, knocking out vital elements
of Britain’s national infrastructure, such as power stations and cash
machines — simply by pressing a button. Even in today’s more amicable
climate, Chinese firms and state agencies have been implicated in a host
of hacking attacks, on targets ranging from leading industrial and
technology firms, to the Pentagon and other US government agencies, to
the New York Times and Coca-Cola. So the threat posed by Beijing’s
growing expertise in this unprincipled art is certainly deserving of the
British prime minister’s attention — and that of the rest of Britain’s
security establishment. For, the truth is that China is now firmly
established as the world’s leading perpetrator of cyber-attacks. The
origins of the country’s love affair with this unprincipled form of
warfare can be traced back to the 1990s, when the Chinese military,
realising that it could never match the Americans in purely conventional
terms, developed the concept of unrestricted warfare, whereby its
enemies could be defeated without recourse to direct military
confrontation.
The two People’s Liberation
Army (PLA) colonels who produced the new manual, whose title literally
translates as “Warfare Beyond Bounds”, initially envisaged resorting to
tactics such as economic upheaval and terrorism to achieve their aims.
From the late 1990s, however, this doctrine has been rigorously applied
to cyberspace, where the Chinese have become adept at using the internet
to defend their interests, as well as using their expertise for
industrial espionage, by stealing technological know-how from western
competitors.
Such is the official
obsession with maintaining the country’s position as the world’s
pre-eminent power in cyber-warfare that the PLA regularly holds national
hacking competitions, in which the winners are rewarded with an
immediate commission into the organisation’s highly secretive
cyber-command. Maintaining supremacy in the dark arts of industrial
espionage has almost become a national obsession, with frequent
accusations that state agents have resorted to blackmail and murder. The
family of Shane Todd, a 31-year-old Californian electronics engineer,
are convinced that his unexplained death in Singapore last summer is
related to sensitive research he was conducting for a Chinese company
into hi-tech chemicals. What is beyond doubt is that, whether through
fair means or foul, hardly a day passes without the Chinese being
implicated in a high-profile hacking scandal.
Article continues below
Major American defence
contractors, such as Lockheed Martin, the Pentagon’s main supplier, have
been attacked on numerous occasions; in Britain, Chinese hackers have
been accused of creating a new “spyware” programme codenamed “Beebus”,
which has been used to attack companies involved in the development of
the next generation of drone aircraft. William Hague — who, as Foreign
Secretary, oversees the work of Britain’s intelligence agencies,
including the GCHQ listening post at Cheltenham — is said by Whitehall
insiders to be incensed by China’s conduct and has told his cabinet
colleagues that Britain must make its displeasure known to Beijing, even
if it means upsetting the lucrative trade ties between the two
countries.
Hague’s ability to claim the
moral high ground will have undoubtedly been helped by a report last
week in the New York Times (which saw its computer network come under
sustained attack after publishing an investigation into the financial
affairs of the relatives of Wen Jiabao, China’s former prime minister).
It has identified a 12-floor office building in Shanghai as the
headquarters of the PLA’s Unit 61398, which is said to be responsible
for launching hundreds of cyber-attacks against US government
institutions. Whether Cameron’s agreement with the Indians will help to
counter this threat, only time will tell. But the gravity of the
situation has become increasingly clear. For years, China has
consistently denied any involvement in such skulduggery. Today, those
protestations of innocence ring less true than ever.
— The Telegraph Group Limited, London, 2013
No comments:
Post a Comment
Comments always welcome!