TaoSecurity Blog

Several weeks ago I attended an outstanding one day conference by the Jamestown Foundation titled China Defense & Security 2011 . The conference consisted of a series of speakers discussing various aspects of US-China national defense and security. Only one speaker concentrated on digital (or "cyber," love that word) items. The rest dealt with a wide range of topics. I took two pages of notes that I thought my benefit those not in attendance. I did not take notes on the one session that was considered "off the record." In this post I will summarize one page of notes. For the second page please see Experts Talk US-China Security Issues, Part 2 . Arthur Waldron cited three ways to view events in China: 1) nothing new is happening; 2) something is happening, but if we had an "expert" in the White House we would be able to deal with it better; or 3) something is happening, but because we're not sure exactly what, it doesn't matter who is in ...

Thanks to the sharp eye of a colleague from a mailing list, I learned of the article Is China Really Cyberdragon? in the English-language China Daily newspaper. The article is by Tang Lan, deputy director of the Institute of Information and Social Development Studies, China Institutes of Contemporary International Relations (a state-directed research institute). His writing displays all of the class elements of what I call Chinese defensive propaganda, in this case specifically addressing APT intrusions. I'll cite a few examples so you know what I mean. Hacking poses a threat to both China and Western countries and politicizing the problem will be detrimental to all. The beginning of the article introduces the reader to the concept that China is just as much a victim of hacking as the West. This is the first invocation of "the victim card," which is a constant aspect of Chinese self-identity and international relations. Tang Lan then dismisses accusations that the C...

I just read a thoughtful article by Michael O'Hanlon and James Steinberg, posted at Brookings and Foreign Policy titled Don't Be a Menace to South (China Sea) . It addresses thorny questions regarding China as President Obama visits South Korea, Japan, Malaysia, and the Philippines. I wanted to share five quick thoughts on the article, fully appreciating I don't have all the answers to this complex strategic problem. 1. "Many in China see the U.S. rebalance as ill-disguised containment, while many in the United States see Chinese military modernization and territorial assertiveness as strong indications that Beijing seeks to undermine Washington's alliances and drive the United States from the Western Pacific." I agree with these statements as being perceptions by both sides, but I also think they are closer to the truth than what the authors believe. I recommend Dr Ashley Tellis' monograph  Balancing Without Containment: An American Strategy for...

The 15 July 2006 issue of CIO magazine featured China Builds a Better Internet by Ben Worthen. I have multiple problems with this article, but I also think it's great to publicize what the world outside the US is doing! Here are some excerpts and commentary. [I]n research labs throughout China, engineers are busy working on another project that the Chinese government plans to unveil at the Olympics: China's Next Generation Internet (CNGI), a faster, more secure, more mobile version of the current one... CNGI is the centerpiece of China's plan to steal leadership away from the United States in all things Internet and information technology. The strategy, outlined in China's latest five-year plan, calls for the country to transition its economy from one based almost entirely on manufacturing to one that produces its own scientific and technological breakthroughs—using a new and improved version of today's dominant innovation platform, the Internet. "CNGI is ...

This week The Diplomat published an article by Dr Greg Austin titled  What the US Gets Wrong About Chinese Cyberespionage . The subtitle teases the thesis: "Is it government policy in China to pass on commercial secrets obtained via cyberespionage to civil sector firms?" As you might expect (because it prompted me to write this post), the author's answer is "no." The following contains the argument: "Chinese actors may be particularly adept in certain stages of economic espionage, but it is almost certainly not Chinese government policy to allow the transfer of trade secrets collected by highly classified intelligence sources to its civil sector firms for non-military technologies on a wide-spread basis . A U.S. influencing strategy toward China premised on the claim that this is China’s policy would appear to be ill-advised based on the evidence introduced so far by the United States in the public domain." (emphasis added) I find it interest...

I started appearing in media reports in 2000. I used to provide this information on my Web site, but since I don't keep that page up-to-date anymore, I decided to publish it here. As of 2017 , Mr. Bejtlich generally declines press inquiries on cybersecurity matters, including those on background. 2016 Mr. Bejtlich was cited in the Forture story Meet the US's First Ever Cyber Chief , published 8 September 2016. Mr. Bejtlich was interviewed for the NPR story Cybersecurity: Who's Vulnerable To Attack? , aired 30 July 2016. Mr. Bejtlich was interviewed for the Washington Post story It’s not just the DNC; we all send emails we probably shouldn’t , published 25 July 2016. Mr. Bejtlich was interviewed for the New Scientist story NATO says the internet is now a war zone – what does that mean? , published 22 June 2016. Mr. Bejtlich was interviewed for the Military Times story The Pentagon's controversial plan to hire military leaders off the street , published 19 June...