USA owes China an apology; but I surely don't!

The concerted effort by USA politicians and media to paint China as the "world bad cyber citizen" kind of backfired with the Snowden revelations. As Larry Ellison is reported to have said to Steve Jobs, "That moral high ground is expensive real estate." Not only does the U.S. owe China and apology, but they owe the American public an apology too. Because the only people who DID NOT know the extent of USA penetration of China's assets were…the American public. That's the trouble with spook shops and secret programs. All it takes is one whistle blower and the proverbial jig is up. And as I wrote recently, that's the trouble with PRISM (see my posting here).

Our cyber security policy should have been public (a la The Morgan Doctrine). Sure, I've been ragging on China since the beginning of this adventure. But I had the guts to put the skunk on the table and name the offending Chinese server IP addresses (see my November 11, 2010 posting here). For two-and-a-half years, I've called out the people who attacked me, and I've called them out with specifics. My publicly spanking the Chinese has gone unanswered. So I don't owe you guys any kind of apology. Yep, I'm taking your assault on my systems personally. In public. Selah.

But the U.S. owes you an apology. I'd like to think that's why Jon Huntsman resigned as ambassador to China, and why he's promoting "hacking back" as the proper deterrent to Chinese bad Internet citizenship (see my reporting of the New York Times story here). It's clear now, however, why the USA has not wholeheartedly adopted Huntsman's hack-back proposal. Who wants to put themselves in the crosshairs of their own policy?

Yeah, like Larry Ellison said: "That moral high ground is expensive real estate."

Snowden Data Exhaust Prediction

While no major media has carried the story yet, data exhaust from my pattern-based analytics platform indicates major Anonymous operations in behalf of NSA-nemesis Snowden are inevitable. Stay tuned for July entertainment.

Reprise: Huawei walks into a Beltway bar…

Nearly a year and a half ago (specifically on Ocober 11, 2011—see my posting here), I offered $10 to the best shot at completing a joke that begins, "Huawei walks into a Beltway bar…" I didn't have any takers. But thanks to a U.K. Register headline yesterday (see the story here), I'll take my own shot:

Huawei's Richard Yu walks into a Beltway bar and shouts, "Hello, gents. I just wanted to announce that Huawei is acquired the cell phone manufacturing operation of Nokia." He tips his hat and exits the bar, whereupon six Nokia cell phones were unceremoniously dropped into full steins of beer.

Of course, Mr. Yu could make an absolute killing in the stock market if he shorted Nokia stock before making such an announcement. Who knows (or is that "Hu knows?"), but maybe Mr. Yu already did this before he talked to the reporter at his P6 announcement in London. Below is Nokia stock trading in today's aftermath:

The Trouble with PRISM

The trouble with our PRISM spying operation is, as illustrated in yesterday's Register article (see it here), is that it was SECRET. Which means that Snowden's assertion that we'd hacked the Chinese since 2009 would inevitably come out and undermine our foreign policy. It certainly wasn't secret from the Chinese. Or the Russians. Or the Iranians. No Grasshopper. It was just secret from the American public. Had our public policy been The Morgan Doctrine, then public Rules of Engagement (ROE) would have saved us a lot of embarrassment. Of course, it would have caused the "Beltway Bandits" serious revenue shortfalls, because we'd have made counter-hacking a money crop for the federal government, instead of the money pit it now is. Once again, let my "voice crying from the wilderness" suggest adherence to The Cyber Privateer Code of Conduct (read it here).

Possible Legal Defense of PRISM Leaker Edward Snowden

I'm flatly amazed at the seismic furor caused by the UK Gardian's citing Edward Snowden's outing of PRISM, given the lack of media attention given FBI Director Mueller's public attempt over 2 yeas ago to have Silicon Valley software companies build trap doors into their products (see my 2011 report here). Come on, media-tards! Just what do you think has been going on for the last two years?

If Snowden does manage to get himself extradited back to the U.S. for what the Guardian claims will be the risk of "major jail time" (see the story here), I would contend that his attorneys could argue that he did not technically violate the spirit of any NDAs he signed. Whenever I sign an NDA with a high-tech client, there is always a clause that says I'm not in violation of the agreement if the information I disclose is available through other publicly available sources.

I think one could reasonably infer the existence and functionality of PRISM from publicly available documents. I expect, though, that Snowden's trial will not be a public one.