Two reports issued this weekend provided a stunning glimpse into the extent of China’s espionage operations using the Internet. Tracking GhostNet: Investigating a Cyber Espionage Network and The Snooping Dragon: Social-Malware Surveillance of the Tibetan Movement, served as clear warnings — especially to the Tibetan movement — that Chinese authorities are watching, listening, collecting and acting on the information obtained.
The second report said that the malware is “well written” and has been “devastatingly effective,” targeting, among others, foreign ministries, NGOs, news organizations, NATO and the Tibetan government-in-exile. The first report says GhostNet infected at least 1,295 computers in 103 countries, “of which close to 30 percent can be considered as high-value diplomatic, political, economic, and military targets.”
Beyond collecting information, the software developed in China, known as gh0st RAT, allows attackers to gain full, real-time control of, send instructions to and retrieve information from the targeted computer.
In the private realm, the implications of cyber espionage as a tool of repression are devastating. In one instance, a woman working for Drewla, a group that uses online chatting forums to reach out to Chinese and educate them on the plight of Tibetans, was arrested at the Nepalese-Tibetan border as she was returning to her village in Tibet. She was interrogated by Chinese intelligence officers, held incommunicado and presented with the full transcripts of her Internet chat activity. She was then banned from Tibet.
While the Tracking GhostNet report is careful not to attribute all cyber attacks to intelligence-gathering operations by Beijing, it is active in that domain and has used actionable intelligence collected electronically to pursue its objectives.
Although the reports paid special attention to Chinese spying on Tibetans, in the process the authors determined that of 986 known infected IP hosts in 93 countries, Taiwan had the most — 148 — including its embassy in Swaziland, the Institute for Information Industry, Net Trade, the Taiwan External Trade Development Council and the Government Service Network.
Coupled with evidence that, despite President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) cross-strait peace initiative, China has not taken the military option off the table, revelations of China’s cyber espionage network raise questions about the wisdom of intensifying relations with China. If, as can be assumed, China remains committed to targeting Taiwan for intelligence collection, then the more electronic contact there is between the two sides, the greater the opportunities will be for the transmission of malware. The repercussions in the banking and high-tech sectors, not to mention defense and public safety, could be huge.
China could target individuals, especially in pro-independence groups and opponents of cross-strait agreements. As fear of, and opposition to, agreements with China that risk undermining the sovereignty of Taiwan increases, China can be expected to monitor dissidents in ways that recall its treatment of Tibetans, as outlined in the reports.
Chinese intelligence has a long history of such activity but until recently its espionage was done through human intelligence. Now that communication is mostly electronic, however, espionage can be carried out remotely and with greater efficiency. Given the stakes, Taiwan should conduct its own study on the matter.
Despite the complicated legacy of colonialism, relations between Taipei and Tokyo continue to blossom in these troubled times. As East Asia continues to battle the COVID-19 pandemic and struggles to contain an increasingly aggressive China, our democratic archipelago benefits from a new high in its security relations with Japan. Remarkably, with its generous vaccine diplomacy and the unprecedented explicit mention of the situation surrounding Taiwan in Japan’s annual defense white paper, Tokyo began to embrace a novel, two-track, comprehensive approach for engaging Taiwan. The first track deals with non-traditional security such as public health and vaccine donations. Japan has generously supported
As the incursions by China into Taiwan’s air defense identification zone intensify, the international community’s anxiety has risen over the question of whether the US military would become directly involved in the case of an attack on Taiwan. Washington’s long-held policy of “strategic ambiguity” does little to ease the trepidation. The rationale universally espoused on “strategic ambiguity” is that an announced commitment from Washington to directly defend Taiwan would encourage Taiwanese independence and consequently bring forth a Chinese military attack and a possible nuclear confrontation between two superpowers. However, this line of argument could soon lose steam if the subject is viewed from
Having deceived the world about its nuclear capabilities while preparing for an arms race, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) is now using its increasing nuclear forces for virtual nuclear coercion. This new threat will continue until the United States, Japan, and Taiwan can restore the CCP’s sense of fear. This dynamic is a familiar one for Taiwan. As the CCP’s People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) capabilities have grown, its inhibitions about conducting larger and more frequent coercive military demonstrations have shrunk. The PLA now more openly practices for the destruction of Taiwan’s democracy and the murder of its citizens. In the nuclear realm,
In an unprecedented move, a group of democratic nations led by the US, UK and EU in a joint statement on Tuesday accused the Chinese Ministry of State Security of having carried out a major cyberattack earlier this year and stealing data from at least 30,000 organizations worldwide, including governments, universities and firms in key industries. Western officials were reportedly perplexed by the attack’s brazen execution and unparalleled scale. In an article on the attack, BBC security correspondent Gordon Corera wrote: “Western spies are still struggling to understand why Chinese behavior has changed.” The attack raises the fear “that they [China]