{"id":6092,"date":"2019-02-15T21:35:29","date_gmt":"2019-02-16T01:35:29","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/ncjolt.org\/?p=6092"},"modified":"2020-06-04T20:52:27","modified_gmt":"2020-06-04T20:52:27","slug":"indicting-chinese-hackers-why-bother","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/ncjolt\/blogs\/indicting-chinese-hackers-why-bother\/","title":{"rendered":"Indicting Chinese Hackers: Why Bother?"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

In 2015, China\u2019s President, Xi Jinping, entered into an agreement with U.S. President Barack Obama whereby China agreed to refrain from hacking the United States and American based corporations. The agreement sparked a new wave in what seemed to be an increase in Chinese cyber intrusions. However, despite the short-term effects of that deal, Chinese hackers have continued to hack<\/a> American based corporations. As such, many Americans have begun to wonder what steps our government is taking in order to prevent these attacks from occurring in the future. <\/p>\n\n\n

The National Public Radio (NPR) recently reported that the U.S. Government is responding to these attacks by simply issuing more indictments. The organization reported that over the past few years, \u201cthe Justice Department has unveiled one China-related hacking indictment after another, including cases against at least a dozen individuals and companies last year alone\u201d. In the eyes of many, this strategy is woefully insufficient, whereas in the eyes of some, this strategy is brilliant.<\/p>\n\n\n

\u2026[the] policy is ineffective because these defendants will likely never see the inside of a courtroom. <\/p><\/blockquote>\n\n\n

Adam Segal, director of the digital and cyberspace policy\nprogram at the Council on Foreign Relations, argued that merely issuing\nindictments to Chinese suspects still living in China is an utter waste of\ntime. Segal argues that such a policy is ineffective because these defendants\nwill likely never see the inside of a courtroom. Another opponent argues that\nnot only do the indictments fail to deter Chinese hackers, but they send a\nsignal of weakness.<\/p>\n\n\n

Conversely, proponents of these indictments argue that they\nserve a brilliant purpose. Proponents first argue that the Chinese government\nreally hates the indictments, and as such, the Chinese government will do\nwhatever is necessary to end these intrusions. Proponents also argue that these\nindictment help reveal crucial information to the public. These proponents\nargue that by indicting Chinese hackers, the government essentially puts\nAmerican based corporations on notice of these intrusions and their frequency.\nProponents argue that this information is useful since a number of these\nAmerican based corporations conduct business in or with China. The idea is that\nonce corporate executives realize they are being targeted by Chinese hackers, they\nwill withdraw their business from Chinese markets. Thus, Proponents argue that\nissuing indictments that otherwise have no real impact, can indirectly hurt the\nChinese economy and thereby deter Chinese cyber intrusion overall. <\/p>\n\n\n

Although these proponents have made convincing arguments,\nsome opponents remain unconvinced. John Carlin, who led the Justice\nDepartment\u2019s National Security Division, acknowledge the utility in informing\nexecutives of these attacks but remarked that mere dissemination of information\nis no solution. Carlin states, \u201cIf we\u2019re going to change this behavior, it has\nto be part of a larger strategy of raising the cost and includes all of the\ninstruments of U.S. power, including the power to sanction under the Treasury\nDepartment.\u201d As of date, the treasury department has refused to use that power\nover its industrial cyber-espionage. <\/p>\n\n\n

Given the support behind the indictments, we should expect to see more of them issued with the hope that it pays off in the future. The question remains, however, will it actually pay off in the future. <\/p>\n\n\n

Savian Gray-Sommerville, 8 February 2019<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

In 2015, China\u2019s President, Xi Jinping, entered into an agreement with U.S. President Barack Obama whereby China agreed to refrain from hacking the United States and American based corporations. The agreement sparked a new wave in what seemed to be an increase in Chinese cyber intrusions. However, despite the short-term effects of that deal, Chinese …<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[51],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/ncjolt\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6092"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/ncjolt\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/ncjolt\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/ncjolt\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/ncjolt\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=6092"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/ncjolt\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6092\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":6859,"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/ncjolt\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6092\/revisions\/6859"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/ncjolt\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=6092"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/ncjolt\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=6092"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/ncjolt\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=6092"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}