Enter Details

Comment on stories, receive email newsletters & alerts.

This is your permanent identity for Gizmodo, Kotaku, Lifehacker and Business Insider Australia
Your email must be valid for account activation
Minimum of 8 standard keyboard characters


Great discounts, competitions and special offers from our partners.
Email newsletters aren't ready to go out just yet, but will contain a brief summary of our top stories, news alerts, plus details of competitions and reader events.
Having issues creating your account? Contact Support

Forgotten Password

Enter Details

Back to log in

Why China's Corporate Espionage Is NOT An Act Of War


You may be wondering why America lets the Chinese army get away with hacking and stealing secrets from Lockheed, Raytheon, Bank of America, and a slew of other giant multinational corporations.

Why are these repeated incidents not treated as acts of war?

It comes down to the interpretation of this kind of hacking as just another form of espionage, and espionage is not an act of war.

Countries have been conducting espionage against each other for thousands of years, and though spies have been caught and killed, generally their spying hasn’t led to a war.

It’s pretty much assumed that every foreign embassy has intelligence personnel working inside it. In fact, Americans have made several concerted attempts to bug the Russian Embassy in the U.S. (and vice versa).

What makes China a bit different is that they’re apparently doing it so well. Companies are obviously being robbed, but there’s also the possibility of hackers perpetrating real-world damage — the threat of damaging critical infrastructure and lives in the process.

Actual real-world damage, it turns out, is where the international community draws the line. Researchers and military professionals recently got together to sort out the whole idea of using military might against a sponsoring country or a collective of cyber hackers.

From Global Post:

The so-called Tallinn Manual, published in March, controversially concluded that nations would be in their rights under international law to respond with bombs or bullets against cyber attacker that caused death, destruction or damage on a significant scale.

We also talked to Jarno Limnell, a cyber security expert at Stonesoft, who told us via email, ”the cyber espionage that has been making headlines recently should not be counted as warfare or as an act of war.”

Limnell concluded with a warning:

“The ability to escalate from espionage to destructive cyberwar is certainly there, but fear may ultimately perpetuate this eventuality. It is possible, for example, that the ongoing ‘cyber spying accusations’ between US and China could escalate to real war, especially in a climate of mutual distrust and fear.”

Follow Business Insider Australia on Facebook, Twitter, and LinkedIn