Skip to main content

Report: Google China Hack Might Be Inside Job

As the topic of Google and China litter the headlines, we continually wonder whether or not the search giant will continue business in the censorship-filled country. But before Google can go any further, it needs to investigate what happened when it had its networks attacked by hackers.

New wire Reuters today published a story that cites its own sources as saying that the hacking of the networks may have been an inside job.

"The sources, who are familiar with the situation, told Reuters that the attack, which targeted people who have access to specific parts of Google networks, may have been facilitated by people working in Google China's office."

Security analysts also told Reuters that the malicious software used in the hack was a trojan called Hydraq.

Perhaps even more interesting from the story is that it notes: "Washington said it was issuing a diplomatic note to China formally requesting an explanation for the attacks."

Just last week, U.S. Ambassador to China, Jon Huntsman, said that the U.S. government will be staying out of any negotiations that Google may have with China following the hacking incident.

  • kyeana
    The plot thickens.
    Reply
  • elmo2006
    Why is the U.S. government requesting an 'explanation of the attacks' when the U.S. government indicated they will be staying out of any negotiations that Google may have with China following the hacking incident?

    @kyeana - indeed!
    Reply
  • jsc
    Perhaps an inside job? What a surprise.
    Reply
  • sunflier
    With Google maps and Google using technology to "spy" or snoop on it's search engine users to obtain internet habits etc. Now, in-turn someone spys (hacks) to find out about Google.

    Look. I'm not totally against Google but does anyone here see the irony??
    Reply
  • elmo2006
    @sunflier

    +1
    Reply
  • Studly007
    Commies are war-mongers. I wonder if the red flagged "PRC" will use this incident to escalate military tension in the Pacific.
    Reply
  • ready4dis
    sunflierWith Google maps and Google using technology to "spy" or snoop on it's search engine users to obtain internet habits etc. Now, in-turn someone spys (hacks) to find out about Google.Look. I'm not totally against Google but does anyone here see the irony??
    Yes, but the methods used to obtain said information is slightly different. One is by tracking what users type into a text box, another is illegally gaining access to a secured network through security flaws. I do agree it's slightly ironic, but google doesn't 'spy', it just records available data. The same thing that many other companies do, collect data from clients to see what their typical habbits are. At least google is pretty straight forward about it. Do you have any clues on how many ways your bank watches your transactions? Credit card purchases (and i'm not just talking about the credit bureau's), etc. There are more things to be worried about than google remembering that you searched for pink slippers 3 times from the same IP address.
    Reply
  • micr0be
    to quote Conan O'Brien ... "Somebody's gona get fiiired"
    Reply
  • Socnom
    This is a more serious threat to China's populous than most people realize. When you combine the fact that Google has a recorded history of what someone does on their site (from x ip location) with the way China dictates over its people, you get a very serious problem. I leave the rest up to your imagination. I'm not being a conspiracy theorist, just a realist.
    Reply
  • sailfish
    sunflierWith Google maps and Google using technology to "spy" or snoop on it's search engine users to obtain internet habits etc. Now, in-turn someone spys (hacks) to find out about Google.Look. I'm not totally against Google but does anyone here see the irony??
    That's an apologist statement and not a very convincing one, either. Your use of the words "spy" and "snoop" are bogus. Users freely and willingly provide Google (and every other search engine) this data and Google only saves the IP-less data which is perfectly legal.

    There's no irony here, just a very thin gruel of an argument, imo.
    Reply