Data breach shows data edited by Chinese companies, millions of social media posts

A data storage unit connected to an IBM mainframe at the CeBIT Technology Conference in Hannover, Germany in 2015. It is used here as a stock photo.

A data storage unit connected to an IBM mainframe at the CeBIT Technology Conference in Hannover, Germany in 2015. It is used here as a stock photo.
Photo: Sean Gallup (((Getty Images).

Of Chinese intelligence Database Recently, 2.4 million people (including about 50,000 Americans) have been leaked.Expose to researcher.

According to Tuesday’s report Register, Fulbright University Vietnamese researcher Chris Boulding and Australian Security researcher Robert Potter Recent treatises Beijing-based company Shenzhen Zhenhua Data Technology, Millions of data Acquired by an Australian-based company called Internet 2.0..Bald wrote Blog post Leaked The database is “a Various sources [and] Very advanced language, targeting, and classification tools add to the technical complexity. The team collects data as a tool for Chinese intelligence, military and security agencies for “information warfare and targeting of influence” (ie, revealing weaknesses of influence and methods of influence). Insisted. Target individual or institution).

Much of what Balding and Potter said was called the major foreign information database and was edited from public sources such as social media feeds. This is a technique called data scraping that can violate the rules of some sites. Otherwise completely legal In the United States However, the two researchers estimated that 10% to 20% of them were weeded out from private sources, but there was no evidence of whether they came from hacking or elsewhere. did. OKIDB’s tens of thousands of profiles relate to all celebrities, from politicians and military personnel to businessmen, celebrities and criminals. The team creates a database that also contains details of infrastructure and military operations in multiple countries.

What is less clear is whether Zhenhua’s data is particularly useful for malicious Washington postZhenhua, who reviewed part of the database, has nothing to show that he has secured a contract with the Chinese government, but touts himself as aiming to do business with the Chinese military. Experts consulted by Post have given various signals as to whether it goes far beyond data scraping.

“There may be money there, but it’s not good enough for military and intelligence targets,” a federal cybersecurity contractor told Post.

Anna Puglish, a senior fellow at Georgetown University’s Center for Security and Emerging Technology and a former East Asian counterintelligence officer, told the US post: When it comes to China, it’s what we had in the Soviet Union. ” But she said Chinese intelligence officials are taking a more “holistic” approach to open source intelligence, “like LinkedIn and social media-this seems to be an evolution of that methodology.” It was.

Anne-Marie Brady, Professor, University of Canterbury, Christchurch Said to the guardian The CCP and the Chinese Department of Homeland Security have already edited a “full book” of information on foreign targets, but what is unusual here is “”Use of big data and outsourcing to private companies. “

Some of the tools detailed in the Balding and Potter treatise include the US Navy’s tracking system, which associates social media posts with specific vessels. It also contains some (patchwork) information about naval officers.

“Data collected about individuals and institutions and analytical tools overlaid from social media platforms bring tremendous benefits to China in opinion formation, targeting and messaging,” the two researchers wrote in a paper. “From the data collected, China can also compose messages at individual meetings and target individuals who may need to be targeted.”

However, the OKIDB data did not contain any information about its intended use. The team was unable to find “direct evidence of a Chinese agency using this data to create information warfare campaigns, messaging, use of anonymous accounts, or targeting of personal influence.” writing. According to the post, Jenfa, lesser known, claims on its website that it has partnered with TRS, a company that provides big data analysis to the Chinese military and public security ministry. Other listed partners include big data and security hardware company Huarong and company Global Tone Communication Technology. “”It is a subsidiary of a state-owned enterprise owned by the Central Advertising Department, and claims to analyze it. Client terabytes of data per day.

China has built an elaborate country Digital monitoring status Including everything from Face recognition To Content monitoring and censorship, But it’s not the only actor to rub the web, depending on the range of imagination.US companies do so, whether it is or not Incomprehensible amount Of the data downloaded for marketing purposes Shade Face recognition company Cooperation with the police..Anyone exposed to previous data breaches can find their information resurfaced to any number. Elsewhere..

“If there is a silver lining here, it means that China can do what they did to us.Rep. Jim Himes, a member of the House Intelligence Committee, told the post.

“This report is not seriously true,” said a Zhenhua spokesman who was identified only as Sun. Said to the guardian.. “”All our data is public data on the internet. We do not collect data. This is just data integration. Our business model and partners are our corporate secrets. d does not exist2 million atabase. “

“… we are a private company,” a spokesman added. “”Our customers are research institutes and business groups. “

Data breach shows data edited by Chinese companies, millions of social media posts

Source link Data breach shows data edited by Chinese companies, millions of social media posts

Source link

What do you think?


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

    12 Cartoons Your Mom Shouldn’t Let You Watch When You Were Young

    Texas’ social media censorship bill pushes unconstitutional limits on free speech