China is the second most powerful country in the world. Do people really think they are that stupid ? They are not going to attack an American company using infrastructure that anyone can track back to them. This Github DDoS has got to be the work of someone trying to frame the Chinese government. Has anyone considered that angle ?
That's not really a defence. They could easily be that stupid, bureaucracies tend to do extremely stupid stuff when looked at from the outside but every cog on the inside thinks that its action makes perfect sense.
> This Github DDoS has got to be the work of someone trying to frame the Chinese government.
Evidence?
> Has anyone considered that angle ?
Sure, but so far the evidence is that that is not the case.
If it is someone trying to frame the Chinese government I'm sure they'll tell us all about it soon.
> bureaucracies tend to do extremely stupid stuff when looked at from the outside but every cog on the inside thinks that its action makes perfect sense.
If this is Chinese doing, the likely ones responsible are the Chinese Intelligence, not their bureaucracy.
> Evidence?
Occam's Razor. I find it hard to believe that a society with sufficient level of sophistication to obtain $9 trillion GDP[1] would 'accidentally' go on to declare cyber war on US. Especially considering the fact that the attack itself was pretty sophisticated.
On closer examination, you seem to be correct. Without insight into how Chinese secret service works the simplest explanation is that the attack was likely perpetrated by them and that is what we must assume to be of highest probability. I will leave my comments here for posterity.
> the Chinese Intelligence, not their bureaucracy.
Intelligence agencies are bureaucracies. Some are more efficient (less wasteful) than others, but in the end, intelligence work is seldom about secret agents driving Aston Martins. Most of it has always been paperwork. Paperwork is nowadays in electronic format. I don't think the Chinese intelligence agencies are an exception.
Occam's Razor is unscientific. Unless you know of any proof that given 2 or more possible explanations for a phenomenon the simplest one is always closer to the truth.
The problem with that kind of speculation is you can equally use the same argument against itself. ie maybe they're bluffing people into thinking that the Chinese military / government have been framed as it seems too obvious that it would have been them.
We could also speculate from the angle that the officers in charge of making these decisions are not tech-savvy themselves (or at least not to the level that they might realise just how traceable these attacks), which isn't a huge assumption to make when you look at how incompetent many government officials are who have serious influence over technology policies (eg http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-23437473)
So anyway, my point is it's better to look for a little evidence to support a hypothesis rather than blindly speculate.
Powerful countries doing a show of force is nothing unusual. They know they can get away with it. If they had severely impacted github it would have sent a strong message not to do buisiness with people who circumvent the Great Firewall. It makes complete sense to me, they just failed.
On the other hand, why would anybody go to this length to frame to Chinese government? What would they try to accomplish? Obama sending a strongly worded letter to the Chinese government?
How does 'economical and financial sanctions' equate to 'Whitehouse gives order to start false flag operation against github'?
The more that comes out and the more silence there is from the Chinese government the less it looks like a false flag operation. Usually the victim of a false flag operation (China in this case, not github) would be very adamant about its non-involvement and would work very hard to expose the originator.
Yes, just like if Glenn Beck really did not rape and murder a young girl in 1990 he would be very adamant about his non-involvement and would work very hard to expose the actual culprit: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beck_v._Eiland-Hall
A parody is just that, we're talking about a several day long real attack here.
And if you read that article you'll see Beck sued to get the domain. So it's not like he ignored it, and besides it was obvious from the beginning that he wasn't the one that registered the domain.
