Business… and Freedom
“In an interconnected world, an attack on one nation’s networks can be an attack on all.” Hillary Clinton, at The Newseum in Washington, D.C.
Clinton, who was delivering a speech on Internet freedom and security, urged China to investigate a wave of cyberattacks against Google and other Silicon Valley companies (33 others, according to VeriSign iDefense back on January 13, including financial institutions and defense contractors). A spokeswoman for iDefense wouldn’t name any of the other companies that were targeted in the recent attack, except Adobe. CNN has a video with comments about the Clinton speech, for those of you who like your news that way. I usually find such videos, including this one, amazingly devoid of information. 
The Chinese government, on the other hand, argues that the Google case is a business dispute and should not affect overall relations between the two countries.
I understand the confusion.
Google’s unofficial motto is, after all, “Don’t be evil.” Yet, they are clearly a “for profit” company. (Note added January 23, 2010: Remember, it is said to be the LOVE of money [greed], not money itself, that is the “root of all evil.“)
Many companies are arranged like feudal societies, with no particular investment in the freedom of their employees (serfs? ). Freedom, to a lot of American companies, is the laissez-faire capitalist philosophy of being able to do anything to “make a buck.” The internal organization of many corporations promotes “like-minded” individuals through “unnatural selection” based on personality type, rather than promoting “the fittest” or even “the best and brightest.”
Governments understand such entities. Some governments even emulate them.
Of the 34 Silicon Valley companies who were attacked in the very sophisticated recent attack (and THEFT of corporate INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY) that was linked to China, how many have come forward to identify themselves?
Two. Google and Adobe.
What about the others?
The others are “stonewalling,” “in denial,” and pretending that the incident did not happen. It is not only banks that prefer denying events to the acceptance of embarrassing objective reality. Companies have been “dealing with” cyberattacks in this way for years.
I would be embarrassed, too!
The theft of intellectual property that occurred at these Silicon Valley companies occurred through a flaw in Internet Explorer that was exploited in a sophisticated zero-day attack. Zero-day attacks can happen to anyone, and I understand that public elaboration of the details of mechanism and security can aid the “bad guys” in future attacks. Zero-day attacks can be made less frequent by our choices of operating system and Internet browser, however. Zero-day attacks rely on flaws, and operating systems and Internet browsers are not “created equal” when it comes to flaws. People searched and found this earlier blog entry of mine, about ANOTHER zero-day attack involving Internet Explorer, in hope that a patch had been released for the flaw involved with the later zero-day attack.
Even companies that specialize in Internet security can make bad choices with regard to the preferred operating systems and Internet browsers that they use. Yes, such choices make companies look ignorant and technologically unsophisticated. And that is embarrassing…. Or, if the companies are technologically sophisticated and AWARE of deficiencies in the product choices that they make, and continue to use the products anyway, to the detriment of their shareholders, it makes the companies look stupid and arrogant….
“Oh, what should we do?” “Maybe if we just keep quiet, people will forget, and it will go away.” (Until next time….)
I think that Google “gets it” with regard to the appropriate response to the latest incidents. Perhaps Adobe does, too. The other 32 companies clearly do not.
Clinton, in her speech today, correctly referred to the fact that a “new information curtain is descending across much of the world.” Some American companies (like the ones that do not support “Net Neutrality“) might very well agree with placing such an information curtain in the U.S. as well! Corporations use confidentiality to keep their mistakes and bad choices “secret.” The artificial distinctions between corporate self-interest and national self-interest are fading. If companies want to have an environment of freedom for themselves, they may have to begin to support the freedom of all.
According to CNET, Clinton said today:
The changing reality is that corporations may very soon have to make a very public choice between freedom and “business as usual.”
The smarter companies already have.
-Bill at
Cheshire Cat Photo™ – “Your Guide to California’s Wonderland™”
You can view higher-resolution photos (*generally* 7-30 megabytes, compressed) at the Cheshire Cat Photo™ Pro Gallery on Shutterfly™, where you can also order prints and gifts decorated with the photos of your choice from the gallery. Apparel and other gifts decorated with some of our most popular photos can be ordered from the Cheshire Cat Photo™ Store on CafePress®. Both Shutterfly™ and CafePress® ship to most international locations worldwide! Framed prints and prints on canvas can be ordered from our galleries on imagekind® and redbubble®. All four locations are accessible from here. If you don’t see what you want or would like to receive an email when new photos are up on the site, send us an email at info@cheshirecatphoto.com.
©2010 William F. Hackett. All Rights Reserved.
