Tag Archives: Cyber Security

Top US Presidential Cyber Advisor Comes to Ottawa

The fellow does not give details on specific matters he raised here but one imagines he urged us to get tougher in a number of ways, with the PRC and Russia particularly in mind and taking account of the extensive critical infrastructure links between Canada and the US. From a story at Global News:

U.S. cyber chief: No reason to believe election infrastructure ‘at risk’ ahead of midterms

By Alex Boutilier Global News

The Biden administration’s cyber security director says there’s ‘no evidence’ that the technology underpinning the U.S. electoral system is ‘at risk’ ahead of Tuesday’s midterm elections.

In an exclusive interview with Global News, U.S. National Cyber Director John Christopher Inglis said there is no evidence to suggest any “encroachment” in U.S. election infrastructure “that would call into doubt the free and fair conduct of an election.”..

Inglis is the first person to hold the role of and principal advisor to President Joe Biden on cybersecurity issues, with a mandate to try and harmonize government cybersecurity efforts and improve cooperation with private industry [official site of Office of the National Cyber Director].

Before this post, Inglis served in a number of senior roles at the U.S. National Security Agency (NSA), including the agency’s deputy director between 2006 and 2014.

In a windowless boardroom at the U.S. embassy in Ottawa, Inglis explained that his recent visit to Canada was part of an effort to improve coordination on cybersecurity principles between the two countries.

“We each retain our national prerogatives and … get to chart our course as we see fit for our distinct kind of aspirations,” Inglis said.

But Inglis said that identifying “common aspirations” between the two countries would allow for more harmonization between their respective cybersecurity plans.

“Our view in the United States, and I think the view emerging (in Canada), is that any viable cyber strategy can only work in an international domain,” Inglis said.

“So having a discussion with our Canadian counterparts allows us to take influence from them about how to think about this space, allows us to align and harmonize our respective approaches to that, so that we can get a ‘one plus one equals three’ proposition.”

Last December, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau tasked several key ministers, including Foreign Affairs Minister Melanie Joly, Public Safety Minister Marco Mendicino, and Defence Minister Anita Anand, with developing a “renewed” national cyber security strategy.

According to the ministers’ mandate letters, that strategy will seek to “articulate Canada’s long-term strategy to protect our national security and economy, deter cyber threat actors, and promote norms-based international behaviour in cyberspace.”

Read more: Trudeau tasks cabinet with new cybersecurity plan amid growing attacks, spying

Alongside that strategy, Trudeau also asked the ministers to “advance” the existing national cybersecurity action plan, aimed at combatting “cyber risks” and protecting critical infrastructure…

Interesting that the Canadian government does not seem to have mentioned the visit.

Lots more on PRC threats at this recent post below, one does wonder how much Mr Inglis said about China and cyber:

Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS) Warns Parliamentary Committee about PRC Interference (and others’) in Canadian Politics (note UPPERDATE!)

Mark Collins

Twitter: @mark3ds

US Justice Department After PRC Spookery, Covert Ops in US

Meanwhile almost nothing is ever done in Canada to charge people with espionage or other nefarious activities on behalf of Beijing–see this post, “FBI Director on Chi-Spy Menace–and PM Trudeau’s Government?” and others noted at the end of this post.

First from a story (with video) at Politico:

U.S. charges more than a dozen people in China espionage cases

Attorney General Merrick Garland said the new actions would “disrupt criminal activity” of individuals working on behalf of China.

The Biden administration is intensifying its efforts to put the spotlight on alleged covert operations by the Chinese government in the United States, unveiling a trio of criminal cases on Monday [Oct. 24] that included one in which Chinese operatives were accused of attempting to pay bribes for inside information about the high-profile prosecution of Chinese telecommunications giant Huawei.

Two Chinese citizens, Guochun He and Zheng Wang, were charged in a criminal complaint in federal court in New York with obstruction of justice after allegedly offering bribes to an unidentified U.S. government employee for details about an ongoing criminal investigation. The complaint says the U.S. employee worked with the FBI to arrange a sting operation aimed at the two defendants, who the FBI alleges are Chinese intelligence officers, offering them fake information about the case marked “Secret.” Court filings in the new case don’t directly name Huawei, but details in the complaint indicate the unnamed company is the Chinese tech firm repeatedly accused by U.S. policymakers of ties to Chinese intelligence [see after this quote for a Canadian aspect].

“This was an egregious attempt by PRC intelligence officers to shield a PRC-based company from accountability and to undermine the integrity of our judicial system,” Attorney General Merrick Garland, using the initials for the People’s Republic of China, declared at a news conference on Monday that included an unusually large complement of Justice Department leadership.

In separate cases, seven Chinese citizens were charged with participating in a scheme to force a Chinese-born U.S. resident living in New York to return to China. Four Chinese nationals have been charged in the District of New Jersey with conspiring to act as illegal agents on behalf of China by using a “purported” academic center in that country to seek sensitive information from U.S. academic institutions.

Only two of the 13 people charged in the newly announced criminal cases have been arrested, according to the Justice Department. Many or all of the rest appear to be overseas and may never see the inside of a U.S. courtroom.

Garland said the series of cases fit a pattern on the part of the Chinese government of trying to undermine U.S. institutions and exert influence against Chinese government critics abroad…

Deputy Attorney General Lisa Monaco offered particular praise for the unidentified U.S. government employee who spent at least four years as a “double agent,” stringing along the alleged Chinese government representatives at the behest of the FBI…

During his comments to reporters, FBI Director Christopher Wray stressed at least three times that he had long been sounding the alarm about an onslaught of what U.S. officials call “malign” Chinese government efforts in the West, including efforts to steal intellectual property and to intimidate perceived opponents of the Chinese government and Chinese Communist Party rule…

During visits to Capitol Hill, Wray has faced questions over a perceived disconnect between his grave public warnings about China and the Justice Department’s decision in February to drop a China-focused enforcement effort launched during the Trump Administration: the China Initiative. Department officials jettisoned the project, at least in name, after it became the focus of criticism from Asian American civil rights groups that said it encouraged unwarranted suspicion of people of Chinese origin.

Asked on Monday whether the move to disband the China Initiative was a mistake in light of the flurry of new charges, Assistant Attorney General for National Security Matthew Olsen — the official who announced the termination of the initiative — insisted that the new cases demonstrated that federal prosecutors remain focused on the threat they see from China…

That Canadian angle? From a story at the Globe and Mail:

U.S. alleges Chinese spies paid bribes for details on prosecution of Huawei

Steven Chase Senior parliamentary reporter

Stephanie Carvin, an associate professor of international relations at Carleton University’s Norman Paterson School of International Affairs and a former national security analyst, said the allegations undercut Huawei’s no-espionage vows. “The idea that the company doesn’t engage in espionage or insider threat behaviour – this kind of undermines all of that.”

The alleged spying also paints a picture of a company that is being assisted by the Chinese state, despite Huawei’s contention that it isn’t beholden to Beijing.

Ms. Carvin said the criminal complaint makes her wonder if there weren’t similar espionage attempts in Canada to pry into the government’s case for keeping Huawei chief financial officer Meng Wanzhou in Vancouver [emphasis added, no shoot].

The U.S. government in 2018 asked Canada to arrest Ms. Meng at Vancouver International Airport as part of a case against her and Huawei. She spent three years under house arrest in Vancouver until she reached a deal with the U.S. Department of Justice and was allowed to return home.

Earlier this year Canada banned Huawei equipment from the country’s 5G wireless network over security concerns, following similar announcements by key Western allies in the United States, Britain and Australia…

And telling tweets by counter-intelligence expert John Schindler:

In Canada? Our government doesn’t want to know. More relevant posts:

Cyber Espionage vs US Defence Industry: Chinese Resident of Canada Pleads Guilty [2016]

Now Major Canadian Broadcasting Corp. News Video on PRC’s Industrial Espionage in Canada

PRC vs Canada: Seems to Take Years to Bring Espionage-Related Charges; When Will we See an Actual Spying Case?

Alberta Stays Pretty Tough vs PRC/PLA Infiltration of its Universities…

Mark Collins

Twitter: @mark3ds

Some Top Germans Seeing the Light about PRC–What About PM Trudeau’s Government? (note Russia UPDATE)

(Photo at top of the page is of German foreign minister Baerbock.)

Further to this post,

Canada’s Clueless Foreign Posturing, er, Policy…and That Pesky PRC Problem

the starts of two stories:

1) Deutsche Welle:

China spying on Germany, say intelligence chiefs

The heads of Germany’s spy agencies warned of continued “naivety” toward China at a parliamentary hearing. They also advised against handing Beijing too much leverage when it comes to cooperation and infrastructure.

The head the BND foreign intelligence service warned parliamentarians in Berlin about “naivety” toward China in an annual public hearing of Germany’s three main spy agencies Monday [Oct. 17].

Bruno Kahl questioned the wisdom of ever-deepening ties with Beijing, saying there was “certainly room for improvement” when dealing with China.

Federal Intelligence Service President Kahl made the statement in testimony delivered alongside Military Counterintelligence (MAD) President Martina Rosenberg and Thomas Haldenwang, president of the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution (BfV) domestic intelligence agency, in an annual public hearing before the Bundestag…

2) Associated Press:

German foreign minister urges caution in China relationship

Germany must avoid repeating with China the mistakes that it made in its relationship with Russia over recent years, the German foreign minister said Tuesday [Oct. 18].

Annalena Baerbock said Germany must face up to a “competition of systems” between countries that believe in international law and cooperation and authoritarian regimes.

“We must first of all learn from the mistakes of our Russia policy of recent decades,” Baerbock [Green Party] said at a foreign policy forum in Berlin organized by the Koerber Foundation think tank. “I say very clearly that one-sided economic dependence exposes us to political blackmail.”

“As far as Russia is concerned, that’s spilt milk now,” Baerbock said, acknowledging that Germany ignored warnings from eastern European partners about its dependence on Russian energy. “We must ensure that we don’t make such a mistake again, and that means that we will have to take account of this more strongly in our policy toward China.”..

AS. MUST. CANADA. Related posts:

“Little Swabia”, or, can the Biden Administration do anything about Germany’s huge Economic Ties with China? Can or will the next German Government?

Making Autos in Xinjiang, or, Nothing to See Here, Volks

German Automakers and the PRC, or, That’s the Way the Mercedes-Benz

UPDATE: Meanwhile more light about Russia, at the Guardian:

German cybersecurity chief sacked following reports of Russia ties

Arne Schönbohm was under scrutiny after comedian highlighted his links to a Russian company in a previous job

Germany’s interior minister has sacked the country’s cybersecurity chief, after allegations he had turned a blind eye to a firm with links to Russian security circles.

Arne Schönbohm, the president of the German Federal Office for Information Security, was released from his duties with immediate effect on Tuesday [Oct. 18], the news magazine Der Spiegel reported, citing security sources.

A spokesperson for the interior minister, Nancy Faeser, confirmed that Schönbohm would be barred from his office, as “necessary public trust in the neutrality and impartiality of his leadership as president of the most important German cybersecurity agency has been damaged”.

Schönbohm, who has since 2016 been in charge of the agencies overseeing the government’s computer and communication security, has come under scrutiny after his links to a Russian company in a previous job were highlighted by Jan Böhmermann, a German comedian, in a late-night satire show.

Before heading up the government’s cybersecurity agency, Schönbohm had helped found the similarly named Cyber Security Council Germany, a lobbying group registered as a voluntary association.

Among its membership roster, the Cyber Security Council Germany has since 2020 listed a Berlin-based cybersecurity firm, Protelion, previously known as Infotecs, a subsidiary of a Russian company founded by an ex-KGB employee who has received a medal of honour for his services from the Russian president, Vladimir Putin…

Vetting? What vetting?

Mark Collins

Twitter: @Mark3ds

How Tech is Making CIA HUMINT Harder

More and more difficult for traditional tradecraft to work for covert efforts in today’s surveillance society–excerpt from a story at Defense One:

Adapting to the digital world 

The CIA is also coming to terms with rapid changes in technology and how they might force the agency to change its approach to human intelligence gathering. 

“Certainly, the revolution in technology in the era of ubiquitous technical surveillance and smart cities—it’s transformed the way in which our case officers conduct our tradecraft and do work business overseas,” [William] Burns said [director of the CIA…during a keynote at the Billington Cybersecurity Summit on Thursday (Sept. 8)].

He said adversaries can now use artificial intelligence and machine learning to mine years of past data and “discern patterns in our activities that make it a lot more complicated to conduct our tradecraft and our profession and human intelligence in particular, in the way that we were accustomed to doing it for years and years before.”

In an effort to adapt, the agency has created one mission center to counter China and another, the Transnational and Technology Mission Center, that aims to better understand “patterns and innovation” in commercial technologies…

Plus a 2019 tweet:

The Burns story also coves the agency’s own extensive cyber activities and plans, e,g.:

He said about one-third of CIA officers work on tech-related issues, from cybersecurity to digital innovation. 

In April, the CIA hired its first chief technology officer: Nand Mulchandani, who previously led the Pentagon’s AI center. Mulchandani is charged with producing the agency’s 10-year technology strategy and fostering links between the agency, academia, and the commercial and public sectors…

A related 2015 post about the-then CIA director:

John Brennan’s Cyber CIA Plans 

Mark Collins

Twitter: @Mark3ds

PM Trudeau’s Government Still Trying to Up-Suck to the Dragon, Ace of Compradors Dominic Barton Section (cont’d)

(Video of foreign minister Joly noted in image at top of the post here, for compradors see here and here.)

Further to this post with two extremely well-informed hard-nose views,

PM Trudeau’s Government Has Finally Banned Huawei. What now?

it would appear the Liberal government remains blinded by the Celestial Empire’s light–and the lure of the filthy yuan. From an excellent and clear-eyed Globe and Mail columnist:

Ottawa may want to go back to business as usual with Beijing. But that’s not possible

Konrad Yakabuski

Canadians hoping for a reset in how this country approaches an increasingly assertive China were likely disappointed to learn that Foreign Affairs Minister Mélanie Joly had tapped Dominic Barton to sit on a new committee to advise Ottawa on its long-awaited Indo-Pacific strategy.

Mr. Barton, who served as Canada’s ambassador to China until December, is a self-confessed “bull on China” who now chairs the board of directors for the British-Australian mining colossus Rio Tinto after overseeing the global operations of the consulting giant McKinsey & Co. Like McKinsey, Rio Tinto’s fortunes are deeply tied to the Chinese economy. China accounted for fully 57 per cent of the company’s US$64-billion in revenue in 2021 [see this post: “Dominic Barton, Canadian Prince of Cashing-in Compradors, and Conflict of Interest (note “UPDATE”)“].

The 17 members of the Indo-Pacific Advisory Committee will be required to divulge any conflicts of interest, and “will be expected to recuse themselves from participating in discussions or activities of the committee should any potential, perceived or real conflicts of interest arise,” Global Affairs Canada said in a June 9 press release announcing the committee’s creation.

Even so, Mr. Barton’s past and present business activities are impossible to ignore. He has long advocated for deeper economic relations between China and the West. His decision to accept the Rio Tinto gig even after witnessing firsthand China’s hostage diplomacy in the detention of Canadians Michael Spavor and Michael Kovrig suggests a willingness to look past Beijing’s increasing authoritarianism, militarism and human rights abuses in the name of business [emphasis added].

Mr. Barton’s seat on the new committee along with other notable China doves has left many observers wondering whether Ottawa’s much-vaunted Indo-Pacific strategy, originally pitched as a foreign-policy pivot away from China in the aftermath of the Meng Wanzhou affair, is shaping up to be a cover for a return to business as usual [emphasis added].

“We want to make sure we have a relationship with China,” Ms. Joly told Politico last month. “It is a difficult one – there were arbitrary detentions of the two Michaels … I’m glad that this issue is now over and we’re moving on … My goal is to make sure that we re-establish ties.”

This will no doubt delight many Canadian business leaders eager to seize on the opportunity to sell to a market of more than 1.4 billion people with a growing appetite for this country’s natural resources and agricultural products. But as Canada moves to reset its relations with Beijing, many of our biggest allies are teaming up to take on the greatest geopolitical challenge of the 21st century as China seeks to cement its world power status.

Western hopes that integrating China into the World Trade Organization in 2001 would lead to its democratization were perhaps always faint. But under President Xi Jinping, Beijing has moved in the opposite direction, and has become a threat to the very rules-based international order that enabled it to become the world’s second-largest economy…

“Beijing wants to put itself at the centre of global innovation and manufacturing, increase other countries’ technological dependence, and then use that dependence to impose its foreign policy preferences,” U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken said last month in a major speech outlining U.S. President Joe Biden’s China policy. “And Beijing is going to great lengths to win this contest – for example, taking advantage of the openness of our economies to spy, to hack, to steal technology and know-how to advance its military innovation and entrench its surveillance state [see this post: “FBI Director on Chi-Spy Menace–and PM Trudeau’s Government?“].”

The Trudeau government is surely not blind to China’s designs. It did – albeit belatedly – decide to ban telecommunications giant Huawei from participating in Canadian 5G networks last month [more here]. But its long delay in making that decision [OVER THREE FLIPPING YEARS] suggests that it did so only reluctantly. And it has not stopped Canadian universities from continuing to accept research funding from Huawei, raising questions about the potential transfer of intellectual property developed here to a company with deep ties to the Chinese military and state [note this post: “Wow! PM Trudeau’s Government Actually Acting vs PRC/PLA Infiltration of Canadian Universities–not so “Wow!” UPDATE (note Australian UPPERDATE)“].

This week, Natural Resources Minister Jonathan Wilkinson conceded that Ottawa may need to take a tougher stand on investments by Chinese entities in this country’s critical minerals. But again, you don’t get a sense that the move is being made with any gusto. Ottawa’s latest discussion paper on developing a critical minerals strategy does not even mention China, despite that country’s dominance in the global electric-battery supply chain [emphasis added].

No wonder Washington has largely left Canada out of the loop as it builds new security relationships with Australia, Britain, Japan, India and several Indo-Pacific countries with the express aim of containing and countering China’s geopolitical ambitions…

As much as Ottawa seems to wish otherwise, there will be no going back to business as usual with Beijing.

One certainly hopes so. And much as this government wishes otherwise.

A telling paragraph from Terrible Terry Glavin on the reach of our comprador rot:

There’s the intimate connections between the Liberal old guard and the China-trade lobby, notable in former prime minister Jean Chretien’s son-in-law, the Power Corporation’s Andre Desmarais, the Canada-China Business Council’s honorary chairman [the council is Comprador Central, website here]. And of course there’s the daughter of Jean (“I am not a Liberal!”) Charest, currently contending for the job of Conservative Party leader. Amelie Dionne-Charest is the chair of the Canadian Chamber of Commerce in Hong Kong [another nest of compradors, website here].

Earlier on Mr Barton:

Canadian Ambassador to PRC Dominic Barton, an Ace of Compradors, still Up-Sucking to the Dragon [2020]

Ace of Compradors Ambassador Dominic Barton gives up Selling the PRC to Canada [Dec. 2021]

Mark Collins

Twitter: @Mark3ds

PM Trudeau’s Government Has Finally Banned Huawei. What now?

Interviews with two serious Canadian experts on the PRC–text from an e-mail from the first-rate Macdonald-Laurier Institute:

1) Canada’s Huawei Ban Comes Amid Heightened Tensions with China

Charles Burton, MLI

The Canadian government punted its Huawei decision for three years to avoid potential retaliation from the Chinese government, and resultingly, argues Burton, Canada is now perceived as an unreliable partner by our allies regarding our engagement with China. QUAD, AUKUS, the IPEF—we haven’t been offered a seat at the table. The CCP will retaliate and its retaliation toolkit is broad-based. Whatever they employ, they will make sure we understand it is because we insulted the Chinese state by not accepting Huawei.

The invasion of Ukraine, which China seemingly supports, as well as sustained tensions, and the potential for conflict over Taiwan, means that Canada must act in concert with other like-minded allies to counter the rise of authoritarian states. There has been mounting pressure for Canada to define its stances on China and Russia. We cannot continue our policies under present circumstances, which amount to appeasement, Burton Says. Canada needs an Indo-Pacific strategy consistent with our allies, make up for decades of policies that are no longer viable, increase our defence allocation, and, most importantly, prepare for conflict.

The interview is here, with video and a synopsis. From the link:

Charles Burton is a Senior Fellow, Macdonald-Laurier Institute, Centre for Advancing Canada’s Interests Abroad and Non-Resident Senior Fellow, European Values Center for Security Policy. Department of Political Science at Brock University specializing in Comparative Politics, Government and Politics of China, Canada-China Relations and Human Rights, 1989-2020. Counsellor at the Canadian Embassy to China between 1991-1993 and 1998-2000. Previously worked at the Communications Security Establishment of the Canadian Department of National Defence.

2) What to Expect Following Canada’s Huawei Ban

Margaret McCuaig-Johnston
ISSP, University of Ottawa

Last month, the federal government announced that Huawei and ZTE will be banned from Canada’s fifth-generation wireless network (5G), citing national security concerns. Despite encouragement from Canada’s Five Eyes partners, the decision to ban Huawei and ZTE still faced significant delays after the two Micheals were released. While the ban has been welcomed by many, there are still significant security concerns to consider in the near-term.

McCuiag-Johnston places particular emphasis on the challenges created by allowing companies and carriers until June 2024 to replace their 5G equipment. Telus has installed a large amount of Huawei software and hardware over the past two years, which means that Canada will have four years of exposure to the national security risk that we have been concerned about all along. Ultimately, de-installing Huawei will require constant updates and fixes to installed 5G equipment via backdoors. These are the very backdoors that could potentially be used for intelligence gathering purposes. Johnston applauds the Huawei decision but emphasizes that the government must not budge on removal deadline it has given to Canadian telecoms.

The interview is here, with video and a synopsis. From the link:

Margaret McCuaig-Johnston  is a Senior Fellow at the Institute for Science, Society and Policy, Senior Fellow with the University of Alberta’s China Institute and Distinguished Fellow with the Asia Pacific Foundation of Canada. Formerly, she was Executive Vice-President at NSERC where she was responsible for strategic operations, including research policy and international relations. She was also a member for seven years of the Steering Committee for the Canada-China Science and Technology (S&T) Initiative.

These two are hard-nosed types about the PRC’s realities and dealing with the CCP. Do have a look.

Related posts:

FBI Director on Chi-Spy Menace–and PM Trudeau’s Government?

Will Anyone in PM Trudeau’s Cabinet Bother to Read Joanna Chiu’s Book on the PRC?

Mark Collins

Twitter: @Mark3ds

Canadian Armed Forces Readying for Cyberwar

Further to these tweets last year,

now we get a look at our military’s “cyber playbook”. From a Global News story:

Canada directs military to take more ‘assertive’ stance in cyberspace

By Marc-André Cossette & Alex Boutilier

The Canadian government has directed its military to take a more “assertive” stance in cyberspace in anticipation of electronic warfare becoming a more central component in conflict, documents obtained by Global News suggest.

A “cyber playbook” prepared by the Canadian Armed Forces and the Department of National Defence comes as Ottawa pushes for international rules and norms around cyber espionage and warfare.

The playbook, provided to Defence Minister Anita Anand earlier this year, noted that the threats facing Canada’s networks have “evolved significantly” since the government released its 2010 cyber strategy.

The document also makes clear that Canada is under increasing pressure from allies to be able to conduct joint cyber operations, either as standalone operations or as support for “conventional” military conflict [emphasis added].

Anand’s office “clearly recognizes” cyberspace as a domain for warfare and operations that Canada must grapple with, the document read.

Speaking at a conference of defence experts hosted by the Canadian Global Affairs Institute on Tuesday [May 10], Anand singled out cyberattacks as one of several pressing national security threats…

Since 2016, NATO has recognized cyberspace as a domain of operations in which the alliance must defend itself just as effectively as it does on land, at sea and in the air.

But Russia’s war in Ukraine has given new urgency to allied co-operation in cyberspace, with western governments having issued repeated warnings this year about the threat of Russian state-sponsored cyberattacks.

“It may not be as upfront as some of the other military operations, but absolutely, cyber is a part of this conflict and in fact, all conflicts,” said Stephanie Carvin, a former CSIS analyst who now teaches at Carleton University.

The department’s playbook notes that Canada’s allies are increasingly calling for operational co-operation, including as part of missions that would include “robust cyber responses [emphasis added].”

In particular, the playbook highlights the U.S. concept of “deterrence through resilience,” noting that it has seen “a major thrust within Canada” and could be reflected in Canada’s cyber priorities.

“Basically, it means being able to deny actors access because of good cybersecurity practices,” Carvin explained. “But also, if they are able to get in, to ensure that we have a quick response, that government systems or private sector systems can come back online quickly.”..

Carvin also noted that the Department of National Defence’s playbook mirrors another concept that has been promoted by Canada’s allies, particularly the U.S.

I’m thinking of the concept of ‘defending forward’: the idea that you need to take a more aggressive stance in cyberspace,” Carvin said. “Not necessarily for offensive purposes, but for defensive purposes — perhaps to preempt any kind of threat that may be coming to your country [emphasis added, see this post on “defending forward” in the bigger NORAD context: “NORAD Chief Wants Defence (of what sort?) “Left of Launch” Focus, Russian Cruise Missiles (air- and sub-launched) Big Threat“].”

Just last month, western governments warned that Russia might ramp up its malicious cyber activity against critical infrastructure in response to sanctions imposed on Russia for its invasion of Ukraine.

It wasn’t the first such warning. In January of this year, Canada’s cyber defence agency urged those tasked with defending the country’s critical infrastructure to be on guard against Russian state-sponsored cyberattacks.

According to the defence department’s playbook, the need to better gather, use and share intelligence extends beyond the federal government and should engage industry, internet service providers and academia. That’s been a priority for the Communications Security Establishment – Canada’s main cyber defence and espionage agency, which also reports to Anand – particularly during the global pandemic.

Similarly, industry representatives have recently called on the federal government to make it easier for businesses to report cyber incidents — possibly through so-called safe harbour legislation, which would shield businesses that report a cyber breach from legal liability provided certain conditions are met.

Read more: Cyber defence agency gets significant boost in Liberals’ Budget 2022

Last month, the Canadian government published the country’s position on cyber warfare and international law. The document hints at what Canada is willing to do in both cyber espionage and warfare, but also when the government would consider a cyberattack to violate Canadian sovereignty.

“The scope, scale, impact or severity of disruption caused, including the disruption of economic and societal activities, essential services, inherently governmental functions, public order or public safety must be assessed to determine whether a violation of the territorial sovereignty of the affected state has taken place,” the document read.

In plain language, Carvin said, “not every action that crosses or affects a state is a violation” of sovereignty.

“So probing a system may not constitute a violation of state sovereignty, even if the action might be considered illegal,” Carvin said.

“If, for example, another country sent a spy to collect the same information, only in person, Canada’s state sovereignty wouldn’t be violated, but the action would be illegal – something like breaking and entering.”..

[DND spokesperson Jessica Lamirande wrote in a statement to Global News that] “Though we cannot release any further information on actual or alleged cyber operations, our Cyber Force is well positioned to plan and conduct cyber operations to defend military systems and infrastructure, and deliver effects outside of Canada, as authorized, in support of Canadian interests abroad.”..

Now here’s what the CAF say about this newish “trade“:

Cyber Operator

Non-Commissioned Member | Full Time

Overview

Cyber Operators conduct defensive cyber operations, and when required and where feasible, active cyber operations [emphasis added]. They liaise and work collaboratively with other government departments and agencies, as well as with Canada’s allies to enhance the Department of National Defence (DND) and the Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) ability to provide a secure cyber environment. They monitor CAF communication networks to detect and respond to unauthorized network access attempts and provide cyber support to meet the operational requirements of the Navy, Army, Air Force, and joint enablers.

A Cyber Operator has the following responsibilities:

*Collect, process and analyze network data

*Identify network vulnerabilities

*Manage a computer network environment

*Conduct defensive and active cyber operations [emphasis added]

*Apply security and communications knowledge in the field of information technology…

And a 2016 post–it seems progress is being made but I believe that comparatively we spend a lot less on cybersecurity etc. matters than the US, UK or Australia (typical, eh?):

Offensive Cyber Capability for Canadian Forces? Is the New Government Cyber Serious?

Mark Collins

Twitter: @Mark3ds

Now Major Canadian Broadcasting Corp. News Video on PRC’s Industrial Espionage in Canada

Further to this post,

Major Canadian Broadcasting Corp. News Video on PRC’s Harassing Critics in Canada, esp. Chinese Canadians (note UPDATE)

now the second installment (note Huawei and the demise of Canadian tech giant Nortel), on the public broadcaster’s flagship nightly news broadcast, of a three-part series of reports by the CBC’s research-intensive Terence McKenna, via the estimable Charles Burton of the Mcdonald-Laurier Institute:

And Brian Lee Crowley, Managing Director of the Institute, adds:


A post on the Harvard prof. noted at the CBC report,

Chicoms Bought Harvard Nanotech Prof?

who was subsequently convicted. Very relevant earlier posts:

Head of Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS) Names PRC, Russia as Threats to Canadian High Tech, Universities

Two Reports on Growing Security Threats to Canada (note esp. PRC)–will PM Trudeau’s Government take Serious Action?

Mark Collins

Twitter: @mark3ds

PM Trudeau Highlights Cyber Threats…but No Mention of PRC, Huawei

Oh well, that really would be expecting a bit much from our rather craven prime minister. Further to this post (note further links at end),

Why Won’t PM Trudeau Call Out PRC (and Russia) for “foreign interference, disinformation, espionage and hostile cyber-efforts”?

now the fellow raises a, er, non-specific alarm (no offence to anyone, eh?)–at Global News:

Trudeau tasks cabinet with new cybersecurity plan amid growing attacks, spying

By Alex Boutilier

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has tasked a committee of senior cabinet ministers to develop a new national cybersecurity plan amid increasingly public warnings from the country’s intelligence community about online threats.

In mandate letters released Thursday afternoon [Dec. 16, see news release here], Trudeau tapped his national defence, foreign affairs, public safety and industry ministers to develop a new “National Cyber Security Strategy [and how blinking long will that take?].”

Read more: Canadian health, energy sectors increasingly targeted by ransomware attacks

The plan should “articulate Canada’s long-term strategy to protect our national security and economy, deter cyber threat actors, and promote norms-based international behaviour in cyberspace,” the letters read [should the letters not also require that threat actors be identified?].

The directive comes as Canada’s intelligence community has been increasingly vocal in their warnings about the threat cyberattacks – and competing nation states – pose to the country’s security, economy and critical infrastructure.

The Communications Security Establishment (CSE), Canada’s electronic cyber defence and espionage agency, warned last week that cyberattacks against critical sectors – like health care provision, manufacturing and the energy sector – are on the rise.

The agency has warned throughout the pandemic that workers shifting to their homes – and away from more secure office networks – presents a target-rich environment for cybercriminals or state-backed hackers to exploit.

Global News reported last week that, for the first time, CSE acknowledged it has conducted cyber operations against foreign hackers to “impose a cost.”

Read more: Canadian spy agency targeted foreign hackers to ‘impose a cost’ for cybercrime

There are signs that the Liberal government is heeding the intelligence community’s warnings [emphasis added, with notable reluctance after quite some time of warnings being issued].

A joint letter signed by Defence Minister Anita Anand, Public Safety Minister Marco Mendicino, Emergency Preparedness Minister Bill Blair and International Trade Minister Mary Ng implored Canadian businesses and organizations to beef up their cybersecurity measures.

“It’s time to think seriously about cyber security,” the letter read. “We urge you to take stock of your organization’s online operations, protect your important information and technologies with the latest cyber security measures, build a response plan and ensure that your designated IT security personnel are well prepared to respond to incidents.”

Trudeau asked Anand and Mendicino, along with Foreign Affairs Minister Melanie Joly and Industry Minister Francois-Philippe Champagne, to develop the new strategy. No timeline has been set for its delivery [!!! emphasis added]– although Trudeau told his ministers that he expects regular and public updates on their progress [and how much personal attention will Mr Socks pay to them?].

But specific threat actors–government, private, or mix of the two–not worth naming? Chicken.

Mark Collins

Twitter: @Mark3ds

The long Reach of the Dragon’s Claws, Lithuania and New Zealand Sections

First smartphones:

Lithuania says throw away Chinese phones due to censorship concerns

Lithuania’s Defense Ministry recommended that consumers avoid buying Chinese mobile phones and advised people to throw away the ones they have now after a government report found the devices had built-in censorship capabilities.

Flagship phones sold in Europe by China’s smartphone giant Xiaomi Corp (1810.HK) have a built-in ability to detect and censor terms such as “Free Tibet”, “Long live Taiwan independence” or “democracy movement”, Lithuania’s state-run cybersecurity body said on Tuesday.The capability in Xiaomi’s Mi 10T 5G phone software had been turned off for the “European Union region”, but can be turned on remotely at any time, the Defence Ministry’s National Cyber Security Centre said in the report.

“Our recommendation is to not buy new Chinese phones, and to get rid of those already purchased as fast as reasonably possible,” Defence Deputy Minister Margiris Abukevicius told reporters in introducing the report…

Taiwanese missions in Europe and the United States use the name of the city Taipei, avoiding a reference to the island itself, which China claims as its own territory…

The National Cyber Centre’s report also said the Xiaomi phone was sending encrypted phone usage data to a server in Singapore. A security flaw was also found in the P40 5G phone [P40 is available in Canada] by China’s Huawei (HWT.UL) but none was found in the phone of another Chinese maker, OnePlus, it said.

Huawei’s representative in the Baltics told the BNS news wire its phones do not send user’s data externally.

The report said the list of terms which could be censored by the Xiaomi phone’s system apps, including the default internet browser, currently includes 449 terms in Chinese and is continuously updated.

“This is important not only to Lithuania but to all countries which use Xiaomi equipment,” the Centre said in the report [Xiaomi products are available in Canada, image at top of the post is a Xiaomi Mi 10T Lite 6GB/128GB Gray smartphone].

Second, Chinese-language media in New Zealand:

Concern over ‘censorship’ rules of NZ-Chinese news site

An influential Chinese-language media outlet in New Zealand warned its users their information could be shared with ‘relevant state agencies’ if they violated Chinese laws

A popular news site could be exposing New Zealanders to Chinese state surveillance, Newsroom can reveal.

The revelation raises questions about the role of media in alleged foreign interference activity in Aotearoa and has prompted calls for stronger regulation.

Skykiwi.com promotes itself as New Zealand’s “most influential” Chinese-language media outlet, with half a million ‘daily average user visits’ to its multi-platform website. Besides providing news coverage, the site also runs message boards where a variety of topics, including current affairs, are discussed. It claims to have 81,000 daily forum users.

Until July, the terms of service for these forums contained clauses forbidding speech on a range of topics and said that users who violate Chinese laws in their postings could have their information shared with “relevant state agencies,” indicating China’s intelligence apparatus would be able to potentially identify them. It also meant criticism of China’s ruling Communist Party was all but banned.

“According to the laws of China and New Zealand, this community [i.e. Skykiwi] is obliged to immediately stop transmission, save relevant records, report to relevant state agencies, and delete addresses, directories, or shut down servers that contain the content.”China has some of the world’s most restrictive laws on dissent in the digital realm, which can be enforced against its citizens even if they posted content while overseas. This means that Chinese nationals in this country or Chinese New Zealanders who may wish to visit the mainland in the future could be at risk of legal action for criticising the Chinese Communist Party on the pages of a New Zealand website.A list of forbidden conduct on the forum, as seen last month, includes “leaking state secrets”, “damaging national honour and interests”, “undermining national unity”, inciting “subversion of state power”, “undermining national policies” and promoting “cults”. Virtually identical wording was discovered on the terms of service for China’s state-backed social media platform WeChat and a list of “prohibited content” outlined by the Chinese Ministry of Culture.

Skykiwi did not respond to emailed queries about its forum’s terms of service when initially approached for this story in July.

But after the questions were sent, Newsroom found that the page was updated, with the line about Chinese laws removed and replaced with a reference to “two countries,” suggesting that the text was curated but the policy had not changed…

Canterbury University professor Anne-Marie Brady, an expert on Chinese influence operations, told Newsroom media regulations were due for an update.

“Now we know that NZ Chinese media sites are using PRC law to censor discussion of NZ citizens and residents on their websites,” she said.

“The question is, what is the NZ Government going to do about it? Our media laws and governing institutions are already weak, and they are totally un-resourced and un-prepared to deal with foreign interference and foreign-state censorship.”

Brady said the Government should pass laws requiring the registration of foreign agents [as should Canada, a post: “Registry for PRC’s Agents in Canada? Who Cares?“]…

PM Trudeau’s government is oddly disinterested in trying to deal with such interference by the PRC in Canada. Very relevant posts:

Dragon Devouring Canadian Chinese Media, Part 2 (Note “Update” on situation in Australia towards end)

Group Led by Chinese-Canadians Warns of PRC’s Influence/Interference Activities in Canada [note further links at end]

Oh well, nothing for Liberals and their comprador friends to see here.

Mark Collins

Twitter: @Mark3ds