←back to thread

PRC Targeting of Commercial Telecommunications Infrastructure

(www.fbi.gov)
286 points 2OEH8eoCRo0 | 2 comments | 14 Nov 24 00:59 UTC | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
basilgohar ◴[14 Nov 24 01:07 UTC] No.42132069[source]▶
> and the copying of certain information that was subject to U.S. law enforcement requests pursuant to court orders

Is this legal speak for saying, "They're using our backdoors without our permission."?

replies(9): >>42132086 #>>42132150 #>>42132199 #>>42132267 #>>42132292 #>>42132511 #>>42132544 #>>42132558 #>>42133159 #
sangnoir ◴[14 Nov 24 02:32 UTC] No.42132558[source]▶
It's legal speak for "They are looking at who we have wiretaps on", which any country would be interested in, just to see which of their assets are being watched, for counter-counter-espionage purposes.
replies(2): >>42132767 #>>42132773 #
halJordan ◴[14 Nov 24 03:12 UTC] No.42132773[source]▶
That is incorrect. While you're idea probably is interesting to them, they are indeed leveraging the infrastructure to "live off the land" doing their own collect. They are very much doing their own targeting.
replies(1): >>42132958 #
sangnoir ◴[14 Nov 24 03:42 UTC] No.42132958[source]▶
How would their own targeting relate to "copying of certain information that was subject to U.S. law enforcement requests pursuant to court orders"? AFAIK, telecoms enforcement requests subject to court orders in the US mean one thing, and one thing only: lawful interception of communication.
replies(1): >>42133132 #
1. basilgohar ◴[14 Nov 24 04:19 UTC] No.42133132[source]▶
There is no known limit to the scope of what LE can monitor, and there is no public record to access or analyze in the case of sealed documents. So it could, for all we know, be anyone and everyone.

Remember, way back when, AT&T just gave the NSA full access to their network.

replies(1): >>42133320 #
2. sangnoir ◴[14 Nov 24 05:10 UTC] No.42133320[source]▶
I'm not sure I'm following your argument in the context of this thread. Are you suggesting there were no surveillance court orders whose targets the Chinese found a d copied?