The title came to me after reading an article in the Guardian about British government officials upset about suspected hacking and relations with China:

“This is happening against a backdrop where, on a whole range of foreign policy issues, the British government is very weak. They seek to appease the Chinese. They should be more robust and indignant.”

The most plausible theories on why the Chinese authorities might choose to foster patriotic hacking were either to test its potential as a weapon or simply to send a signal to other great powers that they have the capability to do so, he said.

In response to a parliamentary question tabled by Mr MacKinlay last year, the then home secretary, Charles Clarke, revealed that the National Infrastructure Coordination Centre had issued a warning in 2005 of “concerted Trojan email attacks from the far east against UK government and business interests”. He said the scale of the attacks as “almost industrial”.

Funny to think that someone would compare the post-industrial efficiency of software and technology in general with industrial output. Is this like using horsepower to describe the output of combustion engines? Should we describe worms in terms of the number of factory workers…?

The article shows how information security has real macro-level issues to deal with, in addition to the usual micro stuff in the news. I have always maintained that international relations was really the study of macro-level security.

The Americans and Germans have also been smarting from Chinese industrial patriot hacking news.