China Hack Denials Paper Example

The article argues about the Department of Homeland Security being aware of certain media reports of the technology supply chain compromise. The assertion came after the department mentioned the previous Saturday that it had no doubts towards the statements given by companies about their supply chains being compromised by the malicious computer chips particularly those which were inserted by the Chinese intelligence services. They, therefore, went ahead in denying a Bloomberg report on the same accounts of Chinese compromised actions. The statement confirmed that China had overstepped its mandate by violating the established policies of the United States. The Chinese government resorted to using the spies who instead of working as per the law decided to breach the privacy of the companies covered in the report. The National Cyber Security Center which is located in the United Kingdom also believed the information or rather complaints that were given by the companies.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

The Bloomberg business week supported the standby citing at least 17 unidentified intelligence with most of the sources confirming that the spies were from China and they placed the computer chips in the equipment which are used by about 30 companies. The effect was also extended to other multiple U.S. government agencies, an issue which was likely to affect the security system of the government. Their governments' networks were exposed as per the report hence the Chinese laying hands on very critical information.

Even though the breach or the compromised level existed, there was an urgency which offered divergent views to that of the Department of Homeland Security, the National Cyber Security Center, and the Bloomberg Business Week. The urgency was that of Britain cyber security which supported the views that were given by two giant companies. The companies were Apple Inc and Amazon.com. Apply argued that its primary investigations did not find evidence to support the stories or rather the claims about the Chinese spies compromising the technological security. It also confirmed that as a company, it was not aware of any investigation done by the FBI on the issue of Chinese involvement hence going against the arguments covered within the Bloomberg report. It went ahead to justify its case by bringing into the picture the retired general counsel by the name of Bruce Sewell who made a personal initiative of calling the FBI and confirming of the existence of any investigation. Bruce Sewell informed Reuters that he called the FBI's then-general counsel who was James Baker if he was certain about Bloomberg conducting any general investigation on a company by the name Super Micro Computer Inc. The company deals in hardware products and was argued as having most of its maker products being implanted with the malicious Chinese chips. The inquiry on the issue was made through a phone call and Baker promised to offer a feedback within the next twenty fours, something which he did. In his feedback, he confirmed that no one had the knowledge of the Bloomberg story and chances could be that it was a mere fabric. The FBI and Baker, however, declined to make a formal comment on the issue.

Conclusion

Even though Baker clarified of the FBI not having any knowledge pertaining to an ongoing investigation hence failing to justify the Bloomberg report, I still believe in the report. Baker and the FBI failing to comment on the issue should be something of interest. The formal comment would have solidified their stand, without it, the Bloomberg report still holds.