emptywheel

Just because Jake was following orders from our gov doesn't mean he wasn't breaking the laws of other countries.

Yes, that's also true,but I'm not sure I see your point. We identified actors behind keyboards. Is it best to just shrug it off?

This is a diplomatic issue, not a criminal one. DOJ assumes that by charging hackers they'll discourage others from wanting to do the work.

Yes, and I admit that that assumption is not proven. But I'm also not sure what a real diplomatic solution would look like, or whether it could actually be effective. I think this indictment is a pretty reasonable action, all considered.

If Iran, Russia, China, etc charged a handful of BAH employees in a similar manner for acting on behalf of the US gov against them, would you still feel the same about reasonableness?

For acts of commercial espionage? Yes, I probably would. I think it's important to keep in mind the context of their actions. It's not like all their attacks were directed against what we'd normally consider "legitimate" targets of state-sponsored work.

I disagree. First, it's impossible to know intent and why an organization was targeted. Second, I can totally see military applications of the organizations targeted in the indictment. Finally, I'd point out that each nation has its own definition of "legitimate"

Here’s a thought exercise I often ask in class. If a Chinese gov hacker breaks into a US ag company and steals a formula for drought resistant corn to feed their people, should it be a crime?