Britain in talks on cybersecurity hotline with China and Russia

Existing protocols not robust enough for emergencies that could materialise in cyberspace, says Foreign Office official

  • The Guardian,
  • Jump to comments ()
William Hague
William Hague will attend the cybersecurity summit in Budapest. Photograph: David Kawai/Xinhua Press/Corbis

Britain has begun tentative talks with China and Russia about setting up a hotline to help prevent cyber-emergencies from spiralling out of control.

The discussions are at an early stage but they reflect anxiety from all sides that a calamity in cyberspace, whether deliberate or accidental, could have devastating consequences unless there is a quick and reliable way for senior officials to reach each other.

The US has been talking to the Chinese about a similar arrangement and the ideas will be among several raised at an international conference on cybersecurity in Hungary on Thursday.

The event will involve 600 diplomats from up to 50 countries and is a follow-up to a conference in London last year. One of the aims of the negotiations is to agree rules of behaviour in cyberspace at a time when states have become aware of the potential to attack, steal from and disrupt their enemies online.

China and Russia have been arguing for a more restrictive, state-controlled future for the internet and for formal arms-control-type treaties to govern what countries can and cannot do.

But they have been challenged by European countries and the US. The UK has said there is no need for treaties and that controls on the internet would restrict economic growth and freedom of speech.

Some progress has been made in reconciling the two positions, diplomats say, but the gulf between them is still huge, and the negotiations are continuing at snail's pace.

With the cyber arena evolving so quickly, and with the US and the UK saying cybertheft now represents a genuine threat to western economies and national security, the need for a hotline is pressing.

"At the moment, we don't really have sufficient information-sharing arrangements with some countries such as Chinaand the Chinese computer emergency response team," said a senior Foreign Office official.

"There isn't a form of crisis communication. If we can build that sort of partnership and relationship then the normative framework develops around that. If you ask for assistance, you get a response. That develops into an obligation to assist. One isn't naive about that, but I don't think the Chinese or the Russians enjoy uncertainty, not knowing who to turn to, who to talk to."

The official said the existing protocols and procedures were not robust enough for the type of emergencies that could materialise in cyberspace. "In theory, there are lists of people who to call, but I think they need to be tested and relied upon."

The foreign secretary, William Hague, and the cabinet secretary, Francis Maude, will be in Budapest for the two-day conference. They will announce that the UK is to establish a new £2m cyberhub at one of country's leading universities, which will provide guidance to the government and companies about where to invest money for initiatives in cyberspace abroad. The money will come from the £650m set aside for cybersecurity in the strategic defence and security review.

The official said talks with China were slow going and that there had not been any fundamental shift in Beijing's position. "Through initiatives such as its draft code of conduct, [China] has promoted a vision of cyberspace which has got much more sovereignty and government involvement in it. They have got particular points that they want to get across to the international community."

Comments

30 comments, displaying first

  • This symbol indicates that that person is The Guardian's staffStaff
  • This symbol indicates that that person is a contributorContributor
Open for comments. or create your Guardian account to join the discussion.
Welcome {name}, you're signed into The Guardian using Facebook. Join the discussion.
  • StephenStewart

    4 October 2012 12:37AM

    William Hague is absolutely insane. That's like J. Edgar Hoover setting up a hotline to the Mafia and the Ku Klux Klan, which he did - but he was certifiable too.

    The Russians used hackers that spend most of their time stealing credit card details and committing identity theft when they wanted talent to crash Georgia's computer networks, an operation that took them only minutes. State sponsored Chinese hackers have used spear phishing attacks to become permanent residents inside the computers of the Fortune 500 and the governments of every industrialized nation.

  • MrChrista

    4 October 2012 12:38AM

    This is surreal. The government have just sold access to UK networks to a company linked the the Chinese government banned in 6 countries and under investigation by America for... cyber attacks on various nations. What next - Sky to run national security.

  • qevindee

    4 October 2012 1:56AM

    this is ridiculous. is it for the gullible public's benefit they're shouting about this i wonder, cos they're fooling none of us really. the Rich States of Earth will do what they like, do as they please, all as usual and to each ones mutuality. thus it is and always has been

    what next MrChrista (above me) Fox News to run the west coast mainline

  • softwater

    4 October 2012 2:00AM

    One bunch of big crooks sets up hotline to talk to another bunch of big crooks in case any little crooks start getting too big for their boots. Right. Got it.

  • royalecraig

    4 October 2012 2:24AM

    Guardian pick This comment has been chosen by a member of Guardian staff because it's interesting and adds to the debate

    I could beef up online security for £1 million per year.
    Simply offer hackers £100,000 if they can break into, disrupt, crash Govt, Coroprate computers, ask them how they did it, give the hacker £100,000 and fix the loophole.
    Just let the hackers do all the work, might as well use their talents for the national good..
    Rinse and Repeat, Job done.

  • MacNara

    4 October 2012 3:25AM

    The article contains not a single example of when - in response to what event or behaviour - a hotline would be useful.

    I can imagine various ways in which countries or groups can attack and damage each other over the cabled and satellite information networks, but I can't imagine a way in which a hotline would be relevant. Can anyone give an example?

    What does 'cyber-emergency' mean? Or is it just an empty phrase that sounds as though is is serious and a good reason for installing even more surveillance. And what would a 'cyber-emergency getting out of hand' involve?

    Maybe if an attack were undertaken by a private organisation based in a certain country, and the hotline were used to request the country to stop it? But I really can't imagine this working in real time?

  • epinoa

    4 October 2012 4:43AM

    Our education system isn't up to providing the necessary skill levels to to defend against your attacks. Our elites do PPE. Can we have a debate instead?

    Please don't attack us ...pretty please?

    I don't think we can PR our way out of this one Dave.

  • richp

    4 October 2012 5:30AM

    a calamity in cyberspace

    Setting us back to what, the early 2000's. No CiF or WoW isn't exactly nuclear war.

    Also, why can't they (and the Guardian) use the term "computer security". Cyber- is a prefix reserved for smutty chats on instant messenger with people (usually having a somewhat misleading a/s/l).

  • LucianOfSamosata

    4 October 2012 6:42AM

    You have nothing to fear but Fear itself [such as the BogeyMen conjured up by this Government when they have run out of excuses and other people to blame].

  • GeorgeStephenson

    4 October 2012 9:12AM

    Wonder who has the longest spoon ? Each one talking about how to prevent computer security being breached , whilst each one behind the others backs is researching ways to breach the others security .? No doubt if Mr. Hague's proposal to merge embassies with the Canadians goes ahead , he will be keeping the Canadians informed.

  • Icarusty

    4 October 2012 9:32AM

    And are the Mafia and KK, then... you said yourself, China are responsible for spear phising attacks - nuisances that prey on human error... whereas the US, UK and Israel create sophisticated trojans and worms to overheat a nuclear power plant.

  • Icarusty

    4 October 2012 9:45AM

    With a ? at the end, how novel. China "can" do this, do that... it's all just speculation and fearmongering. Most chips have a reprogrammable section to update firmware and install new features. Yes, this can be used for good and bad - saves a lot of manufacturing the whole thing and installing them in military equipment all over. But with a security oriented chip no doubt the fixed stuff onchip prevents any overrides the new section can do.

    Also the "links with the Chinese military" thing that Huaiwei is suffering from - well hang on, pretty much every American corporation now global has military ties - CURRENT, as well as past. Microsoft has military ties, they sell software, servers to the US military, should China blacklist them or reign suspicion on Microsoft contracts in China because of that?

    The shitstirrers know very well the buzzwords and phrases uses that can instantly create fear amongst its populace. A bit like China I suppose. The difference is, the Chinese know their news could we be biased... westerners don't have that privilege, so far up their own arse they are to find out the truth.

  • SevenSeas7

    4 October 2012 10:20AM

    Totalitarian Governments United against the dissent of 'their' citizens?

    Exactly. Everything has become transparent now. The general public need to wake-up - UK, US, Europe as well as China and Russia have essentially totalitarian governments. It is time for the people of every nation to stand up to these corporate fascists.

    Looks like the world is in a transition phase where civil disobedience will be the norm until the neoliberals are toppled.


    For starters, people in the UK - please join the march on Saturday 20th October. The more people from all walks of life join the better.

  • BawbagMcWimoweh

    4 October 2012 10:24AM

    emergencies that could materialise in cyberspace

    If China starts rumours about the UK on Twitter then things could get well out of hand. You just have to look at parties that spiral out of control once they've been advertised on Facebook.

  • Pyrus

    4 October 2012 10:27AM

    So cutting to the chase, if something goes wrong online, it's okay for us to pick up the phone and have a chat about it.

    How many civil servants did it take to nail that as a proposal?

  • Exodus20

    4 October 2012 11:14AM

    cybertheft now represents a genuine threat to western economies

    Quite. But how much of it is inside job. Don;t forget other IT and internet savvy countries like India, etc.

  • MacNara

    4 October 2012 11:31AM

    I wouldn't be surprised to find that Hague thinks computers still communicate using a little box called a 'modem' and that therefore a phone call will always be quicker than the internet.

    And anyway, you can't make a phone call and use the internet at the same time.

  • StephenStewart

    4 October 2012 1:25PM

    China are responsible for spear phishing attacks - nuisances that prey on human error...

    Yes, by "preying upon human error" state sponsored Chinese hackers have penetrated the computers of Fortune 500 corporations and the governments of every industrialized nation, largely in order to search to search for proprietary commercial information and economic intelligence. These are not one time penetratrations, but ongoing espionage operations.

    ... whereas the US, UK and Israel create sophisticated trojans and worms to overheat a nuclear power plant.

    I have no information about about any cyberwar capabilities of the UK. if you're talking about the program that created Duqu, StuxNet and Flame, that is presumably an ongoing joint US/Israeli operation. This program hasn't, to my knowledge, attacked any nuclear power plants.

    StuxNet attacked the Seimens programmable logic controllers (PLC) that controlled centrifuges used to refine uranium in Iran, ultimately causing many of them to overheat and break down. Centrifuges are designed to spin very quickly and may be used to mechanically separate compounds into their elementary components with centrifugal force.

    Spinning centrifuges at speeds above their intended operational parameters causes them to overheat and melt down. By damaging or destroying up to a 1,000 centrifuges, the StuxNet program set back uranium refining activities in Iran by, perhaps, 6 months. No nuclear power plants were sabotaged.

Open for comments. or create your Guardian account to join the discussion.
Welcome {name}, you're signed into The Guardian using Facebook. Join the discussion.

Find your MP

Today's best video

Guardian Bookshop

This week's bestsellers

  1. 1.  Verdict

    by Polly Toynbee £7.99

  2. 2.  Last Man Standing

    by Jack Straw £14.00

  3. 3.  Interventions

    by Kofi Annan £20.00

  4. 4.  International Human Rights Movement

    by Neier £19.96

  5. 5.  Philip Gould

    by Dennis Kavanagh £12.99

guardian holiday offers