Chinese Peril

China’s control over economic zones leads to more protests in Vietnam

Protesters held signs that said “No leasing land to Chinese communists for even one day” and “Cybersecurity law kills freedom”.
AP

Vietnamese police have arrested eight more people after protests a week ago over a proposed law on special economic zones that protesters fear would fall into the hands of Chinese investors.

The men from the south central province of Binh Thuan were accused of disturbing public order, opposing officials and damaging state property, the state-run Tuoi Tre newspaper reported.
Protests against the law took place across the country, including in the southern commercial hub of Saigon where seven people were arrested for allegedly disturbing security and opposing officials.
Protesters fear the three proposed special economic zones, where land could be rented for up to 99 years, would be dominated by investors from China.
Lawmakers have postponed the passage of the law until October.
Security on Sunday was tight in many cities and provinces in Vietnam, with a large presence of police in public areas. 

But in central Ha Tinh province, live-stream footage on Facebook showed thousands of people attending a Sunday mass protesting peacefully against the laws.
Protesters held signs that said “No leasing land to Chinese communists for even one day” and “Cybersecurity law kills freedom”.

Witnesses said there were no clashes with police during the two-hour protest.
The Vietnamese government has vowed to punish “extremists” it said had instigated rare clashes with police in Binh Thuan province. 

Protesters hurled bricks and Molotov cocktails at police, damaging some government buildings.
Charge d’affaires of the Chinese embassy in Vietnam, Yin Haihong, said on Friday that the cause of this incident was internal affairs in Vietnam and there was no connection with China.
“However, the incident still has a negative impact on Sino-Vietnamese relations;” Yin said in an embassy statement.

American Is Detained After Joining Anti-China Protest in Vietnam

By Austin Ramzy
Protesters in Saigon, Vietnam, on Sunday held banners denouncing a proposal to create special economic zones favorable to China.

HONG KONG — An American citizen was among dozens of people arrested in Vietnam this week during protests against proposed special economic zones that have raised fears of Chinese encroachment.
The American, Will Nguyen, was visiting Saigon ahead of his graduation this summer from a master’s program at the University of Singapore, according to a statement from his family and friends.
Mr. Nguyen, 32, a Houston native who graduated from Yale, took part in protests on Sunday. 

He was “beaten over the head and dragged into the back of a police truck,” after the authorities moved to quash the demonstrations that day, according to the statement.
A video from the protests shows Mr. Nguyen, with blood smeared across his face, being dragged by a group of men. 

He is later shown standing in the bed of a pickup truck topped with emergency lights.
He was taken to a police station, but his current whereabouts and physical condition are not known, the statement said.
Mr. Nguyen’s family fled South Vietnam after the war that led to its collapse, he wrote in a recent piece for the website New Naratif that discussed the conflict and the country’s history of divisions between North and South.
“He is a proud Vietnamese-American, and passionate about his studies, specifically Southeast Asian studies, in which he majored,” his sister, Victoria Nguyen, said by email.
Pope Thrower, spokesman for the United States Embassy in Hanoi, said the embassy was “aware of media reports that a U.S. citizen was arrested in Vietnam.”
Will Nguyen, 32, of Houston, has been studying at the University of Singapore.

“When a U.S. citizen is detained overseas, the U.S. Department of State works to provide all appropriate consular assistance,” he added. 

“Due to privacy considerations, we have no further comment.”
From Saigon, Mr. Nguyen posted a series of tweets documenting the protests on Sunday, with crowds of people marching down city streets.
“I can’t stress how enormous of an achievement this is for the #Vietnamese people,” he wrote. 

“The people are exercising their civic duty to protest injustice.”
One image he posted shows a protester who was struck by police officers lying on the street while another person helps him. 

Another shows a protester holding a sign that reads, “No Chinese Land Lease Even 1 Day.”

Mr. Nguyen’s family has not been able to reach him, but his hosts at an Airbnb rental did reportedly speak with him shortly after his detention. 

Police officers showed up at the apartment two days later to confiscate his laptop, passport, credit cards and a change of clothes, his family said.
In addition to the special economic zones, protesters said they were concerned about a proposed cybersecurity law. 

The state-controlled news media in Vietnam reported that 102 people were arrested Sunday in the southeastern province of Binh Thuan, where thousands of protesters blocked a highway and later set fire to public buildings. 

Protests were also reported in Hanoi, the capital.
The proposed special economic zones would give leases of up to 99 years to foreign investors in three areas that would have fewer administrative restrictions than the rest of the country. 

The proposal has stirred fear that it would undermine national security by giving China control over parts of Vietnamese territory.
Vietnam and China have overlapping claims in the South China Sea, and Chinese efforts to extend control have set off protests in Vietnam. 

In 2014, China moved an offshore drilling rig into waters that Vietnam considers part of its exclusive economic zone, which prompted large demonstrations and efforts by Vietnam to force the rig to move.
The two countries fought a brief but bloody border war in 1979, when China invaded Vietnam in an attempt to punish its neighbor for toppling the Khmer Rouge in Cambodia.

Microsoft, Intel, IBM Push Back on China Cybersecurity Rules

Beijing wants foreign tech companies to hand over their source code.By EVA DOU

Visitors used a laptop behind a security guard at the Global Mobile Internet Conference in Beijing in April 2015. The Chinese government plans to implement new cybersecurity rules by next summer.

BEIJING—Tough new Chinese cybersecurity rules are providing a rare, behind-the-scenes look at a regulatory skirmish between U.S. technology companies and Beijing.
China is moving to require software companies, network-equipment makers and other technology suppliers to disclose their proprietary source code, the core intellectual property running their software, to prove their products can’t be compromised by hackers.
Tech companies are loath to offer up their source code, saying this will heighten the risk of their code falling into the hands of rivals or malefactors—and may not guarantee it is hack-proof.
Microsoft Corp., Intel Corp. and International Business Machines Corp. are among those filing objections.
“Sharing source code in itself can’t prove the capability to be secure and controllable,” Microsoft wrote in comments released by a government cybersecurity committee in November.
“It only proves there is source code.”
Intel said a rule forcing chip makers to disclose the details of their products “would hurt technological innovation and decrease the security level of products.”
------------
BEIJING’S ONLINE RULES
Some features of China’s new regulations to ensure information technology products are ‘secure and controllable.’

• IT suppliers must provide the software source code running the products, and design details, so authorities can check for security flaws or back doors.
• Product security will be graded on whether the system’s technology is transparent to authorities, how data is stored and processed, and the stability of the supply chain, to economic and political changes.
• IT buyers in China will be ranked into five security classifications that require different levels of IT equipment security.

-------------
The comments were made in a discussion log made public by Technical Committee 260, the national cybersecurity standards maker, as it released technical parameters of its omnibus cybersecurity law adopted Nov. 7.
The committee is rolling out standards for operating systems, microprocessors, office software and other products to comply with the regulations when they go into force in June 2017.
Chinese authorities have said these measures are necessary to guard against foreign espionage tools being embedded in software used here.
They frequently cite claims by former U.S. National Security Agency contractor Edward Snowden that such back doors were routinely built into U.S. technology products sold overseas.
Microsoft, Intel and IBM were the largest U.S. firms to respond to the draft regulations, joining dozens of Chinese companies, government agencies and security experts.
The three U.S. tech giants declined to comment beyond their written statements.
All three have multiple China ventures with local partners and are typically reluctant to publicly challenge Chinese policy.
As such, their written comments, made in Chinese, offer a rare glimpse into how they parry over regulations with Beijing authorities.
Among other things, tech companies are bristling at the level of detail they would be forced to disclose to have their proprietary technologies rated “secure and controllable.”
Microsoft wrote that it believed allowing visitors to view code at its new “Transparency Center” in Beijing should suffice, rather than having to “share source code.”
Technical Committee 260 staffers disagreed, maintaining the original wording and marking the comment “not accepted.”
Microsoft and Intel also raised questions over one security standard that gives a higher ranking to products whose development and delivery can’t be disrupted by “politics,” with Intel requesting clarification.
That complaint was marked “partially accepted,” although political consideration is still in the most recent draft.
IBM said that distinctions should be made between computing services for commercial use, versus services for government applications.
“Computing rooms used purely for commercial cloud computing purposes shouldn’t have to be located within China’s borders,” wrote IBM.
In a written response, Technical Committee 260 staffers said that many sectors touch upon social stability and the public interest.
“It’s not only a pure commercial question.”
Jeremie Waterman, senior director for Greater China at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce in Washington, said there is “deep concern about the IP disclosure requirements.”
But it isn’t clear what recourse U.S. tech companies might have.
Despite any objections, U.S. firms are unlikely to leave China over the cybersecurity requirements because of the importance of the mammoth Chinese market, said James Gong, a senior associate at law firm Herbert Smith Freehills LLP who works with western clients in navigating Chinese law.
“I don’t think they will pull out,” said Mr. Gong.
“I haven’t heard of any company that has decided to leave.”
China has long had cybersecurity standards that weren’t vigorously enforced—but that is likely to change when the nationwide cybersecurity law goes into effect next summer, he said.
Beijing maintains that its security rules apply to domestic and foreign companies equally.
When China passed the cybersecurity law last month, a spokesman for the internet regulator said foreigners who thought the law would favor domestic firms had a “misunderstanding, a biased view.”
But in Technical Committee 260’s discussions, certain government officials argued for the standards to be drafted to favor domestic companies.
“The big trend is called shifting to domestic production,” wrote Guo Qiquan, chief engineer at the China Ministry of Public Security’s Network Security Bureau, in a suggestion that the committee marked “approved.”
“But it can’t be written that way, so one calls it independent and controllable.”

China’s New Cybersecurity Law Is Bad News for Business

This law provides China with the legal tool to obtain all foreign anti-hacking proprietary security hardware and software, which could then be passed on to relevant Chinese firms. 

By Georges Haour 

In this Aug. 16, 2016 file photo, a worker is silhouetted against a computer display showing a live visualization of the online phishing and fraudulent phone calls across China during the 4th China Internet Security Conference (ISC) in Beijing.

China’s new cybersecurity law, expected to take effect next June, could hurt any foreign firm looking to do business in the world’s second-largest economy. 

Though the law is intended to fight hackers, it also requires that foreign companies provide China’s government with sensitive information about network equipment and software. 

Given the weaknesses of China’s enforcement of laws around intellectual property, it’s easy to see how trade secrets can fall into the hands of Chinese competitors at the expense of the best interests of foreign firms.
Businesses most at risk will be those with special hardware and systems for network management, which could well include ATMs. 

Because new-generation ATMs have a much higher level of connectivity, they’re more vulnerable to hacking, which is why they require sophisticated encryption devices and software to secure transactions. 

This cybersecurity law thus provides the government with the legal tool to obtain all such anti-hacking proprietary security hardware and software, which could then be passed on to relevant Chinese firms.

And having access to the hardware and software means Chinese firms would have access to individuals’ personal banking information, as well.
The new law is also counterproductive because the scope of information that foreign companies will be required to provide to Chinese officials is worryingly broad. 

Complying with this requirement will force U.S. firms to make expensive investments to build duplicate facilities within China. 

This is in total contradiction with the free flow of data, expected to swell in 2020 after the introduction of 5G.
U.S. companies will have to weigh this risk against the opportunity to do business in China, which has developed a reputation for ‘copying’ without getting insider access. 

For international companies, there is no easy way forward, as the choice is black or white. 

Either foreign companies will comply, knowing China has a way to peek into what was previously private, or they will choose to stand by principles of privacy at the risk of being excluded from the Chinese market. 

Despite the challenging dilemma, companies are likely to comply and give in to China’s demands. 

The market is too huge and far too ripe for future growth to be ignored, especially when compared to more stagnant outlooks in Europe and the U.S.
In addition to creating barriers for international business in China, this kind of legislative move could stall innovation. 

It could well be considered to be part of what is called “indigenous innovation” in China, which consists of favoring Chinese firms by establishing non-tariff barriers—such as specific standards or regulations on products—in order to prevent non-Chinese firms the access to China’s large and dynamic market. 

And the impact would be wide-ranging, from consumer electronics to products, such as equipment to produce renewable energy, including windmills and solar panels.
Innovation involves a complex process, but it requires a society to be as open as possible and to allow vibrant exchanges between people. 

While cybersecurity is important, this law will wrap around the free market as it grips security. Within China, entrepreneurs are, by and large, not bothered by their government’s management of the Internet, called the “great firewall.” 

However, this new law is a new step to tighten the government’s grip on Internet. 

Furthermore, far from favoring China’s champions in this very dynamic area, such as Huawei, Lenovo, or Tencent, this law will handicap them in the long term. 

Maybe the hope is that these companies themselves will fight to alter the law and mitigate the negative implications for China’s Internet landscape.
U.S. companies have already begun to strongly lobby against the law, as well as China’s position that the Internet must be managed by authorities. 

But despite the efforts of any company, American, Chinese, or other, the cybersecurity law is just a piece of a larger ongoing political puzzle that companies will have to deal with. 

In the end, agility will be key for companies to succeed in the tense political environment.

China’s vast Internet prison

In law and in practice, China is creating the world’s largest online thought prison. 

The Washington Post

A live visualization of the online phishing and fraudulent phone calls across China. 

CHINA’S INTERNET is a universe of contradictions. 

It has brought hundreds of millions of people online and has become a vast marketplace for digital commerce, yet it is also heavily policed by censors to snuff out any challenge to the ruling Communist Party. 

Under Xi Jinping, the censors are working overtime to keep 721 million Internet users under control.
The latest effort came Monday. China’s national parliament approved a cybersecurity law that can be used to restrict free speech and force foreign Internet companies to heed the demands of China’s security services. 

Censorship is not new in China; a huge phalanx of officials are devoted to it, harsh punishments are meted out, and the country is ringed by a content-blocking Great Firewall. 

But now censorship will be more fully enshrined in the legal code.
Article 12 of the new law prohibits use of the Internet for “inciting subversion of the national regime” or “the overthrow of the Socialist system.” 

Also banned is inciting separatism or ethnic hatred, “endangering national unity,” or “fabricating” or disseminating false information about the economy. 

These are all touchstones of Chinese authoritarianism, vague enough to be deployed in many circumstances to smother dissent. 

Article 37 of the new law requires “critical information infrastructure operators” to store users’ data, including that of foreign companies, on Chinese territory, making it easier for the security services to snoop. 

Article 24 requires Internet providers to demand the real identity of those they provide services to — making it easier for security services to track down those who would like to speak their mind. 

Many foreign businesses are also alarmed that the new law gives the Chinese authorities access to their technology and data.Offering a glimpse of how censorship actually works in China, Ronald Deibert, director of the Citizen Lab at the University of Toronto’s Munk School of Global Affairs, released a report recently on digital streaming services. 

Similar to Periscope (which is banned in China), these apps, such as YY, 9158 and Sina Show, have become a craze. 

Mr. Deibert’s researchers downloaded these three, and between February 2015 and October 2016 extracted 19,464 keywords that trigger censorship on chats associated with each application. 

Rather than monolithic control, they found censorship is decentralized and somewhat chaotic; the platforms are often expected to adhere to a kind of “self-discipline” rather than direct orders. 

Mr. Deibert’s group discovered that the most popular app, YY, with 844 million registered users, automatically sends a report back when a user types a banned keyword; the report includes not only the user’s name but also who the message was sent to and the message itself.
In law and in practice, China is creating the world’s largest online thought prison. 

It turns the idea of the Internet as a force for freedom on its head, and as China goes, so go other tyrants. 

From Vietnam to Saudi Arabia, from Russia to Turkey, the age of Internet repression has blossomed.

China adopts cybersecurity law in face of overseas opposition

By Michael Martina, Sue-lin Wong

BEIJING -- China adopted a controversial cybersecurity law on Monday to counter what Beijing says are growing threats such as hacking and terrorism, although the law has triggered concern from foreign business and rights groups.
The legislation, passed by China's largely rubber-stamp parliament and set to come into effect in June 2017, is an "objective need" of China as a major internet power, a parliament official said.
Overseas critics of the law argue it threatens to shut foreign technology companies out of various sectors deemed "critical", and includes contentious requirements for security reviews and for data to be stored on servers located in China.
Rights advocates also say the law will enhance restrictions on China's internet, already subject to the world's most sophisticated online censorship mechanism, known outside the country as the Great Firewall.
Yang Heqing, an official on the National People's Congress standing committee, said the internet was already deeply linked to China's national security and development.
"China is an internet power, and as one of the countries that faces the greatest internet security risks, urgently needs to establish and perfect network security legal systems," Yang told reporters at the close of a bimonthly legislative meeting.
More than 40 global business groups petitioned Li Keqiang in August, urging Beijing to amend controversial sections of the law. 

Chinese officials have said it would not interfere with foreign business interests.
Contentious provisions remained in the final draft of the law issued by the parliament, including requirements for "critical information infrastructure operators" to store personal information and important business data in China, provide unspecified "technical support" to security agencies, and pass national security reviews.
Those demands have raised concern within companies that fear they would have to hand over intellectual property or open back doors within products in order to operate in China's market.
James Zimmerman, chairman of the American Chamber of Commerce in China, called the provisions "vague, ambiguous, and subject to broad interpretation by regulatory authorities".
Human Rights Watch said elements of the law, such as criminalizing the use of the internet to "damage national unity", would further restrict online freedom.
"Despite widespread international concern from corporations and rights advocates for more than a year, Chinese authorities pressed ahead with this restrictive law without making meaningful changes," Sophie Richardson, China Director at Human Rights Watch, said in an emailed statement.
Zhao Zeliang, director of the Cyberspace Administration of China's cybersecurity coordination bureau, told reporters that every article in the law accorded with rules of international trade and that China would not close the door on foreign companies.
"They believe that [phrases such as] secure and independent control, secure and reliable, that these are signs of trade protectionism. That they are synonymous. This is a kind of misunderstanding, a kind of prejudice," Zhao said.
Many of the provisions had been previously applied in practice, but their formal codification coincides with China's adoption of a series of other regulations on national security and foreign civil society groups.
The law's adoption comes amid a broad crackdown by Xi Jinping on civil society, including rights lawyers and the media, which critics say is meant to quash dissent.
Last year, Beijing adopted a sweeping national security law that aimed to make all key network infrastructure and information systems "secure and controllable".