The Normalization of Digital Encroachment: A Selective Indignation
The Independent's report details a cybersecurity firm's findings that an unnamed 'Asian cyber-spy group' compromised 37 foreign governments. The language employed by unnamed cybersecurity firms, such as 'methods, targets and scale of operations are alarming,' frames these actions as uniquely egregious. However, a review of documented intelligence practices reveals a different picture. CASE A: The
'Asian Cyber-Spy Group' Narrative The current framing emphasizes the scale and alleged nefarious intent of the 'Asian group.' The article states the breaches affected '37 foreign governments,' and the unnamed firm describes the 'scale of operations' as 'alarming.' CASE B: Western State-Sponsored Cyber Operations In contrast, when comparable, or even larger-scale, cyber operations are attributed to
Western intelligence agencies, the framing shifts significantly. For example, the 2013 Snowden revelations documented the National Security Agency's (NSA) widespread surveillance, including the hacking of fiber optic cables and the tapping of communications of foreign leaders, such as German Chancellor Angela Merkel, for over a decade (Der Spiegel, 2013). This operation, dubbed 'Tempora' by media,
involved compromising significant portions of global internet traffic. Similarly, the 2008 'Olympic Games' operation, a joint US-Israeli cyberattack against Iran's nuclear facilities using the Stuxnet worm, was widely reported (The New York Times, 2010), but rarely with the 'alarming' rhetoric reserved for alleged adversaries. US Cyber Command's 'persistent engagement' doctrine explicitly states a