Pin-pointing China's attack against GitHub
To say that the "Chinese government" is involved I think understates the situation. We know as fact that their army has invested considerable time and money in a cyberwarfare unit. And that the company that operates the Firewall is a military contractor.When Sony was hacked a few months ago, the media couldn't wait to label it a "terrorist act" by North Korea.I just now searched Google News for "github terrorism".1. http://www.itpro.co.uk/security/24319/github-falls-victim-to...2. https://grahamcluley.com/2015/03/github-ddos-attack/That's all, even though the evidence appears more clear that the Chinese government is involved. Whereas North Korea's responsibility was in doubt. The silence speaks volumes.But is "terrorism" even the correct word for this? When Saddam invaded Kuwait, was that a terrorist act? Consider this quote written by a Chinese military analyst 30 years ago:  those who take part in information war are not all soldiers. Anybody who
  understands computers may become a "fighter" on the network. Think tanks
  composed of non-governmental experts may take part in decision-making;
  rapid mobilization will not just be directed to young people; information-
  related industries and domains will be the first to be mobilized and enter
  the war..

(From http://fmso.leavenworth.army.mil/documents/chinarma.htm)However, the Chinese may respond by claiming this was a preemptive defense. That GreatFire.com was designed to weaken their security and they were justified in taking action to protect the sovereignty of their computers. Haven't western nations done the same when they were threatened by terrorism or nuclear arms?It seems to me that we have officially entered the era of a weaponized internet.