China responsible for two ‘malicious’ cyber attack campaigns in UK, says Dowden

Published

1 year ago

March 25, 2024

admin

China “state-affiliated actors” have been blamed by the government for two “malicious” cyber attack campaigns in the UK.

Making a speech in the Commons, Deputy Prime Minister Oliver Dowden revealed the two incidents involved an attack on the Electoral Commission – responsible for overseeing elections and political finance – in 2021, and targeted attacks against China-sceptic MPs.

He confirmed the Foreign Office would be summoning the Chinese ambassador “to account for China’s conduct in these incidents”, and that the UK, alongside international partners such as the US, would be issuing sanctions.

Mr Dowden told MPs: “The cyber threat posed by China affiliated actors is real and it is serious, but it is more than equalled by our determination and resolve to resist it.

“That is how we defend ourselves and our precious democracy.”

But he faced condemnation from backbench Tories for not going far enough, with former immigration minister Robert Jenrick calling the actions of the UK government “feeble” and “derisory”, and foreign affairs committee chair Alicia Kearns deeming them “sadly insufficient”.

Politics live: PM issues nuclear warning

According to the National Cyber Security Centre, the incident at the commission, discovered in 2022, saw the Electoral Roll compromised, including the names and addresses of tens of millions of voters.

But “reconnaissance activity” in 2021, targeting the accounts of former Tory leader Sir Iain Duncan Smith, former Conservative education minister Tim Loughton, crossbench peer Lord Alton of Liverpool and SNP MP Stewart McDonald was unsuccessful.

The latter of the campaigns was blamed on the APT31 group, also known as Judgement Panda or Zirconium, but a specific entity has not been named for the Electoral Commission attack.

However, the Foreign Office has confirmed it is placing sanctions on a front company, the Wuhan Xiaoruizhi Science and Technology Company, and two actors involved in the operations of APT31, Zhao Guangzong and Ni Gaobin – a move echoed by the US government.

Dowden: Attacks completely unacceptable

Mr Dowden said the two cyber attack campaigns were “completely unacceptable” and demonstrated “a clear and persistent pattern of behaviour that signal signals hostile intent from China”.

He added: “The UK does not accept that China’s relationship with the United Kingdom is set on a predetermined course. But this depends on the choices that China makes.

“That is why the Foreign Office will be summoning the Chinese ambassador to account for China’s conduct in these incidents.

“The UK’s policy towards China is anchored in our core national interests. Where it is consistent with these interests, we will engage with the Chinese government.

“But we will not hesitate to take robust actions wherever the Chinese government threatens the United Kingdom’s interests.”

But in response to the cyber attacks highlighted by the UK government, a Chinese Embassy spokesperson said the accusations were “completely fabricated and malicious slanders”.

They added: “China has always firmly fought all forms of cyber attacks according to law. China does not encourage, support or condone cyber attacks.

“At the same time, we oppose the politicisation of cyber security issues and the baseless denigration of other countries without factual evidence.

“We urge the relevant parties in the UK to stop spreading false information and stop their self-staged, anti-China political farce.”

Those MPs targeted by the attacks – all members of the Inter-Parliamentary Alliance on China (IPAC) who probe Beijing’s activities – were briefed by parliament’s director of security on Monday.

‘MPs will not be bullied into silence by Beijing’

Speaking at a press conference afterwards, Sir Iain said the group had been “subjected to harassment, impersonation and attempted hacking from China for some time”, but insisted MPs would not be “bullied into silence by Beijing”.

He called for a “watershed moment” from the government that would see the UK “take a stand for values of human rights and the international rules-based system on which we all depend”.

However, speaking in the Commons after Mr Dowden’s statement, Sir Iain described his words as “like an elephant giving birth to a mouse”, as he called for further sanctions on China – especially over its actions in Hong Kong – and for the country to be defined as a “threat”.

Foreign Secretary Lord Cameron has been briefing the 1922 Committee of backbench Conservative MPs on the measures, a number of whom have now publicly called for more robust action to be taken against China as a result of the cyber attacks.

Speaking to broadcasters afterwards, Mr Dowden addressed his critics by saying: “I would say this isn’t the end of the story. We will continue to take the necessary and proportionate steps to protect our democratic institutions.”

A clear reminder the cyber threat is constant

Tom Clarke

Science and technology editor

@t0mclark3

The fact China is attempting to spy on the UK and others online should come as no surprise.

This latest announcement from government is more of reminder that the activity is constant, and increasingly sophisticated.

The UK’s National Cyber Security Centre has now implicated a Chinese-backed hacking group APT31 of attempting to target a group of MPs.

There’s a clue in the name: Advanced Persistent Threat is cybersecurity speak for groups usually backed by governments.

A long list From APT16 to APT 41 are hacking groups each with their own techniques and target areas suspected of being run by the Chinese state.

It’s suggested APT 31 used “spear phishing” to attempt to spy on members of the Inter Parliamentary Alliance on China. The same as phishing – in which a malicious file, usually typically embedded in an innocent-looking link in a email – spear phishing is targeted at a specific individual or group.

We have less information on the hack of the Electoral Commission back in 2021, which has now also been attributed to China. In this instance the hackers are believed to have had persistent access to the Electoral Commission’s systems for months.

In response, the NCSC has updated guidance for political organisations and other institutions who could be at threat from such attacks, including updated guidance on sophisticated threat called “living off the land”.

This is a type of “fileless” attack that exploits native code used to manage server networks operated by large providers like Microsoft. Via an intrusion like a phishing attack, malicious code, disguised to look normal, is inserted straight into the target system’s operating instructions bypassing virus scanning software.

The danger of this type of attack is that it’s hard for online security teams to spot that an intrusion has happened, or to monitor the activity of hackers. Without very vigilant cybersecurity, hacks like this have been found to have persisted for long periods of time.

Last year Microsoft announced a “living off the land” attack by Chinese-backed hacker group Volt Typhoon had been used to infiltrate US utilities and critical infrastructure companies from 2021 onwards.

It is the latest incident to highlight growing pressure on Prime Minister Rishi Sunak from within his own party to take a tougher stance on China, having so far refused to brand the country a threat.

Speaking ahead of Mr Dowden’s statement, the prime minister said: “We’ve been very clear that the situation now is that China is behaving in an increasingly assertive way abroad, authoritarian at home and it represents an epoch-defining challenge, and also the greatest state-based threat to our economic security.

“So, it’s right that we take measures to protect ourselves, which is what we are doing.”

A Downing Street source also told Sky News Mr Sunak had “always had a robust position on China”, but it would “not be a sensible thing to do” to “cut all links” with Beijing, and instead the government took a “eyes wide open approach” to its activities.

Politics

Mandelson appointment was ‘worth the risk’ despite ‘strong relationship’ with Epstein, says minister

Published

14 mins ago

September 14, 2025

admin

Mandelson appointment was 'worth the risk' despite 'strong relationship' with Epstein, says minister

Appointing Lord Mandelson as the UK’s ambassador to the US was “worth the risk”, a minister has told Sky News.

Peter Kyle said the government put the Labour peer forward for the Washington role, despite knowing he had a “strong relationship” with convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.

It is this relationship that led to Peter Mandelson being fired on Thursday by the prime minister.

Politics Hub: Latest updates

But explaining the decision to appoint Lord Mandelson, Business Secretary Mr Kyle said: “The risk of appointing [him] knowing what was already public was worth the risk.

“Now, of course, we’ve seen the emails which were not published at the time, were not public and not even known about. And that has changed this situation.”

Speaking to Sunday Morning with Trevor Phillips, he rejected the suggestion that Lord Mandelson was appointed to Washington before security checks were completed.

He explained there was a two-stage vetting process for Lord Mandelson before he took on the ambassador role.

The first was done by the Cabinet Office, while the second was a “political process where there were political conversations done in Number 10 about all the other aspects of an appointment”, he said.

This is an apparent reference to Sir Keir Starmer asking follow-up questions based on the information provided by the vetting.

These are believed to have included why Lord Mandelson continued contact with Epstein after he was convicted and why he was reported to have stayed in one of the paedophile financier’s homes while he was in prison.

Mr Kyle said: “Both of these things turned up information that was already public, and a decision was made based on Peter’s singular talents in this area, that the risk of appointing knowing what was already public was worth the risk.”

Mr Kyle also pointed to some of the government’s achievements under Lord Mandelson, such as the UK becoming the first country to sign a trade deal with the US, and President Donald Trump’s state visit next week.

Mr Kyle also admitted that the government knew that Lord Mandelson and Epstein had “a strong relationship”.

“We knew that there were risks involved,” he concluded.

PM had only ‘extracts of emails’ ahead of defence of Mandelson at PMQs – as Tories accuse him of ‘lying’

Speaking to Sky News, Kyle also sought to clarify the timeline of what Sir Keir Starmer knew about Lord Mandelson’s relationship with Epstein, and when he found this out.

It follows Conservative Party leader Kemi Badenoch accusing the prime minister of “lying to the whole country” about his knowledge of the then US ambassador’s relationship with the paedophile.

Allegations about Lord Mandelson began to emerge in the newspapers on Tuesday, while more serious allegations – that the Labour peer had suggested Epstein’s first conviction for sexual offences was wrongful and should be challenged – were sent to the Foreign Office on the same day by Bloomberg, which was seeking a response from the government.

But the following day, Sir Keir went into the House of Commons and publicly backed Britain’s man in Washington, giving him his full confidence. Only the next morning – on Thursday – did the PM then sack Lord Mandelson, a decision Downing Street has insisted was made based on “new information”.

Speaking to Sunday Morning with Trevor Phillips, Mr Kyle said: “Number 10 had what was publicly available on Tuesday, which was extracts of emails which were not in context, and they weren’t the full email.

“Immediately upon having being alerted to extracts of emails, the Foreign Office contacted Peter Mandelson and asked for his account of the emails and asked for them to be put into context and for his response. That response did not come before PMQs [on Wednesday].

“Then after PMQs, the full emails were released by Bloomberg in the evening.

“By the first thing the next morning when the prime minister had time to read the emails in full, having had them in full and reading them almost immediately of having them – Peter was withdrawn as ambassador.”

The Conservatives have claimed Sir Keir is lying about what he knew, with Laura Trott telling Sky News there are “grave questions about the prime minister’s judgement”.

The shadow education secretary called for “transparency”, and told Sunday Morning with Trevor Phillips: “We need to understand what was known and when.”

They believe that Sir Keir was in possession of the full emails on Tuesday, because the Foreign Office passed these to Number 10. This is despite the PM backing Mandelson the following day.

Ms Trott explained: “We are calling for transparency because, if what we have outlined is correct, then the prime minister did lie and that is an extremely, extremely serious thing to have happened.”

She added: “This was a prime minister who stood on the steps of Downing Street and said that he was going to restore political integrity and look where we are now. We’ve had two senior resignations in the space of the number of weeks.

“The prime minister’s authority is completely shot.”

But Ms Trott refused to be drawn on whether she thinks Sir Keir should resign, only stating that he is “a rudderless, a weak prime minister whose authority is shot at a time we can least afford it as a country”.

Politics

Labour MPs already angry over claim Mandelson’s appointment was ‘worth the risk’

Published

4 hours ago

September 14, 2025

admin

Labour MPs already angry over claim Mandelson's appointment was 'worth the risk'

If you want to know why so many Labour MPs are seething over the government’s response to the Mandelson saga, look no further than my mobile phone at 9.12am this Sunday.

At the top of the screen is a news notification about an interview with the family of a victim of the notorious paedophile Jeffrey Epstein, saying his close friend Peter Mandelson should “never have been made” US ambassador.

Directly below that, a Sky News notification on the business secretary’s interview, explaining that the appointment of Lord Mandelson to the job was judged to be “worth the risk” at the time.

Politics latest – follow live

Peter Kyle went on to praise Lord Mandelson’s “outstanding” and “singular” talents and the benefits that he could bring to the US-UK relationship.

While perhaps surprisingly candid in nature about the decision-making process that goes on in government, this interview is unlikely to calm concerns within Labour.

Quite the opposite.

For many in the party, this is a wholly different debate to a simple cost-benefit calculation of potential political harm.

As one long-time party figure put it to my colleague Sam Coates: “I don’t care about Number Ten or what this means for Keir or any of that as much as I care that this culture of turning a blind eye to horrendous behaviour is endemic at the top of society and Peter Kyle has literally just come out and said it out loud.

“He was too talented and the special relationship too fraught for his misdeeds to matter enough. It’s just disgusting.”

There are two problems for Downing Street here.

The first is that you now have a government which – after being elected on the promise to restore high standards – appears to be admitting that previous indiscretions can be overlooked if the cause is important enough.

Package that up with other scandals that have resulted in departures – Louise Haigh, Tulip Siddiq, Angela Rayner – and you start to get a stink that becomes hard to shift.

The second is that it once again demonstrates an apparent lack of ability in government to see around corners and deal with political and policy crises, before they start knocking lumps out of the Prime Minister.

Remember, for many the cardinal sin here was not necessarily the original appointment of Mandelson (while eyebrows were raised at the time, there was nowhere near the scale of outrage we’ve had in the last week with many career diplomats even agreeing the with logic of the choice) but the fact that Sir Keir Starmer walked into PMQs and gave the ambassador his full-throated backing when it was becoming clear to many around Westminster that he simply wouldn’t be able to stay in post.

The explanation from Downing Street is essentially that a process was playing out, and you shouldn’t sack an ambassador based on a media enquiry alone.

But good process doesn’t always align with good politics.

Something this barrister-turned-politician may now be finding out the hard way.

Politics

Man admits arson after major fire at MP Sharon Hodgson’s constituency office

Published

6 hours ago

September 14, 2025

admin

Man admits arson after major fire at MP Sharon Hodgson's constituency office

A man has admitted arson after a major fire at an MP’s constituency office.

Joshua Oliver, 28, pleaded guilty to starting the fire which destroyed the office of Labour MP Sharon Hodgson, at Vermont House in Washington, Tyne and Wear.

The fire also wrecked a small charity for people with very rare genetic diseases and an NHS mental health service for veterans.

The guilty plea was entered at Newcastle Magistrates’ Court on the basis that it was reckless rather than intentional.

The Crown did not accept that basis of plea.

Oliver, of no fixed address, had been living in a tent nearby, the court heard.

Northumbria Police previously said it was “alerted to a fire at a premises on Woodland Terrace in the Washington area” shortly after 12.20am on Thursday.

“Emergency services attended and no one is reported to have been injured in the incident,” it added.

Drone footage from the scene showed extensive damage to the building.

A spokesperson for the Crown Prosecution Service said: “Our prosecutors have worked to establish that there is sufficient evidence to bring the case to trial and that it is in the public interest to pursue criminal proceedings.

“We have worked closely with Northumbria Police as they carried out their investigation.”

Oliver was remanded in custody and will appear at Newcastle Crown Court on Tuesday, 14 October.