How is it any different if an intruder is caught in my home looking around or a hacker is caught in my computer systems looking around? Both are an invasion of privacy and the assumption of privacy is clear in both instances. All the legal crap at the beginning of the article was just the perfect excuse for allowing invasion of national computer systems without severe penalty. I am still wondering what that penalty would be? Hell, if you or I caught someone in our homes, or gut instinct and our legal right would be to stop them by any force necessary. Keeping them out in the first place is priority one. But should they enter, they are at our mercy. It is all about levels. In my home, your unauthorized entry constitutes a war between me and you. Same applies to governments hacking other governments computers, including our hacking Russia or China.

Without secrets, there would be no spying.

The Chinese breached our computer networks? OoOoOo! Time to ask yourself some questionsL

Do you really think this is the first time?

Do you think the US has done this to other countries as well to gather intelligence?

Is any information that is critical to our nations security held over the internet? (a victim would be someone who is unaware of the harm about to come unto them. Our country is more than familiar with cyber attacks)

Hacking US computer networks: Denial of proxy addresses would be a start for government networks, as well as clone checks.

Information should be free but its not. These people should be caught and consequences decided then after, for them and whomever they are working for.

Hacking the the US government should be an act of stupidy, not of war.

None of these hackers have been persued because what they have done does not fall under the acts of war as defined in the article.

"Whether or not a cyber-attack is grounds for war depends on the nature of hackers' intentions: to spy, by stealing secrets, or to disrupt national infrastructure."

These hackers breached unclassified e-mail systems in the pentagon and that I guess is just considered espionage. No harm no foul right? Its not like they can use some of those emails "if some of them that where sent may have proof of immoral acts" to possibly black mail employees to violate the grounds of war for them right?