The Obama administration finally mentioned China by name in demanding an end to widespread hacking of government and private entities, following months of evidence that convincingly ties attacks to the Chinese government and military itself. From the New York Times this morning:

The White House, [President Obama’s national security adviser, Thomas E. Donilon] said, was seeking three things from Beijing: public recognition of the urgency of the problem; a commitment to crack down on hackers operating in China; and an agreement to take part in a dialogue to establish “acceptable norms of behavior in cyberspace.”

Another article in the Times from yesterday noted that China was continuing to insist that "accusations of Chinese government involvement in recent hacking attacks were part of an international smear campaign."

The evidence on Chinese cyberattacks has convincingly tied them to Unit 61398, a Shanghai-based unit of the People’s Liberation Army General Staff Department.

(as a note, Chinese media continue to focus on attacks by the US on China.)

A recent Room for Debate piece asks:

When is a cyberattack an act of war? And what are the rules of engagement in this new frontier?

So I ask you: how hard should the Obama administration go after Chinese hackers, given that many appear to be linked to its government and military? And what are the rules of engagement for cyberwarfare? Should the US consider such hacking an act of aggression?