The heads of the New Zealand spy agency, the Government Communications Security Bureau (GCSB), have acknowledged some data was accessed in the 2021 hack but said it was not of a “strategic or sensitive” nature. It was not explained what kind of data was accessed for security reasons.
It comes as the Government says it isn’t looking to introduce sanctions against China, despite it being the first time New Zealand’s Parliament has been targeted in such a way.
GCSB minister Judith Collins revealed the hack in a statement this morning that also condemned China for its “malicious cyber activity” aimed at the UK’s Electoral Commission and members of its Parliament.
Prime Minister Christopher Luxon said calling out China for the hacking is an important step in protecting liberal democracies around the world.
The Chinese ambassador to New Zealand, Wang Xiaolong, has also been spoken to late this morning by senior foreign affairs officials, who urged him to convey to China New Zealand’s request to refrain from such activity in the future.
In a statement, a Chinese Embassy spokesperson rejected the “groundless and irresponsible accusations” made by the New Zealand Government, saying the embassy had lodged “serious démarches” with officials to express the country’s “strong dissatisfaction and resolute opposition”.
It follows reports of United States, British and Australian officials filing charges, imposing sanctions, or calling out Beijing over a sweeping cyber-espionage campaign that allegedly hit millions of people, including lawmakers, academics and journalists.
Collins today said the GCSB had completed a “robust technical assessment” following “malicious cyber activity” targeting New Zealand’s Parliamentary Counsel Office and the Parliamentary Service in 2021.
The minister responsible for the GCSB, Judith Collins, has given more details about the Chinese interference in New Zealand’s Parliament in 2021.
The assessment found the Chinese state-sponsored actors known as Advanced Persistent Threat 40 (APT 40) were responsible. They are linked to China’s Ministry of State Security, according to the GCSB.
Some data was removed from the system, but based on the GCSB analysis, the data was not of a strategic or sensitive nature.
“The use of cyber-enabled espionage operations to interfere with democratic institutions and processes anywhere is unacceptable,” Collins said.
“Fortunately, in this instance, the [National Cyber Security Centre] worked with the impacted organisations to contain the activity and remove the actor shortly after they were able to access the network.
“These networks contain important information that enables the effective operation of the New Zealand government. It is critical that we protect this information from all malicious cyber threats.”
Collins said officials had raised the issue of cyber-attacks with China, but the Government didn’t have plans to create legislation to put sanctions on China.
Collins said the collective response from the international community to China’s actions served as a “timely reminder” of the importance of strong cyber security measures.
“It’s important liberal democracies stand up for other liberal democracies,” Collins said.
Luxon said he did not bring it up during last week’s conversation with Chinese foreign minister Wang Yi and believed it wouldn’t disrupt any plans to travel to China.
Luxon said New Zealand has a long-standing relationship with China, but he wasn’t afraid to call out the differences in our countries.
Trade Minister Todd McClay said he did not believe New Zealand’s naming of China for spying would result in any ramifications or fallout in the trade relationship.

” As far as trade is concerned, I don’t have any concerns. We have a broad and long-standing relationship with China and it’s important New Zealand can express its views on the world stage. We are doing that,” McClay said.
Clark said they haven’t seen any information to suggest New Zealand’s elections had been affected.

Data was removed from the system targeted, Clark said, but based on the GCSB analysis, the data was not of a strategic or sensitive nature.
Foreign Minister Winston Peters has confirmed senior foreign affairs officials have spoken to China’s ambassador to New Zealand Wang Xiaolong today to urge China to “refrain from such activity”.
“Foreign interference of this nature is unacceptable, and we have urged China to refrain from such activity in future,”
Peters said.
“New Zealand will continue to speak out – consistently and predictably – where we see concerning behaviours like this.”
” This development is very serious. There’s a very good protection system with ministers, but with the average Member of Parliament, finding out what they are up to and so on, that’s the concerning thing,” Finlayson said. However, he would not say whether he thought sanctions against China or specific Chinese entities should follow. “Those are judgments for the Government to make.”
Asked if he thought New Zealand should be concerned about repercussions from China, Hipkins said that, China was “sensitive” about allegations of spying.
”I imagine they won’t be happy about the fact we have gone public with this information.”
Hipkins said in the past, it had prompted “strongly worded statements.”
Hipkins said today’s revelations had not been released by the previous Labour Government because they had not yet reached the stage of being able to do so.
He said “national security” was one reason why Labour had not been able to go public on this, despite relatively quickly naming China in relation to the separate incident relating to the same hacking group in 2021. He would not expand on that.
The Chinese Embassy spokesperson said New Zealand was “barking up the wrong tree” by accusing China of foreign interference and suggested New Zealand was being influenced by other countries making similar allegations.
“Accusing China of foreign interference is completely barking up the wrong tree.
“We hope the New Zealand side can practice the letter and spirit of its longstanding and proud independent foreign policy, independently making judgments and decisions in its best interests rather than blindly following other’s words and actions at the expense of New Zealand’s own credibility and interests.”
They claimed tracing the origin of cyberattacks was “highly complex and sensitive” as they appeared to criticise New Zealand comments.
“When investigating and determining the nature of cyber cases, one needs to have adequate and objective evidence, instead of smearing other countries when facts do not exist, still less politicize or even weaponize cybersecurity issues.”
:- with input from NZ Herald