I forgot to add an NSA backdoor into Huawei's encryption!
5
Average: 5(1 vote)
Comments
sato (Old Spike)
it's really a yes and also no thing. sure it's usual for the chinese government to be above the hauwei corporation, but that's just the thing. even if the government isn't currently getting data through hauwei, they very easily could, and why wouldn't they? The NSA and Mi5 both already do. china have already banned google and facebook for that reason, and have placed tons of restrictions on apple for the same reason, and it's a very good reason, so really every country should be doing it. not just against hauwei i mean, against every foreign provider.
+1
+2
-1
Vote comment up/down
danmanjones (Old Spike)
CCP hasn't put any restrictions on Apple in China. IPhones were really popular there until a few years ago when other phones started gaining traction. The older iPhones were temp banned recently due to a court case between Qualcomm & Apple. I think a similar case is going down in Europe atm - I think it has to do with Apple not paying royalties on their Qualcomm modems or something.
Facebook isn't blocked in China because of spying, it's blocked because it can be used to foment dissent. More of a CIA/State Department thing than an NSA thing. Google was banned for not to cooperating with CCP censorship demands.
even if the government isn't currently getting data through hauwei, they very easily could
Anyone could but it doesn't make sense for the CCP to do this. Huawei is not only a major contributor to the Chinese economy, it's a flagship brand with national pride & strategy at stake. To have backdors planted into Huawei gear & then an adversarial government find them & publish them would cause immeasurable harm. The UK has just released a report finding no CCP backdoors in their gear, although it did find some of the security aspects wanting. I'd be suprised if it's anywhere near as insecure as CISCO gear though. Note: Chinese cyber-spies can exploit anything, not just products owned by Chinese companies.
NCSC does not believe that the defects identified are a result of Chinese state interference.
yes they have. not on the phones, on their services. itunes movies for example is blocked, and data such as search and location has to be made available to the government. china put the same restrictions on google, which is what made google leave china. apple stayed and just accepted them.
on facebook, china didn't want a program which could be forced to comply with US government information requests to have all that information on chinese citizens and what they thought. fomenting dissent is a security issue. US services could easily find anyone who thought ill of the chinese government and connect with them.
it makes perfect sense for the chinese government to do this, just as the US does on a daily basis to facebook, google, apple, and microsoft. in 2017 google had to hand over information on its users to US government agencies in nearly 50,000 separate cases. any government absolutely can and already does this and more. a government doesn't have to hack anything, they can just ask for or subpoena any data they want from companies in their country. if china wants facebook to hand over information facebook can just refuse, but not if the US government asks. the reverse is true for hauwei.
+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
danmanjones (Old Spike)
not on the phones
Yeah, iPhones are not banned in China but Huawei phones are banned in the "land of the free". Funny huh.
if china wants facebook to hand over information facebook can just refuse, but not if the US government asks. the reverse is true for hauwei.
Apples & oranges. Huawei telco gear doesn't collect information, it's networking equipment. It does whatever the network engineers tell it to do.
If you wanna compare to Google/Apple services then compare WeChat or Taobao. I wouldn't argue with you in that case, I have no idea what data the Chinese government collects on apps that run within China. There's been no evidence that I know of where the CCP has tried to meddle in other countries via online media manipulation. The only country I know of who does that is the US.
+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
skeptoid (Old Spike)
They don't need to actively manipulate anything. They can passively benefit - they can make their devices less secure deliberately to do so. I have seen this.
+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
danmanjones (Old Spike)
That goes back to the reputation issue. If it's less secure then companies won't want to buy it. The recent UK audit found some aspects wanting & Huawei has agreed to work towards resolving them. Ultimately though it's up to the network engineers to ensure security, not the hardware vendor & definitely not the DoJ. You could have the most secure equipment in the world & still have a network full of holes.
Here's an extended quote from the UK govt security audit of Huawei equipment they want to use for their 5G network, addressing the security flaws they found:
These findings are about basic engineering competence and cyber security hygiene that give rise to vulnerabilities that are capable of being exploited by a range of actors. NCSC does not believe that the defects identified are a result of Chinese state interference.
I worked in the industry for 20 years - they will turn a blind eye to shit processes and features, and vulnerabilities, if the price is right and they can act surprised later on. Many of these Execs work at a place for only a couple of years - by the time the timebomb goes off they are long gone working somewhere else the money is in the bank, so, no it doesn't make much of a difference at all. Our main competitor had the worst reputation in the industry for shit that didn't work properly and they ultimately sank my company through price attrition.
+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
danmanjones (Old Spike)
What you're describing is corner-cutting measures. It happens everywhere in IT. It's a bit different to globally recognized brands but ultimately it's the same pressure to get things done on budget. The UK audit was pretty scathing in this regard but apparently they're working together to patch things up a bit.
This is not what's being charged though. The charge is political & is based on a suspicion of CCP manipulation. So far it's been baseless, just like pretty much everything coming out of the DoJ that makes int'l headlines. There's a pretty solid rule being formed: if the DoJ holds a press conference - they're lying.
Comments
(Old Spike)
it's really a yes and also no thing. sure it's usual for the chinese government to be above the hauwei corporation, but that's just the thing. even if the government isn't currently getting data through hauwei, they very easily could, and why wouldn't they? The NSA and Mi5 both already do. china have already banned google and facebook for that reason, and have placed tons of restrictions on apple for the same reason, and it's a very good reason, so really every country should be doing it. not just against hauwei i mean, against every foreign provider.
(Old Spike)
CCP hasn't put any restrictions on Apple in China. IPhones were really popular there until a few years ago when other phones started gaining traction. The older iPhones were temp banned recently due to a court case between Qualcomm & Apple. I think a similar case is going down in Europe atm - I think it has to do with Apple not paying royalties on their Qualcomm modems or something.
Facebook isn't blocked in China because of spying, it's blocked because it can be used to foment dissent. More of a CIA/State Department thing than an NSA thing. Google was banned for not to cooperating with CCP censorship demands.
even if the government isn't currently getting data through hauwei, they very easily could
Anyone could but it doesn't make sense for the CCP to do this. Huawei is not only a major contributor to the Chinese economy, it's a flagship brand with national pride & strategy at stake. To have backdors planted into Huawei gear & then an adversarial government find them & publish them would cause immeasurable harm. The UK has just released a report finding no CCP backdoors in their gear, although it did find some of the security aspects wanting. I'd be suprised if it's anywhere near as insecure as CISCO gear though. Note: Chinese cyber-spies can exploit anything, not just products owned by Chinese companies.
(Old Spike)
yes they have. not on the phones, on their services. itunes movies for example is blocked, and data such as search and location has to be made available to the government. china put the same restrictions on google, which is what made google leave china. apple stayed and just accepted them.
on facebook, china didn't want a program which could be forced to comply with US government information requests to have all that information on chinese citizens and what they thought. fomenting dissent is a security issue. US services could easily find anyone who thought ill of the chinese government and connect with them.
it makes perfect sense for the chinese government to do this, just as the US does on a daily basis to facebook, google, apple, and microsoft. in 2017 google had to hand over information on its users to US government agencies in nearly 50,000 separate cases. any government absolutely can and already does this and more. a government doesn't have to hack anything, they can just ask for or subpoena any data they want from companies in their country. if china wants facebook to hand over information facebook can just refuse, but not if the US government asks. the reverse is true for hauwei.
(Old Spike)
not on the phones
Yeah, iPhones are not banned in China but Huawei phones are banned in the "land of the free". Funny huh.
if china wants facebook to hand over information facebook can just refuse, but not if the US government asks. the reverse is true for hauwei.
Apples & oranges. Huawei telco gear doesn't collect information, it's networking equipment. It does whatever the network engineers tell it to do.
If you wanna compare to Google/Apple services then compare WeChat or Taobao. I wouldn't argue with you in that case, I have no idea what data the Chinese government collects on apps that run within China. There's been no evidence that I know of where the CCP has tried to meddle in other countries via online media manipulation. The only country I know of who does that is the US.
(Old Spike)
They don't need to actively manipulate anything. They can passively benefit - they can make their devices less secure deliberately to do so. I have seen this.
(Old Spike)
That goes back to the reputation issue. If it's less secure then companies won't want to buy it. The recent UK audit found some aspects wanting & Huawei has agreed to work towards resolving them. Ultimately though it's up to the network engineers to ensure security, not the hardware vendor & definitely not the DoJ. You could have the most secure equipment in the world & still have a network full of holes.
Here's an extended quote from the UK govt security audit of Huawei equipment they want to use for their 5G network, addressing the security flaws they found:
(Old Spike)
I worked in the industry for 20 years - they will turn a blind eye to shit processes and features, and vulnerabilities, if the price is right and they can act surprised later on. Many of these Execs work at a place for only a couple of years - by the time the timebomb goes off they are long gone working somewhere else the money is in the bank, so, no it doesn't make much of a difference at all. Our main competitor had the worst reputation in the industry for shit that didn't work properly and they ultimately sank my company through price attrition.
(Old Spike)
What you're describing is corner-cutting measures. It happens everywhere in IT. It's a bit different to globally recognized brands but ultimately it's the same pressure to get things done on budget. The UK audit was pretty scathing in this regard but apparently they're working together to patch things up a bit.
This is not what's being charged though. The charge is political & is based on a suspicion of CCP manipulation. So far it's been baseless, just like pretty much everything coming out of the DoJ that makes int'l headlines. There's a pretty solid rule being formed: if the DoJ holds a press conference - they're lying.