U.S. to open program to replace Huawei equipment in U.S. networks(reuters.com)
reuters.com
U.S. to open program to replace Huawei equipment in U.S. networks
https://www.reuters.com/business/media-telecom/us-open-program-replace-huawei-equipment-us-networks-2021-09-27/
320 comments
Again, there is sooo much talk around it in all directions.
But has there actually been a backdoor exposed?
With all the attention turned towards it and that it has been a topic in geopolitics since years - there should have been some ressources allocated towards some reverse engeneering, that clearly shows it is not trustworthy?
If not, why not? I mean it surely is not easy - but I always only hear blame without proof.
(And I don't need proof, that the ccp is not nice. I know that.)
In either case, my takeaway is, that we need more open hardware, that can be easily verified to do what it claims.
But has there actually been a backdoor exposed?
With all the attention turned towards it and that it has been a topic in geopolitics since years - there should have been some ressources allocated towards some reverse engeneering, that clearly shows it is not trustworthy?
If not, why not? I mean it surely is not easy - but I always only hear blame without proof.
(And I don't need proof, that the ccp is not nice. I know that.)
In either case, my takeaway is, that we need more open hardware, that can be easily verified to do what it claims.
The US has never proved that there is any kind of Chinese surveillance going on with Huawei equipment. Lying and anti-market strategies seem to be the tool of choice of the US government to block the advance of societies that are not deemed to be part of their empire.
For background, a couple of posts on the Huawei 5G debacle. From the UK viewpoint, but at least partly relevant to other western powers.
https://blog.eutopian.io/huawei-5g/
https://blog.eutopian.io/huawei-5g-the-uk-gets-a-lesson-in-g...
So a $1.9 billion gift to cisco from the feds?
I view this as inevitable. Networking infrastructure has a valid national security interest.
Companies in China are extensions of the state and tools of foreign policy. Sure these companies are notionally private but the people who own them exist because the CCP allows them to and the price for that is loyalty.
I believe this will continue and I fully expect that at some point the United States will deem those born in mainland China, regardless of current citizenship, to be a security risk and they won't be allowed to work in areas of national security or national interest.
This goes beyond classified material and extends to China cheating on trade including, but not limited to, the wholesale theft of intellectual property through "partnerships" and other means as the price Western companies pay for "access" to the Chinese market.
Western companies won't "win" in China because the CCP won't allow it to happen. They're literally giving away their secret sauce chasing a phantom. There's a reason why there are Chinese versions of every Western company you can think of that's dominant in China.
Why the issue with those born in mainland China? Because China doesn't allow dual-citizenship. Those that become naturalized in the United States, for example, lose their Chinese citizenship. This then becomes a carrot the CCP can dangle in front of those wishing to return: restoration of citizenship. That is, of course, if you happen to have a particular set of knowledge or skills deemed important to China.
What I believe is most needed immediately is reciprocity in trade. That is, if Western companies aren't given fair access to the Chinese market (for the record, it's China's right to restrict this for whatever national interest they wish) then Chinese companies should be similarly restricted in the West.
Companies in China are extensions of the state and tools of foreign policy. Sure these companies are notionally private but the people who own them exist because the CCP allows them to and the price for that is loyalty.
I believe this will continue and I fully expect that at some point the United States will deem those born in mainland China, regardless of current citizenship, to be a security risk and they won't be allowed to work in areas of national security or national interest.
This goes beyond classified material and extends to China cheating on trade including, but not limited to, the wholesale theft of intellectual property through "partnerships" and other means as the price Western companies pay for "access" to the Chinese market.
Western companies won't "win" in China because the CCP won't allow it to happen. They're literally giving away their secret sauce chasing a phantom. There's a reason why there are Chinese versions of every Western company you can think of that's dominant in China.
Why the issue with those born in mainland China? Because China doesn't allow dual-citizenship. Those that become naturalized in the United States, for example, lose their Chinese citizenship. This then becomes a carrot the CCP can dangle in front of those wishing to return: restoration of citizenship. That is, of course, if you happen to have a particular set of knowledge or skills deemed important to China.
What I believe is most needed immediately is reciprocity in trade. That is, if Western companies aren't given fair access to the Chinese market (for the record, it's China's right to restrict this for whatever national interest they wish) then Chinese companies should be similarly restricted in the West.
This is great.
The next question will be how much trust can we place in the networks of our allies that still use compromised equipment from Huawei?
The next question will be how much trust can we place in the networks of our allies that still use compromised equipment from Huawei?
This issue seems to have been tiptoed around and many governments have tried to "play fair" about some aspects of critical infrastructure.
If the strategic importance of a company like ASML hasn't taught western governments how much is at stake when it comes to getting a technology edge then I'm not sure what will.
If the strategic importance of a company like ASML hasn't taught western governments how much is at stake when it comes to getting a technology edge then I'm not sure what will.
US really need to think hard on why Huawei gets ahead in 5G. And how can they make US telecoms more innovative. I think they should introduce more competitions.
id go so far as to say this is more a one-time 1.9 billion dollar bailout for the telecom industry.
the bitter truth is nobody in the USA made it to market as fast as Huawei with 5G for a number of reasons. AT&T and others rested on their laurels, content with a monopoly market where they defined what 4g speeds were and werent. They became convinced they could extend this monopoly assertion to the rest of the world either through sheer hubris or through blind ignorance. Once the global market called their bluff, they scrambled for protectionism from the US government in the form of unsubstantiated sinophobic rhetoric, and stoked an elderly congress still rife with bubbling anticommunist sentiment. Trump gave them their trade war and it wasnt until Canadian bourgeoise faced chinese prisons that they were forced to acquiesce. Huawei's CFO signed off on largely symbolic US charges, and resumed her life.
Now the only damage control can come from US taxpayers, forced to pay twice for inferior 5G.
the bitter truth is nobody in the USA made it to market as fast as Huawei with 5G for a number of reasons. AT&T and others rested on their laurels, content with a monopoly market where they defined what 4g speeds were and werent. They became convinced they could extend this monopoly assertion to the rest of the world either through sheer hubris or through blind ignorance. Once the global market called their bluff, they scrambled for protectionism from the US government in the form of unsubstantiated sinophobic rhetoric, and stoked an elderly congress still rife with bubbling anticommunist sentiment. Trump gave them their trade war and it wasnt until Canadian bourgeoise faced chinese prisons that they were forced to acquiesce. Huawei's CFO signed off on largely symbolic US charges, and resumed her life.
Now the only damage control can come from US taxpayers, forced to pay twice for inferior 5G.
Maybe it is different when it comes to enterprise equipment, but for consumer routers and APs I find Huawei's offerings to be extremely poorly designed. They have the minimum amount of hardware capability, badly designed bug-ridden ugly software, missing and misleading configurations. I would never buy a Huawei product unless I absolutely had to have the cheapest crap in the market. If people/ISPs would just pay for quality, Huawei would be out of business tomorrow.
This is, of course, pure politics with no meat or foundation in reality. If they are exchanged with equipment like Cisco or other US made (well, designed) products it is a big step backwards. Not only do they have a much worse proven track-record (especially Cisco) but no US manufacture (and really no EU either that I have heard of) can match Huawei in getting your own custom stuff pushed through to release. I have never heard someone from the industry acknowledge anyone beating Huawei in R&D and time to deliver custom requests to code or hardware. They are light-years ahead of most other manufactures in those areas IMO and if they were a US company everyone would praise them (they still do but not too loudly). They are like Ubiquiti - before they started to suck.
Will be interesting to see how this plays out in other countries such as South Africa which has Huawei infrastructure and Huawei 5g routers in homes.
Next step: insert domestic backdoors and patriotic data monitoring.
Make sense for the US to do - though again can be easily used by CCP to incite nationalism. Although more and more people in China does not admire US as a whole anymore, after Trump, Afghanistan shitshow
NOK
It is sad to find so many folks have been brainwashed without being aware of it …
Free trade, only good when you're on top.
Also these equipments have been produced in China for decades, even western branded ones, and there is still no proof that they pose any security risk. As opposed to USA companies well documented to spy USA allies, and their own population, for government agencies
Also these equipments have been produced in China for decades, even western branded ones, and there is still no proof that they pose any security risk. As opposed to USA companies well documented to spy USA allies, and their own population, for government agencies
Canada was obeying international treaties when it detained Meng. The Chinese state took Canadian hostages and held them in questionable conditions until they were eventually able to force a swap. It is now clear that the Chinese government expects certain Chinese executives and corporations to be above both international law and the law of foreign countries in which they operate.
If your country permits Huawei to do business within it's borders, that puts your own citizens at risk of being taken hostage. Let's not kid ourselves that national governments care more about people than economics, but letting foreign countries take your citizens hostage without repercussion can threaten your chances of being reelected.
Thanks to this episode, public opinion in Canada is now overwhelmingly against letting Huawei operate in Canada. Given this and pressure from its allies in the five eyes, it seems almost inconceivable that the Canadian government won't soon ban Huawei from participation in 5G networks.
This episode has also raised questions about permitting the operations of other Chinese corporations that are too closely associated with the Chinese government. e.g. If a Chinese mining corp operating in a foreign country had it's operations shut down for environmental law infractions, would there be reprisals in the form of trade sanctions, etc. from China?
This kind of lawless behaviour is going to have a chilling effect on all commerce with Chinese companies.