Beta

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

US Blocks Huawei From Building LTE Network

Soulskill posted more than 2 years ago | from the you-may-or-may-not-be-evil dept.

China 156

An anonymous reader writes "The U.S. government has cited national security as a reason not to let Chinese company Huawei build an LTE public safety network. They're worried about Huawei's close ties to the Chinese government and the threat of any devices Huawei manufactures being bugged. Of course, whoever gets the contract is going to be manufacturing their devices in China anyway, but it looks like a Chinese company won't be allowed to deploy the infrastructure."

cancel ×

156 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Obligitory (0)

Moheeheeko (1682914) | more than 2 years ago | (#37713644)

/tinfoil hat

Re:Obligitory (2)

CaptSlaq (1491233) | more than 2 years ago | (#37713682)

/tinfoil hat

Would be "The Fed wants to maintain its monopoly on cellphone snooping".

Re:Obligitory (3, Interesting)

Synerg1y (2169962) | more than 2 years ago | (#37714878)

after stuxnet? :)

Totally feasible, would slashdot feel better if they were excluding muslims rather than the Chinese? :)

Re:Obligitory (1)

zlives (2009072) | more than 2 years ago | (#37714916)

exploding cell phones... great now its not just cancer i have to worry about!

Re:Obligitory (1)

Nadaka (224565) | more than 2 years ago | (#37715080)

They are called IPhones. A damaged battery tended to go boom.

Huawei was in the news in Europe as well... (5, Interesting)

thrill12 (711899) | more than 2 years ago | (#37713660)

... for advertising with a lot of important and big customers' "success stories" (such as TGV) that were in fact never real customers of Huawei/were never worth a success story. Guess they really are trying hard to set foot 'here'. (http://www.automatiseringgids.nl/nieuws/2011/41/%E2%80%98huawei-jokt-over-europese-klanten%E2%80%99)

Re:Huawei was in the news in Europe as well... (4, Informative)

WindBourne (631190) | more than 2 years ago | (#37713930)

Not surprised. Just like the 'Chinese success', it is all predicated on constant lies and deceptions. But considering that Huawei is Chinese gov (in fact, more Chinese gov, than America Air was US Gov [wikipedia.org] ). In fact, unless a company has outside participation, it is 100% owned AND MANAGED by the gov.

Re:Huawei was in the news in Europe as well... (4, Funny)

m.ducharme (1082683) | more than 2 years ago | (#37715646)

In fact, unless a company has outside participation, it is 100% owned AND MANAGED by the gov.

Which is totally incompatible with the American model, where the government is 100% owned and managed by the corporations.

Re:Huawei was in the news in Europe as well... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37713964)

I hate to break it to you but they ALL do that. Had a small consulting gig with a minor department of a subsidiary of a big corporation? *BAMM* Big corporation as reference!

Re:Huawei was in the news in Europe as well... (2)

chrb (1083577) | more than 2 years ago | (#37714272)

Yeah, all corporations stretch the truth about the success of their product deployments... remember Microsoft trumpeting their London Stock Exchange big success story? But it turned out that the LSE had so many problems they eventually dumped the entire platform and bought a provider of Linux-based systems instead. Microsoft don't talk about that so much anymore.

But then what did you expect, that a corporation would actually come out and tell the truth? "We deployed our software at customer site; it was problematic and buggy, and led to downtime and multiple redesigns, patches and redeployments." Too much honesty, marketing would never allow it.

Re:Huawei was in the news in Europe as well... (1)

Sun (104778) | more than 2 years ago | (#37714524)

"We deployed our software at customer site; it was problematic and buggy, and led to downtime and multiple redesigns, patches and redeployments."

I do not expect the whole truth from companies' marketing divisions. Just the truth. If, after you have removed all unsuccessful installations you have nothing left, keep you mouth shut.

Shachar

Great (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37713688)

Free market, right?

So the next step is that the Chinese block sales of semiconductors to the US citing national security as the reason...

Re:Great (2)

headhot (137860) | more than 2 years ago | (#37713724)

Good, then it will be harder from them to copy them.

Re:Great (1)

digitig (1056110) | more than 2 years ago | (#37714040)

I didn't realise that the US was in the habit of copying Chinese semiconductors. Maybe you don't understand the word "to", maybe US innovation is in a worse state than I thought.

Re:Great (1, Insightful)

erroneus (253617) | more than 2 years ago | (#37713738)

Sounds great! Then we will be FORCED to bring labor back to the US and then there will be jobs and prosperity again.

Money isn't as much about hoarding money as much as it is about circulating it.

Re:Great (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37713832)

Money isn't as much about hoarding money as much as it is about circulating it.

Obviously you're not one of the 1% who owns the Republican Party.

Re:Great (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37713912)

Nobody knows auto-fellatio like the Republicans. That's gotta count for something, right?

Re:Great (0)

LifesABeach (234436) | more than 2 years ago | (#37714092)

Is this question from personal observation? Or Envy? Or both?

Re:Great (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37714226)

Some personal observation, with a mix of amazement. Their kink, more than anything, serves to highlight the neat-o advances made in scanning electron microscopy. You know, to find their tiny penises.

Re:Great (0)

LifesABeach (234436) | more than 2 years ago | (#37715314)

I know, responding to an A/C is pointless, but a question arises.

What if the decision maker is female? Then it would be vanity. I have found that suggesting someones view is from about half way inside their handlers colon [wikipedia.org] to be informative, and non sexist.

Emergency Response (1)

MrSmith0011000100110 (1344879) | more than 2 years ago | (#37713704)

Let's see, so the people that need a strong working network get the choice of Motorola or Huawei? Can I throw my hat in the ring and offer them tin cans and miles of string? At least my solution would work.

Re:Emergency Response (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37713916)

Difference is, Huawei notoriously counterfeited hardware for years. Highest profile example was Huawei v Cisco, Huawei basically ripped off the hardware and the software 1:1, hex edited their name on to the OS. Huawei does not deserve to be in our market at all.

USA ought to ask USSR about it (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37714196)

IIRC the USSR were done one over by some government interference in some infrastructure, can't remember who that was...

Re:Emergency Response (2)

LifesABeach (234436) | more than 2 years ago | (#37714420)

It would have been more diplomatic for the U.S. to have stated that Huawei was denied because of its "Convection" to a prior "cost cutting" business model. Also, I believe that there is a requirement for products that are used for Emergency or Military Communications to be manufactured in the U.S.. Not all things, but definitely Communication Package Systems. In that case, anyone outside the U.S. gets a "red flag" regardless of nationality. From a global point of view, Huawei can peddle its comm. gear anywhere on the planet. And from a U.S. perspective, U.S. Trade Balances are so far in the "red" that saying, "no" to other venders outside the U.S. is a help to those of us in the U.S. that can't swap sovereign boundaries like, um, a Bidet.

Re:Emergency Response (1)

SmurfButcher Bob (313810) | more than 2 years ago | (#37713926)

Ha! But your portables, batteries and accessories would NEVER enjoy the immense Floating Point support that's built in to Motorola RF products, batteries, and accessories!

(For the uninitiated - no, the decimal point never floats to the left.)

Re:Emergency Response (3, Informative)

Kagetsuki (1620613) | more than 2 years ago | (#37714080)

I've dealt with Huwei wireless gear on and off and have constantly found it to be absolutely awful. That is unless you expect things like 3G data adapters to tweak out after 5 minutes because they overheat or IP Phone boxes that drop connections like it's a sport. Seriously, I'd trust tin cans and string with my life before a Huwei product.

Re:Emergency Response (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37715616)

you cruising for a lawsuit? because that's the same thing Americans said about Japanese products not so long ago..

US Blocks Huawei From Building LTE Network (3, Insightful)

omar.sahal (687649) | more than 2 years ago | (#37713706)

Makes you wonder sometimes why the US gets so suspicions of other nations some times! You need to look at an accusation sometimes and figure out if this is telling you more about the accuser than the accused!

Re:US Blocks Huawei From Building LTE Network (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37713864)

Actually...you should note that it's more of a national security issue. China's not on the US' friend list. They're not really on anyone's when you get to brass tacks. By law, things that are National Security related can only be allowed by companies affiliated with countries that're our allies and the countries themselves that're our allies. This is pretty much standard for ANY country, including China. Do you think they'd let us build out a similar infrastructure if they weren't able to do it themselves because of their tinkering with their economy like we did back several decades back? If you think they would, I've got some nifty oceanside property on the Florida coast to sell you.

Re:US Blocks Huawei From Building LTE Network (4, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37713938)

Cheap anti american b.s.
They are banned by the UK & India, their "employees" were caught red-handed trying to steal info in Indonesia & India.
Not to mention that they usually copy products from rivals such as Cisco.

Seriously, have you any idea what a threat the Chinese government poses to the world? even though they love money now, the country is still run by totalitarian freaks. Do you think anyone at a Chinese corporation can stand up to the Chinese intelligence agencies and say "no"?

Re:US Blocks Huawei From Building LTE Network (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37713972)

Yeah! Just like rape cases!

Re:US Blocks Huawei From Building LTE Network (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37714088)

Makes you wonder sometimes why the US gets so suspicions of other nations some times!

I don't wonder at all. The US is suspicious of other nations because it would be stupid not to be. Every nation should be suspicious of every other it it wants to continue to exist.

You need to look at an accusation sometimes and figure out if this is telling you more about the accuser than the accused!

I don't see any accusations being made.

Are you trying to suggest that the US is spying on China? Congratulations, you can see the bleeding obvious; you can cancel that ophthalmologist appointment. It's not a secret, it's not a surprise, and you'd be a fool to believe it's not reciprocal.

Re:US Blocks Huawei From Building LTE Network (0)

elsurexiste (1758620) | more than 2 years ago | (#37714424)

So... They are wary of having a disrupted or manipulated emergency network? They are wary of being eavesdropped by a company with dubious credentials? Just like me, I guess. What's insightful about it?

But let's say Huawei does the same thing Cisco and other big players do, the only difference is it's reported as "eavesdropping" instead of "cooperating with law enforcers". It would be just a case of a government being xenophobic. Business as usual.

Re:US Blocks Huawei From Building LTE Network (1)

LifesABeach (234436) | more than 2 years ago | (#37714450)

No one is stopping you from buying the red cans and strings. Go for it.

Re:US Blocks Huawei From Building LTE Network (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37714464)

Huawei is a for-profit company, but it's also a government subsidiary. It's like a more freely operated USPS.

Imagine if there was an article: "US government wants to build public cell phone network in China"

I think the Chinese would be concerned private communist party communications would be intercepted and read by the US government -- and chances are they would be right.

Re:US Blocks Huawei From Building LTE Network (1)

timeOday (582209) | more than 2 years ago | (#37714640)

Speaking of which, I wonder how US-based network providers like Cisco feel about this? They make a lot of money in China, helping them build the Great Firewall [wired.com] and all that. If there is one sure outcome of this action, it's that China will want to reciprocate in kind. There is no way an insult like this will go unanswered. So I think we have to see this as part of a larger trade war [csmonitor.com] that may be brewing. Stock up on iPhones, everybody!

Re:US Blocks Huawei From Building LTE Network (2)

Ihmhi (1206036) | more than 2 years ago | (#37714648)

Industrial espionage and other types of more mundane spying are the norm during times of general peace. China is well known for their industrial espionage and they're either bad at hiding it or just don't care. It'd be like hiring a man with multiple arrests for burglary as a security guard at a storage center - you're just asking for something bad to happen.

Re:US Blocks Huawei From Building LTE Network (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37715584)

Maybe the US is afraid the Chinese _won't_ put any kind of tracking/monitoring/spying capabilities into the network. Which, when looking at diminishing civil rights in this country and increasing ignorance of the Constitution, is clearly a major concern for the US government.

Imagine how quickly the "#OccupyWallStreet" protests could have been thwarted if there was an "unplanned outage" in the NYC area...

They never really mean it (1)

erroneus (253617) | more than 2 years ago | (#37713708)

You know, it was like the whole security thing. They put people through hell and all the while, the borders remain free and open to the drug trade and to illegal workers... because you know, "terrorists" would never use those channels to get into the US to do their dirty work right?

Now they are saying "oh no! we can't let the chinese set up things here... they are too close to the chinese government!" Meanwhile, all manufacturing is in China having who-knows-what installed along with the stuff they are making.

The risks are obvious to see and they pretend they don't see them. If the government really wanted security, it would do what it wants to do regardless of how much it would upset the 1%. That 1% has interests in all of the things above including the drug trade, illegal workers and manufacturing in China. It's all about the money and profits. Threaten those and you should fear for your life.

Re:They never really mean it (1)

h4rr4r (612664) | more than 2 years ago | (#37713874)

There is no reasonable way to seal US borders.
There are 12,034 km of land boarders and 19,924 km of coastline.

Even if our entire military people was stationed at the borders smugglers could still fly over or tunnel under. Much of this border is in areas that are totally or nearly uninhabited, costs to feed and transport this border protection force would be on the scale of a major war. You would also have to have these people inspect every container that comes into US ports. 7 million containers come into this nation by sea every year. You would also need to throughly inspect every rail-car and tractor-tailer that crosses a border.

Sealing the borders would totally destroy the US economy and people would starve because of it.

Sources:
https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/us.html [cia.gov]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Container_Security_Initiative [wikipedia.org]

Re:They never really mean it (1)

erroneus (253617) | more than 2 years ago | (#37714096)

While I won't disagree with the problems of real and total security, doing this ridiculous partial security thing isn't even approaching to be the answer.

And believe me when I tell you I know what it was like from the beginning -- I was among the first batch of TSA screeners and was one for about two years. I saw LOTS and LOTS of stupid.

Re:They never really mean it (0)

h4rr4r (612664) | more than 2 years ago | (#37714244)

So were you really hard up for a job or just a sicko?

Re:They never really mean it (3, Interesting)

Duradin (1261418) | more than 2 years ago | (#37714680)

"costs to feed and transport this border protection force would be on the scale of a major war."

Given just the cost of transporting fuel in Afghanistan moving the troops there to the Mexican border would probably be on the scale of a minor police action and not a major war.

Move some bases down there and do boot camp on the border.

Tunnels can be detected (to a point where they'd have to dig too deep to be practical) if anyone bothers to put the devices and manpower in and flights over the border would make for cheap gunnery practice.

As for people starving, NPR interviewed a tomato farmer all upset that his illegals were fleeing some new laws, illegals that had skills the local work force lacks, hmm, sounds like the job for a work visa, of course, they wouldn't be cheap illegals then.

Re:They never really mean it (1)

h4rr4r (612664) | more than 2 years ago | (#37715296)

We have a massive coastline. Moving fuel and troops to the AK coastline would probably cost near as much as Afghanistan. There are no roads, you would have to build them.

The Mexican border is similar, lots of it is just desert, you could not find enough troops to fill such boot camps. The stuff you are talking about doing would cripple the US economy.

Re:They never really mean it (2)

Duradin (1261418) | more than 2 years ago | (#37715600)

Moving goods/people to AK and through Canada back to the US wouldn't be cheap for the ne'er-do-wells either.

Don't need to lock down the entirety of the borders, just the ones profitable enough to violate. Alaska would work much like the bulk of Russia, let the land itself be the defenses.

We seem to be up for supporting multiple foreign fronts in under developed areas. Pull the bulk of the troops out of foreign theaters and what standing army we have can be standing in Roman style border posts.

Re:They never really mean it (1)

readin (838620) | more than 2 years ago | (#37714948)

There is no reasonable way to seal US borders. There are 12,034 km of land boarders and 19,924 km of coastline.

Even if our entire military people was stationed at the borders smugglers could still fly over or tunnel under.

I guess this is why the wall Israel built has been such a huge failure [sarcasm] and why South Korea has removed all obstacles and stopped patrolling along their border with North Korea [more sarcasm].

Re:They never really mean it (1)

h4rr4r (612664) | more than 2 years ago | (#37715246)

Compare the size of those nations and who their neighbors are.
We have more uninhabited coastline in AK than the whole border of Israel.

Re:They never really mean it (1)

readin (838620) | more than 2 years ago | (#37715588)

Look a the shapes and resources of those nations. Our biggest current issue, the border with Mexico, is far smaller compared to our GDP and resources than what South Korea and Israel have to defend from North Korea and terrorist attacks.

Re:They never really mean it (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37715966)

You should also look at how much money has gone from the US to Israel and... shockingly, South Korea. It isn't a small number, for either country. Also shockingly, relatively large projects are much easier to complete when you have an even larger country bankrolling substantial portions of the costs of those projects. .... Which country, exactly, is going to be doing this for the US, again?

THE TOOK OUR JOBS (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37713720)

MADE IN AMERICA

Re:THE TOOK OUR JOBS (0)

erroneus (253617) | more than 2 years ago | (#37713742)

de T'k err jerbz!

Even if it is bugged... (3, Informative)

CMcQueeny (682013) | more than 2 years ago | (#37713794)

Even if we assume they're both tainted with devious Chinese spyware (and I'm not sure that China would want to harm such a huge and valuable debtor, by the way) which of these sounds like a bigger threat:

1. A large Chinese-built wireless network which the government can monitor or shut down with relative ease.

2. A vast semi-regulated sea of Chinese-built devices of all kinds flowing into the US, too many to be effectively controlled or destroyed, many of them used by emergency and government workers.

Come on, people. Maybe China is a threat to us and maybe it isn't, but if there's a problem, at least attack it in a logical way.

Re:Even if it is bugged... (1)

chrb (1083577) | more than 2 years ago | (#37714164)

Those two choices are not mutually exclusive, and they aren't even the right choices. You have mixed up two things: 1) building the network 2) building the devices that will use the network. The real choice is:

1. A large wireless network supplied by Huawei, and manufactured in China, which the government can monitor or shut down with relative ease.

2. A large wireless network supplied by companyX, and manufactured in China, which the government can monitor or shut down with relative ease.

The devices that will use the network being a "vast semi-regulated sea of Chinese-built devices of all kinds flowing into the US" is already a given, because every wireless manufacturer uses Chinese factories.

Re:Even if it is bugged... (1)

CMcQueeny (682013) | more than 2 years ago | (#37714578)

I didn't mean to imply that they were mutually exclusive.

The story in this article is that the US government is trying to exercise some more control over the new network's infrastructure, for reasons of national security. My point is that even if we assume the national security threat is real, the logical attack vector for the Chinese would be the devices (which are almost impossible for the government to control without draconian measures) rather than the infrastructure (which is already subject to significant government regulation).

If there is a credible threat (which again I think is somewhat dubious), the only real solution is to end the reliance on foreign-manufactured devices.

Re:Even if it is bugged... (1)

LifesABeach (234436) | more than 2 years ago | (#37714536)

Maybe you could describe in more detail of, "devices of all kinds flowing into the U.S.?"

Re:Even if it is bugged... (1)

CMcQueeny (682013) | more than 2 years ago | (#37714632)

I work in an emergency room, so I come in contact with a lot of emergency workers -- medical, police, fire dept., even FBI and other federal depts in some cases. Their radios, computers, cellphones, etc., are almost always just generic equipment like everyone else, and for most of the brands I know they're manufactured in China.

I'm sure at a very high level there is custom-made American equipment, but by and large the electronics which make modern emergency response practical are made in China.

Re:Even if it is bugged... (1)

LifesABeach (234436) | more than 2 years ago | (#37715182)

It is at that high level that this thread is about.

Re:Even if it is bugged... (1)

CMcQueeny (682013) | more than 2 years ago | (#37716042)

Is it? I was under the impression that this would be a general-use emergency system, not a higher-level thing; after all, most of the federal departments, the military, etc., already have fairly extensive private networks where high-level secret communication is concerned. Maybe I'm completely off-base. If it isn't a general-use network with lots of people on the ground having access, then using custom American equipment is more practical, and is definitely the option to pursue I'd say.

Re:Even if it is bugged... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37715790)

I usually see Taiwan and Japan

Re:Even if it is bugged... (1)

Kjella (173770) | more than 2 years ago | (#37714800)

Even if we assume they're both tainted with devious Chinese spyware (and I'm not sure that China would want to harm such a huge and valuable debtor, by the way) which of these sounds like a bigger threat:

I don't think you should ever try to predict what can happen with alliances and defense pacts, surprise attacks and whatnot. It's not like the US pre-WWII would predict they'd be at war with Italy and Japan, possibly Germany but even that is doubtful. If say India and Pakistan or the Middle East start a war it can easily escalate into WWIII with US and China on opposing sides. I don't for one second buy that we're "beyond" war. Besides, there's a small causality loop there, when people are sure the opposition won't declare war that is when they're likely to act in such an arrogant and aggressive manner that it does lead to war.

1. A large Chinese-built wireless network which the government can monitor or shut down with relative ease.

Except that if you're in a state of war shutting down so you can't mobilize is a rather bad thing. But that's much less of a worry than the possibility of backdoors to tap into communications or inject mis-communication. It's easy to say we'll have alternatives but if they're not used they'll go away. For example less and less people have landlines, cables buried into the ground you can run from bunkers. In a war cell phone towers are like homing beacons for missiles, they're likely to be the first to go and all the people that rely on cell phones for communication will be out of reach. Sure, there's VoIP but is the Internet operational? Does everybody have headsets? Can you find all the numbers you need to call there? Even if the phones are compromised, people will quickly start using those that work. If the whole system is down, then you're screwed big time.

 

Blame (insert blank here) (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37713810)

I think part of the blame has to be on how Chinese companies steal IP and then sell substandard versions (eg "counterfeit") without taking any responsibility for it.

Yes companies like those in the RIAA and MPAA have done their fair share of IP theft, but ultimately later IP came by and pinched them back and they eventually started delivering things in the formats and quality people want.

Chinese companies on the other hand seem to walk in the wrong direction so frequently that "security reasons" is just the governments way of saying "I don't think you can deliver a quality product at all."

I'd like to see clothing, food and toy companies start to take the government's cue and demand higher quality goods or start taking their business back to America. I mean goddamitsomuch I bought a few hundred dollars in clothes, and not a single item was made in America, with most of it being made in China, Vietnam or Bangladesh. Some of these things had such low thread count and pulled threads in their stitching I was like, this stuff's quality is terrible. But I have no choice, nobody sells domestically made clothing anymore that that isn't branded in hideous ways.

Electronics unlike clothing, food and toys, have an additional safety issue since they have RF power, batteries and chargers that have to be made properly (remember laptop fires from sony batteries? Nokia cell phones exploding from counterfeit batteries? Wondering why you can't replace the battery in your iPhone? This is why.) I get the impression, frequently, that any Chinese made networking parts would be more expensive to operate from having to be repaired 5 times as often, and may result in a lot more deaths from malfuctioning.

Re:Blame (insert blank here) (1)

LifesABeach (234436) | more than 2 years ago | (#37714766)

Your argument has a double edge to it. In order to undercut your competitor you buy cheaper. If the government "adjusts" Trade Balances to shift in one direction or another, that affects the cost of the product. As a purchasing community, the U.S. is tapped. It is getting to the point that business models that rely on outside usage of goods and services are beginning to optimize to the point of extinction. A review of the H.P. business model clearly shows that when a corporation optimizes profit and ignores the 60 month and 120 month business plan, that business model pays a heavy price. What I'm not convinced about is when the government ignores the phrase, "Default/Foreclosure/Auction." Businesses go out of business, that is not necessarily the fault of the people. And the short sightedness of business is definitely not the fault of the people.

It might not be built in China (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37713822)

Cisco and other companies DO have manufacturing for the DOD. It is possible that we will add this to that manufacturing. We should do the same for using smart phones by our troops.

it's ok for the U.S. govt... (0)

lkcl (517947) | more than 2 years ago | (#37713834)

wait... hang on... it's ok for the U.S. govt to *actually* have warrantless wiretapping, but it's not ok to have china *maybe* doing warrantless wiretapping? huh. how about Huawei provide the full schematics and full source code of the LTE Cell-Towers under license, and the parts be manufactured in... oh wait, the cheapest place to have the parts manufactured is: China.

Re:it's ok for the U.S. govt... (4, Insightful)

Frosty Piss (770223) | more than 2 years ago | (#37713886)

it's ok for the U.S. govt to *actually* have warrantless wiretapping, but it's not ok to have china *maybe* doing warrantless wiretapping?

Under US laws? Yes.

Re:it's ok for the U.S. govt... (5, Informative)

WindBourne (631190) | more than 2 years ago | (#37713982)

How did you get modded up? If we do wiretapping of telecom networks ESP. SECURED networks, in another nation, that would be called .... SPYING. And NO nation sees that as being legal.

Re:it's ok for the U.S. govt... (1)

LifesABeach (234436) | more than 2 years ago | (#37714868)

I believe that the parent comment believes that the bad guys are just a couple goofs. That would be a grave decision. But I'm still trying to wrap my head around the "Patriot Act;" Its short sited nature concerns me, go figure.

Re:it's ok for the U.S. govt... (1)

WindBourne (631190) | more than 2 years ago | (#37715232)

Patriot act is a NIGHTMARE. Parts of it were needed, but it was obviously designed to allow the feds far more abilities than was needed. And the lack of oversight on it is just amazing. Personally, I was shocked and disgusted that Obama did not at least put more leashes on it. OTH, I expected such behavior out of W, Cheney, and Rumsfeld. In fact, for that group, I expected far worse. My guess is that they KNEW that they could not get by with worse than what they had.

HOWEVER, the fact that my gov. spies on me, does not mean that I want a nation whose gov. sees itself as being in a cold war with the west, spying on any nation in the west, let alone ours.
Sadly, there are plenty of idiots, like lkcl, whom do not recognize the difference, nor understand the implications.

Re:it's ok for the U.S. govt... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37714068)

Lawful Interception aka wiretapping is a requirement from most governments to be provided with telecom systems.

What the US government is worried about are backdoors.

Re:it's ok for the U.S. govt... (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37714122)

I realize you're trying for irony or critical whatever, but...this is an important distinction.

When the US gov't does it. It [IMO] is a constitutional violation. But, being a government--and the most powerful one on the planet... it is de jure legal.

When a nation does it to another nation it's espionage. That's illegal everywhere.

Last but not least--when a nation does it the government of a nation it does not officially recognize... well, you've probably got government contractors involved and it's free enterprise.

To be candid, the more interesting part to me here is that rather than addressing the problem, they've merely multiplied the cost to play.

Effectively--they've shut out Tukey / Iran, but not China, and probably not India or Pakistan.

Really, it's nearly a non-issue anyway... people worry about hardware bugs... But my understanding is that LTE is an all IP protocol which will have a session border controller (LI effectively built into protocol) in the deployment at various points.

Have you talked to someone at a telco helpdesk lately? They don't need bugs--they just need one of their expats/foreign nationals willing to share access.

Re:it's ok for the U.S. govt... (1)

Desler (1608317) | more than 2 years ago | (#37714142)

Yes, pretty much every country considers being spied on by other countries to not be okay. Are you an idiot?

Re:it's ok for the U.S. govt... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37714350)

you are a fucking moron. Think before you type.

seriously? (1)

cycle (675816) | more than 2 years ago | (#37713846)

So the US is basically just trusting that whoever puts the network in won't take advantage of the situation? That's frightening.

Hah, the Gov't doesn't have straight A's on this (2)

BMOC (2478408) | more than 2 years ago | (#37713872)

We're worried about the Chinese (perhaps understandably), but we can't prevent our own companies from interfering with the military?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LightSquared#Interference_issues

Hahah, it's already bugged (1)

EmagGeek (574360) | more than 2 years ago | (#37713878)

All of this equipment is already manufactured in China, so what's the difference who installs it?

Re:Hahah, it's already bugged (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37714030)

There is a difference. The hardware may be made in China, but most other vendors don't have software made in China. Some SW is now done in India, but surprisingly much of it is still made in Europe and the US. The products are also integration tested in the US before deployment. Not saying Chinese spyware is totally impossible in non-huawei products, but it would be substantially more difficult.
   

That is false. (1)

WindBourne (631190) | more than 2 years ago | (#37715306)

Cisco actually has equipment here that is manufactured here for sale to various groups of the USA. I would guess that they also sell to EU gov. as well. The feds SHOULD put a requirement that all of the equipment for backbones and TLAs be required to have all equipment manufactured in friendly nations that have decent oversight. It does not have to be in America, but, it needs to occur in NATO nations, Australia, Japan, etc. And even Japan and Australia have some lacks security issues that will need to be solved first.

Won't stop our gov from bugging us... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37713884)

It won't stop the guberment from bugging us and listening in on our conversations/texts/banking sessions, etc.. They just don't want China to have a free look at it...

Re:Won't stop our gov from bugging us... (1)

LifesABeach (234436) | more than 2 years ago | (#37714922)

I guess it comes down to who do you wan ta trust? The man you lected? Or the man who caps ya if you both disagree?

Government doesn't like competition... (1)

Oswald McWeany (2428506) | more than 2 years ago | (#37713962)

The government doesn't like to have competition in bugging the populace.

Re:Government doesn't like competition... (2)

Desler (1608317) | more than 2 years ago | (#37714184)

Duh? You believe the Chinese government would voluntarily allow the us government to spy on its country?

Re:Government doesn't like competition... (1)

Oswald McWeany (2428506) | more than 2 years ago | (#37715672)

I think you missed the joke! :)

The US is spying on us (wiretapping, etc)- they don't want China doing it too- they don't want competition spying on us.

Happens in India as well (1)

mehrotra.akash (1539473) | more than 2 years ago | (#37714064)

India had blocked Huawei and basically all chinese telecom players for a while over the same/similar reason, but has now reallowed them (dont know the exact reason why)

Re:Happens in India as well (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37714266)

Could it be a bribe?

Re:Happens in India as well (1)

benjfowler (239527) | more than 2 years ago | (#37715892)

Probably because the Chinese were the ones handing out the fattest brown envelopes.

They don't have to be built in China (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37714076)

Foxconn for instance still has factories in Taiwan and even the Czech Republic. Malaysia has been getting into the game and Singapore's Dollar has been going down to the point where they are starting to look competitive again too. Heck, if the tower components are really bulky Mexico might also be in the running. There's no reason why these things HAVE to be made in China. There are other contract manufacturing options.

made in - doesnt matter (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37714086)

Its not about where the HW is made but about who controls what gets inside SW & who are really people behind vendors technical support. End of story.

Occupy America! (0)

bryan1945 (301828) | more than 2 years ago | (#37714288)

Obama sucks! Corporations suck! Taxes suck! Tax the rich more! Tax the rich less! Apple is evil! Microsoft is evil! Linux is the bestest of all bestestness! Unions are Awesome! Unions suck! More free trade! Less free trade! Global warming! No global warming! Muslims suck! Muslims are people, too! French people.. well, they're French. Australia has drop bears! It's all Bush's fault! It's all Tea Baggers fault! Is all Socialists fault! It's the government's fault! Wiretapping! MPAA! Copyright! Patents! There is no God! There is a God! There is FSM! There is not FSM! Creationism! Evolution! RIAA! Steve Jobs sucks! Steve Jobs rules! Bill Gates is the devil! Bill Gates is.. still the devil! Android rules! iOS sucks! Capitalism! Socialism! Ron Paul! Constitution good! Constitution living document!

There. Copy and paste into any article from now on and you have the general sense of what the "discussion" on any given article will be like.

Back to the article- every company in China has close ties to the government. TFA is low on real info, so I can't give a qualified opinion. I could see a Chinese-tied company tried to pull a few fast ones on the US, but there is no shown proof yet.

Re:Occupy America! (3, Interesting)

Quila (201335) | more than 2 years ago | (#37714456)

The intelligence services of a few countries have found ties between Huawei and the Chinese military and intelligence services. Currently, the Chinese are the biggest spy threat to the US. Not allowing this company to build our communications infrastructure sounds like a reasonable, safe decision.

US would prefer Huawei as subcontractor (1)

Pokermike (896718) | more than 2 years ago | (#37714316)

Meh, they'd prefer to overpay Northrop or Lockheed (or similar) to build it. In turn, they will end up subcontracting it out to Huawei. All the expense of doing it ourselves with the value add of the complete insecurity of having had China do it.

Meanwhile, (2)

ledow (319597) | more than 2 years ago | (#37714700)

In England, we're actually encouraging them into our 4G networks:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/10/10/cornish_lte/ [theregister.co.uk]

Re:Meanwhile, (2)

Nadaka (224565) | more than 2 years ago | (#37715126)

England is a little farther along in its emulation of the Chinese surveillance state than the US is.

Fu King Chinese (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37714792)

First we outsource manufacturing to China

Then the Chinese start making their own stuff to sell back to us

Then we're fucked.

Chinese (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37714940)

To buy anything Chinese is to fully with all your heart endorse Communism.

Made in the USA (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37714996)

Why don't we build our own damn LTE network?

Have you considered? (1)

Taty'sEyes (2373326) | more than 2 years ago | (#37715214)

Have you considered they may have been blocked "because" they would not allow the US Government to install bugged devices? It may not be "China is a threat". It may be "Huawei won't let us spy".

Muslims and Chinese (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37715326)

I notice a handful of people with Muslim-looking names posting knee jerk responses defending China, despite China's piss poor track record on human rights and integrity.

I'm noting here that the only real 'friends' China has, are dirty, brutal and corrupt Third World basket cases. The kind that typically like China's policy of "non interference" foreign policy, to be as dirty, violent and corrupt as they like. Kind of convenient, really.

And kind of pathetic to see Pakistanis fanboying China as per usual. No shame, no pride and no decency.

Buying American? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37715432)

Is it possible that the government will actually use a local electronics/communications company to build a domestic communications network? Thereby fueling the local economy with tax dollars as opposed to further increasing the trade deficit or avoid the creation of all those jobs? Amazing times we live in that the government is considering investing in real growth at home rather than abroad.

Chinese official: "We must not allow bugging gap!" (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37715700)

"The technique of bugging equipment or writing software in such a way as to allow undetected access has also been used by U.S. intelligence agencies in the past to gain a window into the communications of other foreign governments."

I mean, who can fault the Chinese government for trying to join the fun? You know, besides the American government...

That's rich -- Clipper chip? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37715900)

So now the US is worried about bugged communications equipment. The same US that wanted China to build and secretly install clipper chips in cellphones?

My how things change. And my, what a short memory the editors have.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?
or Connect with...

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>