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 Congress Rules Huawei a 'Security Threat'

timothy posted about 2 years ago | from the q-in-tel-is-totally-a-different-story dept.

United States 186

dgharmon writes with the lead from a story in the Brisbane Time: "Chinese telecom company Huawei poses a security threat to the United States and should be barred from US contracts and acquisitions, a yearlong congressional investigation has concluded. A draft of a report by the House Intelligence Committee said Huawei and another Chinese telecom, ZTE, 'cannot be trusted' to be free of influence from Beijing and could be used to undermine U.S. security."

cancel ×

186 comments

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

I love to fart. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41583129)

Farts.

Don't panic (5, Funny)

Chrisq (894406) | about 2 years ago | (#41583155)

Don't panic. If you have a Huawei phone just fill a bucket with water and drop the phone in. After 12 hours you can safely dispose of t in the bin. Then go and buy a phone made in the West like the ....uhm ..... well ... do without a phone.

Re:Don't panic (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41583329)

If past actions are anything to go by this stance actually says "We know that our electronics cannot be trusted to be free from US influence and therefore we cannot assume that a foreign nations electronics will be."

Re:Don't panic (4, Funny)

Divebus (860563) | about 2 years ago | (#41583387)

China practically invented the category of Gov't spyware in electronics. Be careful what you say in front of your Chinese made toaster.

Re:Don't panic (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41583397)

Why can't we implant spies deep inside the Chinese manufacturing sector to send information back to Washington about what their plans are? Oh yeah. Because they all fucking look alike.

Re:Don't panic (2)

shentino (1139071) | about 2 years ago | (#41583589)

Not that China would care anyhow not to do it anyway, but sinking to their level would only justify them.

Re:Don't panic (1)

bmo (77928) | about 2 years ago | (#41583421)

>China practically invented the category of Gov't spyware in electronics.

NSAKEY

--
BMO

Re:Don't panic (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41583577)

>China practically invented the category of Gov't spyware in electronics.

NSAKEY

--
BMO

You can't be serious. Here [schneier.com] is a better comment from someone whose log(Slashdot UID) < 0.

Re:Don't panic (3, Interesting)

bmo (77928) | about 2 years ago | (#41583845)

I am serious and not serious.

I am serious in implying that we taught the Chinese well.

--
BMO

Re:Don't panic (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41584247)

You can't be serious in thinking that a Slashdot user's UID is really meaningful whatsoever.

Funny coming from an AC btw.

Re:Don't panic (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41583525)

China practically invented the category of Gov't spyware in electronics

Whereas the USA is content with bugging the Chinese premier's aeroplane [airliners.net] ...

Perhaps China should have placed Boeing, Dee Howard and Rockwell-Collins on their "security threat" list.

Re:Don't panic (2)

shentino (1139071) | about 2 years ago | (#41583579)

I'm pretty sure that China would not mind punishing US citizens for insulting the chairman anymore than the United States would not mind busting Chinese citizens for patent and copyright infringement.

Re:Don't panic (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41584339)

I think you were there earlier:

http://www.zdnet.com/us-software-blew-up-russian-gas-pipeline-3039147917/

Though the UK were there even earlier. Giving these away because we knew they had been cracked:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enigma_machine

Re:Don't panic (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41585043)

Hello is this thing on?

Re:Don't panic (5, Insightful)

javilon (99157) | about 2 years ago | (#41583383)

They are opening a can of worms.

Obviously, the US has been doing exactly that. There are documented cases of back doors introduced into US software and hardware. It could bite them back with other countries using exactly the same argument against them.

I do not fault the US for defending their interests. It is clear that China will use all opportunities available to them, exactly as US did. But they are going to face the same issues that countries like Iran face now. They can use foreign technology that is better than domestic products, or they can try to stop it from entering the country. The fact is that US is quickly becoming irrelevant in hardware manufacturing, so it is a difficult call.

What seems clear is that this won't be good for the economy since it will be interpreted as tariffs by the other side.

Re:Don't panic (2)

shentino (1139071) | about 2 years ago | (#41583601)

Interesting that sovereign nations are not really any more civilized with each other than savages in the jungle are.

Re:Don't panic (1)

lightknight (213164) | about 2 years ago | (#41584305)

That's an insult to savages in the jungle.

Sovereign nations are almost...human in their actions. The paranoid planning, pre-emptive strikes on the basis of fear alone, and seeing corruption the same way some of the founders of old saw debt (always need to maintain a minimal amount of it, for "reasons") is strangely familiar.

It's almost like, having banded together as a giant group, the best and the worst of humanity has suddenly been increased a thousand fold.

Re:Don't panic (0)

andy1307 (656570) | about 2 years ago | (#41583743)

Obviously, the US has been doing exactly that. There are documented cases of back doors introduced into US software and hardware.

According to this logic, we should let criminals do whatever cops are allowed to do....carry guns...great...wiretap people....the cops do it too...

Re:Don't panic (1)

PixetaledPikachu (1007305) | about 2 years ago | (#41584107)

Certainly. I think this is their reason in the first place. You guys (US) the criminals, they're the good guys

Crypto AG (1)

Compaqt (1758360) | about 2 years ago | (#41583815)

Crypto AG [wikipedia.org] makes encryption machines that embassies use to communicate with their governments.

It is widely suspected that the NSA has another KEY that lets them read their "ecrypted" communications. The government made the usual protestations of innocence.

Not that I think you should trust Huawei, either, on the front line. On the front line of your network you should probably have a Linux or BSD firewall.

Re:Don't panic (2)

Andy Dodd (701) | about 2 years ago | (#41584495)

After my experience with a Huawei S7 - Regardless of spying paranoia, this is the only valid thing to do with a Huawei product.

Same applies to US (5, Interesting)

Seeteufel (1736784) | about 2 years ago | (#41583173)

I guess the same applies to companies like IBM, AT&T and Microsoft in the European Union, companies which undermine our domestic security (see the IBM Lotus Notes backdoor scandal in Sweden [heise.de] ) and seek to influence our law makers. In particular AT&T with their lobbying for censorship rules and Microsoft which does not disclose the source code of its applications to the IT security agencies and undermines open source and open standards policies --- as if they were part of the European constituency. Oh, and don't mention the OOXML case.

Re:Same applies to US (5, Informative)

scdeimos (632778) | about 2 years ago | (#41583287)

You forgot Cisco, who is so in-bed with the US government that they caused an ex-Cisco employee to be arrested [slashdot.org] while sitting in a Canadian court room. Glass houses, me thinks.

Re:Same applies to US (2)

shentino (1139071) | about 2 years ago | (#41583619)

Just because it is foolish to throw stones while in a glass house doesn't necessarily bring honor to the one who built that house, or the one that put you in it.

Biting the hand that feeds you is foolish, but it doesn't prove the hand is honorable.

Re:Same applies to US (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41583969)

You forgot to mention Crypto AG and Siemens.

Security threat to the United States (4, Funny)

Kinky Bass Junk (880011) | about 2 years ago | (#41583185)

Sure, if by 'security threat' you mean 'economic threat', and by 'United States' you mean 'Motorola'.

Re:Security threat to the United States (2)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41583239)

They aren't talking about smart phones, they are talking about infrastructure telecom components.

Re:Security threat to the United States (2)

Kinky Bass Junk (880011) | about 2 years ago | (#41583677)

You say that as though I read the summary.

Re:Security threat to the United States (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41583475)

Moto doesn't make LTE infrastructure.

Re:Security threat to the United States (2)

dkleinsc (563838) | about 2 years ago | (#41584245)

by 'United States' you mean 'Motorola'.

No, they probably mean 'AT&T', which just happens to be the 3rd largest campaign contributor [opensecrets.org] in the country:

Re:Security threat to the United States (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41584373)

AT&T buys telecom equipment, they don't make it (at lest not in the field where Huawei operates).

This is great! (3, Insightful)

Alex Belits (437) | about 2 years ago | (#41583187)

Other government will eventually do the same to Microsoft, following the logic that US always accuses its enemies of everything it does.

Re:This is great! (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41583551)

And banning MS anywhere in the world would be bad how? If they switch to Linux and start talking about how much better it is the world would benefit.

I wonder how many Republicans... (1, Funny)

stoofa (524247) | about 2 years ago | (#41583223)

...will misread that as 'Hawaii' and immediately call into question all Hawaiian birth certificates?

Re:I wonder how many Republicans... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41583417)

None. Everyone knows that Republicans can't read.

Re:I wonder how many Republicans... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41583733)

None. Everyone knows that Republicans can't read.

Bullshit. They read the bible, which is how they know the Earth is only 3,000 years old and Jesus buried the phony dinosaur bones that we dig up.

Re:I wonder how many Republicans... (3, Funny)

kh31d4r (2591021) | about 2 years ago | (#41584061)

None. Everyone knows that Republicans can't read.

Bullshit. They read the bible, which is how they know the Earth is only 3,000 years old and Jesus buried the phony dinosaur bones that we dig up.

They think it's ~6000 years old. Are you republican by any chance?

Re:I wonder how many Republicans... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41584775)

None. Everyone knows that Republicans can't read.

And Democrats can't debate.

A step forward (4, Interesting)

gmuslera (3436) | about 2 years ago | (#41583231)

Now all the other governments of the world should ban Microsoft for being a security threat and things could become far better for most of the people. Even could be considered "a national security threat", played a major role in Stuxnet/Flame/etc targetted attacks, where US agencies could had been involved.

In fact, with that argument most US based software companies could be banned outside, unless by licence (i.e. open source ones) you can get all the source, recompile and deploy it yourself. And that includes embedded software devices

Re:A step forward (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41583409)

Maybe all other countries should do that. WTF does that have to do with this article?

Re:A step forward (2)

Charliemopps (1157495) | about 2 years ago | (#41583657)

If the Chinese government is using Windows for their government computers, they're fucking insane. In fact, we're insane for using it. Closed source is not secure. Period. Closed source and compiled in a foreign country? Absolutely bat shit crazy.

Re:A step forward (2, Funny)

cavreader (1903280) | about 2 years ago | (#41584031)

And pray tell what SW would all the countries use to run their businesses. Evidently you have not seen the chaos caused by companies trying to migrate just one application from a MS platform to another. There are millions of custom Windows business applications that would need to be re-engineered and the expense would be prohibitive to say the least. And No, running apps under Wine or any other virtual environment is not an acceptable solution because all it does is add another layer of code between the application and the system running it. Mass changeovers would still need to re-test all of your applications to make sure they work properly. Advocating wholesale changes in application environments just because you hate MS is extremely stupid. shortsighted, and evidence of a lack of experience when it comes to providing IT services in the business world. And you are living in a geek dreamworld if you believe you can just take source code, compile it, deploy it, and expect it to actually work. The majority of Open Source applications are just poor imitations of proprietary coded applications. And don't forget that there would need to be mass re-training of the IT staff so they are capable of supporting an entirely new environment. What MS could do and should do is close it's foreign offices that are currently providing a large number of jobs throughout the EU. Maybe that will force them to build their own shit instead of using lawsuits to create their revenue stream.

Re:A step forward (2)

drinkypoo (153816) | about 2 years ago | (#41584567)

And pray tell what SW would all the countries use to run their businesses. Evidently you have not seen the chaos caused by companies trying to migrate just one application from a MS platform to another

All I hear you saying is that we should impede progress and let criminals get away with crime because some people are too stupid to choose Open standards that will permit a migration to another platform, later. Fuck them. They didn't do their homework, and they chose Microsoft, and that's how we got here to begin with. Why should the rest of us continue to pay for their bad decisions? We don't keep automakers going just because people won't be able to buy spares.

Is the free trade not so fun anymore? (4, Insightful)

miffo.swe (547642) | about 2 years ago | (#41583251)

First off i have a very hard time believing backdoors are built in the large networks they sell. In complex systems like that its next to impossible to hide things in the long run. Anything suspicious would have been found in the audits.

This looks like a try at restricting import with arbitrary reasons without any substance behind them. I am sure many countries smile at this as they get to block American goods like GM corn etc citing safety reasons, and now they can use US own rhetoric.

Re:Is the free trade not so fun anymore? (3, Interesting)

JustOK (667959) | about 2 years ago | (#41583351)

Who builds the audit tools?

Re:Is the free trade not so fun anymore? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41583371)

No need for Backdoors. They don't fix the bugs.

Re:Is the free trade not so fun anymore? (3, Insightful)

amiga3D (567632) | about 2 years ago | (#41583377)

Free trade? It's a slogan not a reality. Governments the world over subsidize their industries. If you think backdoors don't exist in systems like this you're very naive. If I had anything I was worried about keeping secret I'd never use anything I didn't compile inhouse after a long, serious search of the source.

Agreed (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41583553)

Blaming free trade for the problems of the world is like blaming libertarianism. Sounds great to the permanently pro-government crowd, except for one problem: the measure of libertarianism (and free market economics) in the world today is absolutely tiny.

Re:Is the free trade not so fun anymore? (1)

javilon (99157) | about 2 years ago | (#41583415)

You could introduce a "bug" into a processor that given a specific input (e.g. some GUID) will jump to a memory location and execute it. I guess that would be pretty difficult to find unless it is actually exploited.

Re:Is the free trade not so fun anymore? (5, Insightful)

DarkOx (621550) | about 2 years ago | (#41583445)

First off i have a very hard time believing backdoors are built in the large networks they sell

Really? After stuxnet, flame, you think that?

Fact is most of that network hardware gets a great deal less scrutiny than desktop software gets. A much smaller number of people use it directly, far fewer security folks get access to it.

Even if backdoors are not deliberately inserted its beyond reason to think exploits don't exist somewhere. Now what would the Chinese government's security arm do if they discovered a useful reliable exploit? Probably exactly what our own did/does and create things like stuxnet. Oh and if you could work something like that into the network layer it would be way way harder to spot than at the application layer.

Re:Is the free trade not so fun anymore? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41583467)

[quote]Really? After stuxnet, flame, you think that?[/quote]

How are those two instances in any way related? Neither of those used back doors which actually works against you.

They used good old fashioned malware and relying on the human element. They didn't involve network hardware at all.

Lets just cite some more unrelated things to help our claims.

Re:Is the free trade not so fun anymore? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41583501)

http://phenoelit.org/stuff/Huawei_DEFCON_XX.pdf

How Was This Arbitrary Again? (3, Insightful)

eldavojohn (898314) | about 2 years ago | (#41583493)

First off i have a very hard time believing backdoors are built in the large networks they sell. In complex systems like that its next to impossible to hide things in the long run. Anything suspicious would have been found in the audits.

I think you underestimate the creativity of the people who make networking gear.

This looks like a try at restricting import with arbitrary reasons without any substance behind them. I am sure many countries smile at this as they get to block American goods like GM corn etc citing safety reasons, and now they can use US own rhetoric.

That's fine. The US House Committee is claiming that Huawei and ZTE receive billions from the Chinese government and are able to subsidize their products with that money so that they can be the lowest bidder to foreign countries. That's not entirely arbitrary as they're not claiming the same thing against Foxconn or Asus. If you want to say Monsanto receives government subsidiaries as tax credits or whatever, you're probably right but so does almost every other international company headquartered out of the United States. Want to place an embargo on the United States? Go right ahead, Iran and Cuba seem to be doing okay. Personally, I think the safety concerns against GM corn are enough to block it and I think they should continue along that line of reasoning -- what economic conspiracy do you have for keeping GM corn out?

This hearing was open [house.gov] and is completely available on YouTube if you want to rebut more specific claims by the committee. I like listening to the Huawei guy, he's pretty humorous, he says that they will not under any conditions jeopardize the integrity of their networks for any third party or government ... yeah, like you sell networking gear in China and you can say that? Please.

Is the free trade not so fun anymore?

Oh, give me a break. Free trade? Are you serious? It's not fun when the most populous country in the world is artificially manipulating its markets, controlling what its currency trades at internally and creating its own companies that are traipsing around claiming to be private companies ... christ, the tariffs and tax laws surrounding international business are so complicated, there's no point in calling any of this "free trade" in any sense of the words.

Re:How Was This Arbitrary Again? (2)

QQBoss (2527196) | about 2 years ago | (#41584225)

That's fine. The US House Committee is claiming that Huawei and ZTE receive billions from the Chinese government and are able to subsidize their products with that money so that they can be the lowest bidder to foreign countries. That's not entirely arbitrary as they're not claiming the same thing against Foxconn or Asus. If you want to say Monsanto receives government subsidiaries as tax credits or whatever, you're probably right but so does almost every other international company headquartered out of the United States. Want to place an embargo on the United States? Go right ahead, Iran and Cuba seem to be doing okay. Personally, I think the safety concerns against GM corn are enough to block it and I think they should continue along that line of reasoning -- what economic conspiracy do you have for keeping GM corn out?

Would it bother you too much if I pointed out that Foxconn (Hon Hai Precision Industry Co., Ltd., actually, Foxconn is the trade name) and Asus are both Taiwanese companies, and the USA generally considers Taiwan to not be a part of China (at least for purposes of defense and business). Perhaps you meant Lenovo and ... never mind, China doesn't have an ODM anywhere close to Foxconn.

Re:Is the free trade not so fun anymore? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41583539)

Psssst..... Room 641A [wikipedia.org] or Stuxnet [wikipedia.org]

The report boils down to "We do it, so it follows they also do it"

Re:Is the free trade not so fun anymore? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41584367)

Quote "i have a very hard time believing backdoors are built in the large networks they sell. In complex systems like that its next to impossible to hide things in the long run. Anything suspicious would have been found in the audits"

Please... while it isn't trivial, it isn't beyond the means of a major nation-state to pull it off. It is a simple matter to keep the capability dormant until needed. You don't have it calling home asking for instructions. It is activated by a specific pattern of data, that is impossible to distinguish, hidden in legitimate traffic that may come in sparsely over hours or days. Responses are not sent out in internally sourced packets to some IP address that maps to Chinese government. The data is piggy backed on other legitimate traffic. With the scale of the ICs in equipment like this, it would be pretty difficult to find and reverse the malicious logic, especially since it would be intentionally hidden and distributed in tiny pieces across the part. Difficult, but not impossible. I'm only guessing based on the warning, but I suspect that the government has found suspicious logic or behavior in this equipment that is not easily explained by calling it a "bug."

Even if the Chinese stuff didn't have back doors... I'd be more inclined to believe that the US government doesn't want Chinese equipment because it DOESN'T have back doors put in at the behest of the US Government?

no shit? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41583255)

A) no shit. is there really anyone who thinks that a company whose domestic government insists on being involved with and controlling companies with censorship abilities wouldn't be influenced by said government in foreign territories?

B) this would be much better if the US had moral ground to stand upon. alas, it does not.

Irony (4, Insightful)

Dr_Barnowl (709838) | about 2 years ago | (#41583271)

I'm told this is ironic because the reason that Huawei got started was because the Chinese did all sorts of experiments with Cisco gear and determined that they couldn't trust them because of all the backdoors they had to accommodate US agencies.

The Chinese needed network gear they could trust, they'd been tearing the Cisco gear down for a while to check them for back doors, so they just went the whole hog and started their own router company.

The main reason that the US *know* that the Huwaei gear has back doors in it is probably because they are the same back doors cloned from the Cisco gear, but with different encryption keys.

Re:Irony (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41583343)

no. Huawei just uses versions of Cisco's old source code. I think there was a defcon talk about the fact that Huawei does not need to put backdoors into their systems. The bugs are so well know that you can set your BT to the right IP and auto pwn.

Re:Irony (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41583461)

It has never been proven that there are any backdoors in any Cisco kit aside from those provided for the purposes of lawful intercept systems, which are legally mandated in pretty much every country.

I'm going to have to [citation needed] your entire post.

Also, "you're told"? By whom? None of this post makes any sense.

Re:Irony (1)

Xacid (560407) | about 2 years ago | (#41583489)

"except for".

Re:Irony (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41584007)

Yes, except for those that are required and documented. Which is not what we're talking about here.

Re:Irony (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41584205)

It has never been proven that there are any backdoors in any Cisco kit aside from those provided for the purposes of lawful intercept systems, which are legally mandated in pretty much every country.

And it has never been proven that there are any backdoors in any Huawei kits aside from those provided for the purposes of lawful intercept systems.

But that hasn't stopped the US government from slandering and blacklisting the company. I guess it's as reliable as Iraq having weapons of mass destruction a decade ago.

Re:Irony (1)

Sarten-X (1102295) | about 2 years ago | (#41583797)

I'm told Huawei [wikipedia.org] started off selling phone switches, while Cisco [wikipedia.org] was working on computer networks from the start. They weren't really competitors until around 2000, as Huawei expanded into computer networks to accommodate the gradual merging of phone and computer networks.

Re:Irony (2)

QQBoss (2527196) | about 2 years ago | (#41584333)

I was teaching Huawei how to design in the PowerPC CPUs for their first switch designs in 1998, so your timing is about right. I was doing the same for Cisco starting around mid-1994. Their ice cream ping parties were great.

Lobbying (4, Informative)

amiga3D (567632) | about 2 years ago | (#41583335)

Hauwei should have started lobbying harder sooner. They spent over 800 million this year but only 200 million last year. Well, if they keep it up things will turn around. Gotta grease those palms in DC to get what you want.

Re:Lobbying (1)

jbmartin6 (1232050) | about 2 years ago | (#41583557)

Source? I'm interested in similar numbers for other corps assuming info is available to the public

Re:Lobbying (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41583585)

Paying for things is good capitalist thinking.
Paying for Senators is the only way the US can be sure that they're not dealing with those damn commies.

Security or revenue threat? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41583367)

I presume it's purely a coincidence that Cisco stands to lose massive market share if Huawei are allowed to undercut them in their own country..

This could get interesting given the numbers involved. I suspect the story hasn't ended just yet.

Well that AND... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41583369)

their god damned slitty eyes!! Can't spell Indo-China without China!!!!! god damn reds

If only the UK did that with the US nukes. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41583441)

The replacement for trident is unsafe because it cannot be trusted to be free of US control and interference.

Yet still they're trying hard to buy.

A little good sense (1)

Pope Raymond Lama (57277) | about 2 years ago | (#41583443)

All paranoid xenphobic US atitudes taken in context, this is onethat makes some sense. I just wish all other countries in the World would do the same thing towards US government hooked-up and not-trustable Microsoft.

Hollow, empty words. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41583447)

Of course, this "ruling" has zero effect on whether the US actually buys stuff from Huawei.

More empty hollow words with no action from the Republitards in congress trying to one-up Obama's recent anti-China rhetoric.

The Terrorists Win If You Have 4G? (2)

rmdingler (1955220) | about 2 years ago | (#41583453)

So we'll get our new 4G LTE system where? Per the 60 Minutes segment that aired last night, there is no U.S. company capable of providing the infrastructure. They named a French, Chinese and perhaps a Swedish company as the only options.

Re:The Terrorists Win If You Have 4G? (2)

EmagGeek (574360) | about 2 years ago | (#41583499)

LTE is not 4G.

The only implementation of 4G that exists is LTE-Advanced, which is not deployed anywhere in the United States.

Re:The Terrorists Win If You Have 4G? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41583569)

Correct, the network operators started marketing fast 3G as 4G before the 4G standard was set by the telecom companies who actually develop the stuff.

Re:The Terrorists Win If You Have 4G? (2)

kh31d4r (2591021) | about 2 years ago | (#41584127)

Currently you are buying most of it from Sweden.

About Time.... (3, Interesting)

NormHome (99305) | about 2 years ago | (#41583485)

That the US Government officially took notice of Chinese efforts to spy on and undermine the US; wasn't all that fake Cisco equipment that ended up in the department of defense enough of a wake up call.

The very fact Huawei has government connections... (3, Insightful)

MtViewGuy (197597) | about 2 years ago | (#41583491)

....Is why they will have trouble selling their networking hardware in much of the world. If Huawei wasn't founded by a ex-Chinese military official, that might be a different story.

Re:The very fact Huawei has government connections (1)

qarnage (572321) | about 2 years ago | (#41583641)

That would be double standards. For instance, it seems ok to many people that Check Point Software was founded by an ex Unit 8200 member, right? Seems like it's a "they're not our kind of friends" thing and political leverage heading into elections soon.

Re:The very fact Huawei has government connections (2, Interesting)

QuantumRiff (120817) | about 2 years ago | (#41584085)

To be fair, the DOJ blocked them from buying sourcefire (the commercial part of Snort) for that very reason in 2006: http://www.linuxplanet.com/linuxplanet/reports/6399/1 [linuxplanet.com]

Re:The very fact Huawei has government connections (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41584377)

The very fact Huawei has government connections...

Yes, that's absolutely true, in the free world (ie only the US), private companies never ever have government connections. Cough [wired.com] , cough [ibtimes.com] , cough [wired.com] . Don't look behind the curtain, these aren't the droids that you're looking for.

TUBGIRL (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41583603)

successes wi7h The

Symantec (as in Norton Antivirus) & Huawei (2)

Neptunes_Trident (1452997) | about 2 years ago | (#41583615)

Thought I'd throw this out there. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Huawei_Symantec [wikipedia.org] and this http://www.huaweisymantec.us/ [huaweisymantec.us] and this http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/27/technology/symantec-dissolves-alliance-with-huawei-of-china.html?_r=0 [nytimes.com] Is the alliance is over?

The devil you know vs. the devil you don't (1)

funkboy (71672) | about 2 years ago | (#41583625)

If the Chinese govt machine wants in to your telecom network then they'll get in one way or another.

It's just a choice between giving them a knob and having their hordes of crackers get the information they need. If they can crack the DoD, then telecom networks should be a walk in the park for them.

Personally I think this is a step in the wrong direction from a trade perspective. It really sends the wrong message.

What I find interesting about all this is that the Chinese were reverse-engineering Cisco stuff for decades to find the US gov't backdoors in it, but rather than doing a backroom teardown of Huawei gear to definitively *prove* that there are backdoors (probably in the Lawful Intercept code) , the US authorities simply *assume* that they *are* there and are acting accordingly. As seems to be par for the course these days, methinks that precious few tech types were consulted in this decision...

Huawei 5.0 (1)

srussia (884021) | about 2 years ago | (#41583727)

"Book 'Em Danno"

hardware! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41583781)

I think the larger threat will be the McDonald's happy meal toys which are secretly a massively parallel grid network supercomputer with software defined radios that can .....

Its very difficult to detect back doors in silicon!

China payback (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41583839)

Time for China to ditch Cisco and Juniper for security reasons as well

Who was saying that? (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41583951)

Who was giving advices to the government about that?? I dont know why but this smells to some protectionism to Apple... maybe they are to worried about one more iphone competitor....

US American hypocresy (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41584045)

I really love the US American hypocresy, pressuring China to open their markets and they close their own markets.
How you are going to gain their trust if you dont trust them.

Re:US American hypocresy (1)

Ogive17 (691899) | about 2 years ago | (#41585067)

How is our market closed down? We still buy billions of dollars worth of cheap, useless shit every year.

That's a silly comment considering the trade deficit with China.

As for trust, why would anyone in the business world trust China? They openly steal any intellectual property they can get their hands on. I'm in the auto industry, we learned long ago not to allow any assembled components be produced in China. They can make our brackets and bolts and seals but if we let them do final assembly we'll soon find a poor quality fuel pump on the market being marketed as OEM.

All this is irrelevant to any immoral business practices US companies have. I'm not saying our companies always conduct themselves in an appropriate manner. But in terms of corporate espinage, doing so could land your company in very hot water here.

And by security you mean (4, Interesting)

gelfling (6534) | about 2 years ago | (#41584149)

Apple didn't want to tangle with them in a predatory lawsuit that even if they won they'd never see a dime, so they simply lobbied Congress to keep them out.

No caps internet (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41584161)

who'd a thought chinese internet could be so evil

Finally. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41584183)

I'm damned surprised that it's taken this long for someone up there to wake up.

Dear US Congress, (1)

Elbart (1233584) | about 2 years ago | (#41584317)

three words: "Made in China". Good luck of getting rid of this phrase regarding all your electronics.

Re:Dear US Congress, (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41585091)

Yeah. It is not like the other choices are made in America either.

http://www.itnews.com.au/News/229650,nokia-siemens-to-defend-iran-spying-claims.aspx

http://spectrum.ieee.org/telecom/security/the-athens-affair
>The next day, the prime minister of Greece was told that his cellphone was being bugged, as were those of the mayor of Athens and at least 100 other high-ranking dignitaries, including an employee of the U.S. embassy [see sidebar "CEOs, MPs, & a PM."]
>Like most phone companies, Vodafone Greece uses the same kind of computer for both its mobile switching centers and its base station controllers—Ericsson's AXE line of switches.

Not unless the US seriously forces hardware manufacturer to bring back manufacturing/packaging of chips, circuit packs, software development back to the states. I am sure that more lube can be applied to the right politicians.

As a private citizen, you should worry more about your own government listening in your conversations about how bad the government is than a foreign government the opposite side of Earth. One of them can put you in a no fly list and/or lock you without trail as a terrorist.

Yeah, and Foxconn can... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41584443)

Because nobody of the "US companies" uses factories in China to do the dirty work...
And nobody could add any spy functionality there... Riiiight!

If the US wants to be "secure" they have to stop allowing companies to have any business in or with foreign countries or pay no taxes through bribery and treasonous manipulation (aka "donations and lobbying").
But they can’t. Since without China doing the cheap stuff, and still taking their printed-just-for-you dollars, the US would risk collapse of the value of the dollar and the inability to buy stuff anymore. And China would lose their biggest client and their economy would crash too.
That won't happen. Not without a 3rd world war in-between.

So, as usual, this is a mere charade. A security theater.

Hawaii a security threat? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41584751)

WTF? I guess it must be those loud shirts that could easily blind a pilot during takeoff and landing.

News at 11... (1)

Tastecicles (1153671) | about 2 years ago | (#41584767)

...DoD finds backdoor in nuclear guidance systems.

You read it here first.

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>