6 ms·
This argument would hold more weight if the government was saying not to use any non-US phone. But they're specifically targeting Huawei and ZTE. Notice that th
by eridius 9y ago
This argument would hold more weight if the government was saying not to use any non-US phone. But they're specifically targeting Huawei and ZTE. Notice that there's no recommendation to avoid e.g. Samsung phones.
- user982 9y agoSamsung is South Korean, a US ally and SIGINT partner. Modify the argument to, "the government is saying not to use any phones that are not from the US or its puppet states."
- eridius 9y agoAre Huawei and ZTE the only phone manufacturers from a non-SIGINT partner state? That doesn't seem correct. Hell, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mobile_phone_makers_by_country https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mobile_phone_makers_by... lists 29 different mobile phone makers in China, 2 of which are Huawei and ZTE, one of which is a subsidiary, leaving 26 independent manufacturers. But the government isn't telling us not to buy e.g. a Xiaomi phone.
- michaelmrose 9y agoWhich of those other 27 are big enough in the US to be worthy of mention?
- eridius 9y agoHow about Xiaomi? Wikipedia says that as of 2017 they're the world's 5th largest smartphone company. I don't know how popular their products are in the US, but I have at least heard of them before (which is more than I can say for ZTE).
- prklmn 9y agoI’d venture to say 98% of the US population couldn’t tell you if Xiaomi was a tech company or a Chinese food dish.
- eridius 9y agoThat's true of Huawei and ZTE too, and yet the government thought it was worth saying don't buy their phones, so I'm not sure what your point is.
- prklmn 9y agoMy point is that Xiaomi phones are not popular in the US, at all. Xiaomi had zero official distribution in the US up until recently when they started selling directly on amazon. ZTE and Hauwei phones have been sold through official distribution channels for a while. ZTE phones are given away or nearly given away for free to every cricket wireless customer.
- free652 9y agoI am more aware of Xiaomi than Hauwei. ZTEs were around, but those are garbage phones. I know that Xiaomi makes phones, smart bands and a smart tv. I literally had no idea what Hauwei was making until I looked up right now.
- emodendroket 9y agoHuawei made one of the Nexus phones.
- seanmcdirmid 9y agoConsidering that the name literally means little rice, they wouldn't be necessarily wrong. (at least it isn't 小蜜, which has a different meaning...)
- seanmcdirmid 9y agoXiaomi has almost zero presence in the US market, you can't get their phones here unless you go via a grey market importer.
- Retric 9y agoOr Amazon.com...
- ajoy 9y agoFYI, Xiaomi is very popular in India, because they offer perceived good value for the cost.
- sbrm1 9y agoXiaomi now has the largest market share amongst phone manufacturers in India.
- ENOTTY 9y agoThe witnesses only answered the question in front of them. Sen. Cotton only asked about ZTE, Huawei, China Telecom, and China Unicom, so Director Wray responded only about ZTE and Huawei. This is standard practice when testifying in front of an oversight committee.
- s73v3r_ 9y agoCalling South Korea a puppet state is quite a stretch.
- jiggunjer 9y agoEven if it was a puppet state, apparently Samsung is above the law there. They are like 70% of its GDP.
- Clubber 9y ago1/5th of exports, 17% of GDP. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samsung https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samsung
- jiggunjer 9y agoI stand corrected. I shouldn't try to pull statistics from my failing memory anymore. Still big enough to intimidate a government from messing with them.
- praneshp 9y ago> Still big enough to intimidate a government from messing with them Nope, per recent incidents.
- kurthr 9y agoUm, well Samsung's president hass been released from jail, but the countrie's last president hasn't... http://fortune.com/2018/02/05/samsung-j-y-lee-released-south-korea/ http://fortune.com/2018/02/05/samsung-j-y-lee-released-south... I'd say that is a LOT of influence.
- praneshp 9y agoReleased from jail necessarily implies the government will "mess" with them.
- xtrimsky1234 9y agoWhat about OnePlus then? It is a Chinese company, and I'm sure they sell more phones than Huawei.
- morganvachon 9y ago> " This argument would hold more weight if the government was saying not to use any non-US phone" There's not even such a thing as a "US phone" though, is there? Even phones manufactured by US companies like Apple are made in China with Chinese/Taiwanese sourced parts. Google always outsources its Nexus/Pixel devices to third parties like LG and Motorola. Speaking of Motorola, they are now owned by Chinese manufacturer Lenovo, which has also been in hot water lately over spyware and rootkits in their laptops. I'm of two minds about the announcement. On the one hand, Huawei and ZTE have both been caught installing backdoors and spyware on their devices in the past[1]. On the other hand, the US three letter agencies have a vested interest in US citizens carrying around easily monitored and tracked devices, and they easily find ways around Constitutional protections against spying within their own borders. I honestly don't know who to believe in this situation. [1] https://www.fastcompany.com/4025254/new-phone-who-dis-huawei-zte-respond-to-reports-of-secret-back-door-in-android-devices https://www.fastcompany.com/4025254/new-phone-who-dis-huawei...
- gascan 9y agoIf Huawei and ZTE put in back doors, and the CIA/FBI/NSA wants into your phone, then you'd expect they would want you to have a Huawei phone. After all, as oft repeated here, a backdoor is accessible to anybody, no matter who it was put in for.
- olympus 9y agoNot necessarily. If there is a hardware vulnerability specified by the Chinese government, the NSA would not want you to use that phone. They'd rather keep China from having the easy option and then compromise your info another way (that presumably makes it more difficult for China to get your info).
- emodendroket 9y agoAlso, finding the backdoor is still some effort.
- tomrod 9y ago
- olfactory 9y ago> Notice that there's no recommendation to avoid e.g. Samsung phones. True, however from a propaganda standpoint focusing (first?) on a nation that is already viewed with suspicion and xenophobia by many Americans might be considered a sort of "baby steps" way of the US adopting a more adversarial stance with respect to foreign manufactured hardware. By focusing on China the question of motive becomes much easier to sell (because of pre-existing biases).
- emodendroket 9y agoThe US has a closer relationship with South Korea's security apparatus than China's, though.
- tripzilch 9y agoAnd their argument would hold more weight if they would just point at the vulnerability they're suspecting. Even if they only had rough suspicions (with rigorous technical underpinnings, just like a security researcher taking their job seriously). The public security community has repeatedly discovered, reported and fixed serious security vulnerabilities without the NSA doing shit all to help out (which is their job) whether they knew about the vulnerability or not, going as far as deliberately pushing back. The only reason I can see why you'd prefer one argument over the other is if you somehow believe the NSA always has the best interest of the people at heart. But I think we know a little better by now and they might support the people in theory, but there are usually other interests that are bigger and better and more important.
- eridius 9y agoDo you really expect the FBI, CIA, and NSA to point to a specific vulnerability? I would imagine their specific concerns are classified due to national security. If it was just the NSA saying this I'd be a bit more skeptical. But if the FBI and CIA agree, that seems like sufficient reason to believe that their motives are honest.