4 ms·

The problem is that Huawei kit does not have GCHQ/NSA backdoor capabilities. Hence it has to be banished. The story has not changed since five years ago: http

The problem is that Huawei kit does not have GCHQ/NSA backdoor capabilities. Hence it has to be banished. The story has not changed since five years ago: https://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/04/25/huawei_responds_to_spying_allegations/ https://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/04/25/huawei_responds_to_... It would be commercial suicide for Huawei to have backdoored their export products. For the Chinese domestic market they may have 'Great Firewall' extras to them but for export products it simply makes no business sense. There is zero evidence in the public domain to support the hysterical allegations of the crazy folks in our domestic military-industrial-espionage complex. In former times there was this quaint notion of innocent until proven guilty. It is time we grow up a bit and stop slandering our Chinese friends. Xenophobia has never helped. Edit: Instead of downvoting, please explain the flaws in my comment, whether they be based on unsubstantiated claims, tone of voice or just personal grudge. Thank-you.

pbhjpbhj 8y ago
If people can readily refute this then citations would be appreciated?
threeseed 8y ago
Nobody is slandering the Chinese people and this has nothing to do with xenophobia. This is purely about the actions of the Chinese government who have built their military on the back of IP theft. Much of which has been obtained through backdoors etc. And this isn’t a courtroom so the whole innocent until guilty concept makes no sense.
- stult 8y ago
  >And this isn’t a courtroom so the whole innocent until guilty concept makes no sense. In fact, if anything, the opposite principle should apply in the context of systems security.
  - dis-sys 8y ago
    are you suggesting that Chinese should ban all UK high tech stuff in China until it can be proven to be backdoor free? sounds like a fair reaction to me.
pjc50 8y ago
Well, they almost certainly _are_ "backdoored" in some sense, because the UK (like almost all countries) mandates that law enforcement be able to wiretap calls. It would never have been deployed in the first place without it.
- Theodores 8y ago
  Not sure I entirely buy your argument here without more information. The ability to wiretap does not depend on every bit of kit on the chain being wire-tap-able. From what I understand Huawei provide the radio access network components that work with existing 'Cisco/Ericsson' core infrastructure, with the core bit being where the wire tap happens and not the radio access bit.
  - 3chelon 8y ago
    Yes, I would have thought (pure speculation) that GCHQ could tap the backhaul at many different points and not have to depend on having backdoor access to every piece of equipment.
unmole 8y ago
> The problem is that Huawei kit does not have GCHQ/NSA backdoor capabilities. Hence it has to be banished. GCHQ/NSA don't need to add their own backdoor capabilities. Huawei gear ships with support for what is refered to as Lawful Interception.[0] I agree with the rest of your comment and I said something similar myself a few days ago[1]. But the idea of Huawei being barred by a British carrier because of GCHQ not being able to snoop on it is absurd. Full disclosure: I am a Huawei employee. 0: http://support.huawei.com/enterprise/en/doc/EDOC0100412586?section=j00b http://support.huawei.com/enterprise/en/doc/EDOC0100412586?s... 1: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18514607 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18514607
- Theodores 8y ago
  I like the Huawei employees I have met in Surrey, it does seem a pity that their world is being ruined by the brainfarts of politicians and those spooks that told so many lies about Iraq and every other war.
empath75 8y ago
It’s not xenophobia to be wary of a non-allied state having access to your sensitive computer networks. Hell, the U.K. should be just as worried about American products, tbh. Having a home grown electronics manufacturing industry seems like it should be a national security priority for everyone. America moving all of its electronics manufacturing to China was complete madness, imo, though I understand the chain of events that led to it.
CapricornNoble 8y ago
>There is zero evidence in the public domain to support the hysterical allegations of the crazy folks in our domestic military-industrial-espionage complex. Key phrase "in the public domain". As someone with access to info that is NOT in the public domain.......every organization basically has one of two choices: either your data ends up on an NSA server, or your data ends up on a server in China. Which you choose largely depends on your government's politics and which superpower they are currying favor with. Reasons factory-installed backdoors could NOT negatively impact business: -customers that aren't tech-savvy enough to notice -customers that feel data security isn't important -customers who are too cheap for more expensive alternatives (overlaps with the last category) -customers who have an antagonistic relationship with the US, so Chinese backdoors are "more secure" than US backdoors by default I think you'd be surprised how many people, globally, fall in those above categories. But major UK telecom companies certainly don't.
rayiner 8y ago
> The problem is that Huawei kit does not have GCHQ/NSA backdoor capabilities. Hence it has to be banished. As yes. The problem is the Chinese kit is too free.

pbhjpbhj 8y ago

If people can readily refute this then citations would be appreciated?

threeseed 8y ago

Nobody is slandering the Chinese people and this has nothing to do with xenophobia. This is purely about the actions of the Chinese government who have built their military on the back of IP theft. Much of which has been obtained through backdoors etc. And this isn’t a courtroom so the whole innocent until guilty concept makes no sense.

stult 8y ago
>And this isn’t a courtroom so the whole innocent until guilty concept makes no sense. In fact, if anything, the opposite principle should apply in the context of systems security.
- dis-sys 8y ago
  are you suggesting that Chinese should ban all UK high tech stuff in China until it can be proven to be backdoor free? sounds like a fair reaction to me.

pjc50 8y ago

Well, they almost certainly _are_ "backdoored" in some sense, because the UK (like almost all countries) mandates that law enforcement be able to wiretap calls. It would never have been deployed in the first place without it.

Theodores 8y ago
Not sure I entirely buy your argument here without more information. The ability to wiretap does not depend on every bit of kit on the chain being wire-tap-able. From what I understand Huawei provide the radio access network components that work with existing 'Cisco/Ericsson' core infrastructure, with the core bit being where the wire tap happens and not the radio access bit.
- 3chelon 8y ago
  Yes, I would have thought (pure speculation) that GCHQ could tap the backhaul at many different points and not have to depend on having backdoor access to every piece of equipment.

unmole 8y ago

> The problem is that Huawei kit does not have GCHQ/NSA backdoor capabilities. Hence it has to be banished. GCHQ/NSA don't need to add their own backdoor capabilities. Huawei gear ships with support for what is refered to as Lawful Interception.[0] I agree with the rest of your comment and I said something similar myself a few days ago[1]. But the idea of Huawei being barred by a British carrier because of GCHQ not being able to snoop on it is absurd. Full disclosure: I am a Huawei employee. 0: http://support.huawei.com/enterprise/en/doc/EDOC0100412586?section=j00b http://support.huawei.com/enterprise/en/doc/EDOC0100412586?s... 1: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18514607 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18514607

Theodores 8y ago
I like the Huawei employees I have met in Surrey, it does seem a pity that their world is being ruined by the brainfarts of politicians and those spooks that told so many lies about Iraq and every other war.

empath75 8y ago

It’s not xenophobia to be wary of a non-allied state having access to your sensitive computer networks. Hell, the U.K. should be just as worried about American products, tbh. Having a home grown electronics manufacturing industry seems like it should be a national security priority for everyone. America moving all of its electronics manufacturing to China was complete madness, imo, though I understand the chain of events that led to it.

CapricornNoble 8y ago

>There is zero evidence in the public domain to support the hysterical allegations of the crazy folks in our domestic military-industrial-espionage complex. Key phrase "in the public domain". As someone with access to info that is NOT in the public domain.......every organization basically has one of two choices: either your data ends up on an NSA server, or your data ends up on a server in China. Which you choose largely depends on your government's politics and which superpower they are currying favor with. Reasons factory-installed backdoors could NOT negatively impact business: -customers that aren't tech-savvy enough to notice -customers that feel data security isn't important -customers who are too cheap for more expensive alternatives (overlaps with the last category) -customers who have an antagonistic relationship with the US, so Chinese backdoors are "more secure" than US backdoors by default I think you'd be surprised how many people, globally, fall in those above categories. But major UK telecom companies certainly don't.

rayiner 8y ago

> The problem is that Huawei kit does not have GCHQ/NSA backdoor capabilities. Hence it has to be banished. As yes. The problem is the Chinese kit is too free.