22 ms·

Huawei Facts: An open letter to the US media

111 points by gtt 8y ago

phishfi 8y ago
I'm so torn with how to see Huawei. The dealings with Iran seem pretty cut and dry, and the laws in China are impossible for Huawei to ignore. On the other hand, their consumer products are very different from the commercial routing and telecommunication branches. Yet, the high level US government folks are being forced not to use the consumer products. Why aren't they being prohibited from using other Chinese consumer electronics, like Lenovo, Xiaomi, etc?
- torgian 8y ago
  Exactly. It comes down to politics
- clouddrover 8y ago
  > Why aren't they being prohibited from using other Chinese consumer electronics, like Lenovo, Xiaomi, etc? I suppose it depends which "approved devices" list you're using. If I look at the US Department of Defense's approved products list I see Korean brands like LG and Samsung but I don't see Lenovo or Xiaomi: https://aplits.disa.mil/processAPList.action https://aplits.disa.mil/processAPList.action
  - herewulf 8y ago
    I've done some consulting for a company fulfilling a defense contract and they had to switch their entire desktop anti-virus solution because they were using foreign made software and DISA was not happy about it. The origin of hardware/software is very much a concern for the US gov't.
- SyneRyder 8y ago
  There is a ban on Lenovo products. From 2013, regarding a ban imposed since approx 2005: "Chinese PC maker Lenovo has reportedly been banned from supplying equipment for the "secret" and “top secret” networks of many intelligence agencies, due to concerns its products are vulnerable to being hacked." ... "The ban is only thought to apply to the most highly restricted networks, and Lenovo remains a significant supplier of computers for “unclassified” government networks in these countries." https://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/news/10208578/Spy-agencies-ban-Lenovo-from-secret-networks.html https://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/news/10208578/Spy-age... (That said, I have a Lenovo X1 Thinkpad, bought partly because of all the recommendations on HN, and in particular seeing Troy Hunt using Lenovo. I'd forgotten that article when I bought it.)
  - phishfi 8y ago
    I'm talking about the report from a few weeks ago banning top level government officials from using Huawei devices for personal use. At the time, they were considering banning them for all military members as well... But there was no mention of any other Chinese manufacturers. The only other one that's been in the news lately is ZTE.
ngcc_hk 8y ago
Not sure. Core network to me is always very dangerous. China for their own security show not use US products and vice visa. For product, they should prohibit (both sides) not to use the others desktop, laptop and handheld devices. Apply for Russia, the 3 main hacking communities. For the case, Huawei is unusual. It seems to have a few case (down to even the glass cover!) Hence the company ... But more important imagine if IBM ship to Iran their products via a faked HK company and lie to HSBC about it so money can be transferred (based on the limited amount we heard), the case is there but the difference is USA threaten Canada for doing what the treaty is bounded. Or would USA pool resources to do it in court instead in diploma channel. Now this action on country level (as seems in the news also in other European countries) not using just company resources but diplomatic resources. Is Huawei a firm represent the country? Is it a department of communist China? Back to the device part, the government and core network shall be on its own whatever the countries are. It is just dangerous for Russia/China/USA to use other hacking country.
spamizbad 8y ago
I'm surprised how few free/open market advocates have come rushing to Huawei's defense. It seems everyone's caught the protectionism bug these days. Fact of the matter is they're being singled out not because of the their Iran dealings (Numerous US corporations have done this in the past and paid only modest fines), but at the behest of corporate lobbying efforts on the part of Huawei's competitors whose high margin business models are under assault.
- bassman9000 8y ago
  Because the Chinese is not a free market, at least far less, by huge margins, than the US or any other Western nation one. Huawei has been free to operate, and even bid in large contracts. Name one Western company allowed the same degree of freedom in China. If Huawei wants to get equal treatment, its CEO should ask the Chinese government to truly open their economy, and allow outside companies to truly compete.
  - vectorrain 8y ago
    But this time, it's US that impose restrictions on Huawei. That is your so called free market?
    - product50 8y ago
      Yeah - US is a free market and should everyone in. But China should exclude whoever they like. And it is all totally fair right? Why not, because US is a free market and how dare they didn't let Huawei in?
    - bassman9000 8y ago
      We all either play by the same rules, or none do. Though luck for Huawei. Check the WTO records on China.
- hnmonkey 8y ago
  You're stating that they're being singled out for just doing business and that businesses are just afraid of losing money. You seem to be ignoring the trade secret theft, IP theft, multiple intelligence agencies investigating them and stating that their hardware shouldn't be used, practically being an arm of the Chinese military intelligence, and probably more I'm forgetting. Seems like a very disingenuous argument to be making...
bassman9000 8y ago
https://www.digitaltrends.com/mobile/huawei-threat-to-the-us/ https://www.digitaltrends.com/mobile/huawei-threat-to-the-us... But Huawei is incredibly opaque – at least by Western standards. Ren’s still there (now about 70 years old) and still has veto power, but rarely makes public statements. He attributes Huawei’s success to collective leadership. That leadership? Huawei won’t say. National champions aren’t state-owned businesses, but they typically get market protection, financial support — sometimes as direct funding, but more often tax breaks, subsidies, low-interest loans, and government contracts — and even diplomatic help. That means the Chinese government could have a significant influence on Huawei, since so many purse-strings lead back to Beijing. And the company has a reputation for playing fast-and-loose with intellectual property: in 2003 Cisco accused Huawei of copying its source code and documentation – all the way down to typos. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ren_Zhengfei#Communist_Party_and_military_ties https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ren_Zhengfei#Communist_Party_a...
- dade_ 8y ago
  Like Xerox? https://books.google.ca/books?id=KIEIX2X-na8C&pg=PA68&lpg=PA68&dq=xerox+russian+espionage&source=bl&ots=2kp_BO-CWK&sig=ACfU3U3kKOVPt2pfcCV27Vl2KX9IlInNaQ&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjT6Y-XjeXgAhXo7oMKHaw4CYQQ6AEwB3oECAYQAQ#v=onepage&q=xerox%20russian%20espionage&f=false https://books.google.ca/books?id=KIEIX2X-na8C&pg=PA68&lpg=PA...
  - bassman9000 8y ago
    Nice whataboutism you got there.
  - Spooky23 8y ago
    Xerox owes its complete domination of print and document to its status as a US government protected company. Lol.
    - threeseed 8y ago
      Xerox has around 20% market share of managed print and document services. Not really a complete domination is it. Lol.
beams_of_light 8y ago
I'm not sure which is more dangerous with regard to Huawei - their utter disrespect for intellectual property, or their subservience to a totalitarian government that is in continual digital warfare with the United States. Platitudes directed at the US are exactly that, and should be ignored.
- torgian 8y ago
  And the States do the same thing. shrug Everyone is spying on eachother and we are not safe from that, despite what is said. I’m more afraid of the NSA having far reaching powers to spy on their own citizens than I am of China hacking into the NSA
  - _iyig 8y ago
    If the NSA spies on your text messages as opposed to the CCP, you (and your family) are much less likely to be imprisoned, tortured, or killed on the basis of your religious or political beliefs.
    - izacus 8y ago
      Systemic harassment, no fly lists and personal surveillance of muslim people happening in USA makes your sentence a joke.
      - leereeves 8y ago
        While those are wrong, they aren't: > imprisoned, tortured, or killed on the basis of your religious or political beliefs You've entirely failed to refute the parent comment.
        iforgotpassword 8y ago
        Uuh so China is doing drone bombings in the US then or how's that gonna work?
analognoise 8y ago
I don't think we should buy anything important from China because of their abysmal human rights abuses, surveillance state machinations, hacking and IP theft, down to the way they treat their neighbors (Taiwan, building BS "islands" to claim fishing territory, etc." I think we should isolate and contain them as much as possible, free market BS be damned, we should grow a spine and do without them by working as closely with the neighbors they've stepped on for years and who are much more open to ideals we agree with. We should actively work against them and I'm glad we're finally doing something. As much as I hate Trump, the one thing he's done I agree with is putting the screws to China. It's actually a popular stance with both parties, and it looks like it will continue after he's likely impeached. Good.
- justicezyx 8y ago
  Why do you assume that it was China vs. the world, not China and many others vs. US and many others? I hope you take a clearer look at the current geopolitical map and have a more updated view of the world.
dade_ 8y ago
And Canada now has zero credibility here. Between a US created diplomatic crisis with China and our Liberal government being exposed by it's on Attorney General, China has been proven right. Our courts are still at the control of our corrupt PMO. https://nationalpost.com/news/politics/the-tories-passed-a-measure-designed-to-catch-liberal-scandals-thirteen-years-later-it-caught-lavscam/amp https://nationalpost.com/news/politics/the-tories-passed-a-m... US/Canada human rights arguments arguments are pretty galling by a NA Aboriginal POV. I think the protester in Tianemen square had more of a chance than the students in Kent State. Kettle And pot are black as night.
- eastWestMath 8y ago
  >I think the protester in Tianemen square had more of a chance than the students in Kent State. There was literally ORDERS OF MAGNITUDE more killed at Tianemen square.
  - autokad 8y ago
    I was curious to if this is true. but what does the data say? there were only 4 killed at kent, and anywhere between 1k-10k killed at Tianemen square. However, for 'more of a chance', you have to consider the denominator. https://www.britannica.com/event/Tiananmen-Square-incident https://www.britannica.com/event/Tiananmen-Square-incident from this, we get at least 1 million people at the protests, but I dont know how many in one day, etc, so this gets tricky. from wikipedia, I believe there was about 2k at the kent protests. so 4/2000 ~ .002 and 5k (middle of 10k) you get about .005 - but this would vary a lot depending on what numbers you use. to be pedantic (you did say literally), orders of magnitude would suggest a multiplier of at least 10, which it doesn't seem we have. Though I concede, who knows how many really died in the Tianemen protests. Kent is pretty well known, which does say something edit: does say something about the freedoms we have in press
- threeseed 8y ago
  So the entire judicial system in Canada has been coopted by the Trudeau government. Sure thing.
- 8y ago
rqs 8y ago
> We build base stations in the harshest environments, like the Arctic Circle, the Sahara, rainforests in South America, and even on Mount Everest. In the wake of disasters like the tsunami in Indonesia, the nuclear disaster in Japan, and the massive earthquake in Chile, our employees were some of the first on the ground, working tirelessly to restore communications networks and support disaster relief. Then, after your employees have done all that hard work, you just fire them and call them "mediocre"[0]. Hehe, this is the very reason of why I as a Chinese IT worker, refuse to pay my own money for any of their product. [0] https://bgr.com/2019/01/21/huawei-layoffs-ceo-mediocre-employees/ https://bgr.com/2019/01/21/huawei-layoffs-ceo-mediocre-emplo...
- powerapple 8y ago
  huh? Huawei pays very well, and there is a reason it is paid very well. You don't get that kind of money for being a baby.
  - 420codebro 8y ago
    The wang-sucking dynasty champs have arrived.
  - pertymcpert 8y ago
    Why is that being a "baby"? Shouldn't you expect high standards of behavior?
- massivecali 8y ago
  All communication companies have a similar quote. https://www.ericsson.com/en/about-us/sustainability-and-corporate-responsibility/technology-for-good/humanitarian-response/ericsson-response https://www.ericsson.com/en/about-us/sustainability-and-corp...
gonvaled 8y ago
Americans complaining about spying by other governments, even if true, would be the top of hypochresy. It is so blatantly clear that the motivations to fight Huawei are mainly because of losing the technology race, that it is not even funny. That the US pretends to dictate to free countries what they should buy or sanction (Iran) is not cool. That the US complains about state intervention when its whole technology lead was built on state investment is funny. That the US complains about technology stealing when it built its industrial base by stealing European technology is insufferable. You know what? Just let the world be.
- natch 8y ago
  >You know what? Just let the world be. So don't comment then, if you want to let the world be. >because of losing the technology race It's not that US companies are "losing the technology race." If you read accounts from actual employees of partners, contractors, and others in the industry who work with Huawei, what you will read is that apparently Huawei has set up systems and incentives for copying and stealing technology. And then to pair up with that, it sounds like they have been extremely aggressive about patenting everything they can identify as possibly patentable, which would include, if you think about it, others' technology innovations and techniques that they have stolen. So it seems these people, with these ethics, who also happen to be organized under a unit of the Chinese military, end up getting IP protection on things that others invented, in areas that are critical to sensitive global communication standards that will cover transmission of private, commercial, governmental, and otherwise sensitive data.
  - __m 8y ago
    Looks like they are using the US history book on industrial revolution as a field manual.
  - sovok_x 8y ago
    >If you read accounts from actual employees of partners I'd like to read those! Where can I find the direct cites or even comprehensive review with them (that didn't mystically pop up on the Net within the last year period)? Google seem to fail me.
dreamcompiler 8y ago
Huawei was created as a front organization for China's intelligence service. This has been known for years; long before the Iran deal. We know it and they deny it. That's how the game has always been played with respect to Huawei. Other Chinese companies like Lenovo have exhibited tendencies to spy, but AFAIK only Huawei originated as essentially an arm of the Chinese CIA. That's what makes Huawei different.
- DDebbieDDowner 8y ago
  > Huawei was created as a front organization for China's intelligence service. This has been known for years; long before the Iran deal. We know it and they deny it. Same as Google then, yet we don't see the same outrage from the western media as we see with the case of Huawei. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12841993 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12841993
- apexalpha 8y ago
  God I would love any form of backup or source on that statement.
- lphnull 8y ago
  I'm out of the loop and Google is of no help and may even be censored on my device. What's going on?
  - thg 8y ago
    It's FUD based on the factless propaganda the US government is spouting out. Nothing more.
    - seppin 8y ago
      The founder was Chinese military, the early funding came from government sources, and several official gov white papers state Huawei as a national security priority. I don't know what you accomplish by denying something so basic and provable.
hguhghuff 8y ago
This reads as manipulative and cynical propaganda.
natch 8y ago
Translation: Journalists, please arrange private visits to our campuses where we can wine and dine you and offer you compelling incentives to work with us for mutual benefit. We won't necessarily openly bribe you but we are keeping a list and you will get a hidden "journalist credit score" which will be considered in such matters as applying for visas, etc. Your score may also influence the credit scores of others who associate with you.
- __m 8y ago
  How is that credit score hidden, when they are openly labeled as fake news?
CathayRe 8y ago
I don't think Huawei understands it, or they do but trying not to show. The West dont have problem with Huawei, the west have problems with CCP. And there isn't a single International Chinese company that doesn't have some form of Guanxi with CCP.
- shdh 8y ago
  Actually, Huawei has stolen IP from a number of western organizations. So the disdain isn't only for the CCP.
sasasassy 8y ago
In these cases I'm always reminded of an Obama speech he made shortly after the beginning of the Edward Snowden disclosures, where he guaranteed in national television that the US did not spy on national citizens. Imagine that, not being a national citizen, but from an allied country, and being told point blank that you are a-okay for spying without any kind of shame. AFAIK China does not intercept all of my country's communications, which the US has been doing for decades. Sigh, it's just a bad choice between sleazy US or dictatorial China. At least there are some other 5G choices available.
- mschuster91 8y ago
  > Imagine that, not being a national citizen, but from an allied country, and being told point blank that you are a-okay for spying without any kind of shame. This was the case from the beginning of modern countries - even back in old Greece or in 400 BC with the introduction of doves (per https://www.focus.de/wissen/mensch/tid-5865/geschichte-der-spionage_aid_57738.html https://www.focus.de/wissen/mensch/tid-5865/geschichte-der-s...). It was and is always a case of tacit acceptance - you as a country knew you were spied upon just as you were spying on other countries, and you relied on this to get your own spies traded back alive.
  - flohofwoe 8y ago
    It's a difference though between spying on another country's government organizations (which is ok) vs. spying on its citizens (which is never ok).
    - 420codebro 8y ago
      I must have missed that made up rule.
    - mschuster91 8y ago
      > vs. spying on its citizens (which is never ok). Yet everyone does it. The NSA snoops up everyone and their dog, same does GCHQ, same does the BND, same do the Russians and Chinese for anything they can get their paws on. Doesn't even matter if it's own or other countries' citizens - the NSA simply asks BND or GCHQ to spy on US citizens on their behalf, and vice versa. Laws meaning to protect citizens from their own secret services are for all practical measures null and void.
otterwww 8y ago
Please believe us, not multiple security researchers and governments, they know not what they speak. China is good for you, we love you and your money. Come to us, let us feast on your data. What BGP hijacking...these are not the routes you are looking for
throw2016 8y ago
There is a lot of finger pointing at China and wild claims by people who don't care about these things. After Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria, Yemen, threatening Iran and now with open meddling and orchestrating coups in Venezuela its utterly absurd to pretend to care about human rights or democracy. Apparently you can do the same thing every time and cause catastrophic devastation, kill millions and put millions of families in disarray and continue to claim 'innocence'. And some here talk about Tienanmen in 1989 as if none of the above happened, while colluding with regressive regimes like Saudi Arabia as we speak to bomb Yemen. In the same way some care about surveillance, but only in China. The NSA revelations, secret courts, secret orders, Snowden and Assange being hounded and not a single person held accountable has nothing to do with surveillance, rule of law or democracy. Google, Facebook and others making billions spying on the world and building invasive profiles is not surveillance. US law enforcement demanding to go through your phones and laptops at airports like the stasi is not a police state. Credit scores and social credit are somehow different. This is a culture of smug finger pointing based on dissonance. This is an orchestrated sabotage of a company perceived to be a threat by some interests with zero evidence or due process in collusion with a global media that is apparently not too reliant on evidence or investigation. This will be lesson for many on capitalism, free trade and the 'natural constraints' of our global system.
stargrazer 8y ago
Here is an article [0] which may define the background to some serious concerns about Huawei. It was almost like Microsoft's purported 'embrace, extend, extinquish' philosophy. "Many Canadians believe that Huawei stole the core technologies and business strategies from Nortel and used that knowledge to drive Nortel out of world markets and into bankruptcy. " [0] https://www.assemblymag.com/blogs/14-assembly-blog/post/90631-did-outsourcing-and-corporate-espionage-kill-nortel https://www.assemblymag.com/blogs/14-assembly-blog/post/9063...
subjoriented 8y ago
The fact of the matter is that the United States considers strong industries in strategic technology fields in adversary nations a national security threat. This is why NSA seeks to modify US standards for export across the world. It's why US lawmakers have worked with US telecommunication firms to gain access to international communications. It's why the US has gone after Kaspersky AntiVirus. It's why the US has gone after Huawei, and intelligence officials have supported debunked stories about (e.g. SuperMicro). It's why the Trump Administration has stripped the regulations on 5G development (to speed it up so that American companies and technology can dominate the standard). This isn't a uniquely American thing. Russia and China are doing the same things (heard of the Great Firewall?) Opening doors to journalists is a good and appropriate step. It won't fix the underlying issues, though, as they stem from National Security competition - not wrote press misunderstanding.

111 points by gtt 8y ago

I'm so torn with how to see Huawei. The dealings with Iran seem pretty cut and dry, and the laws in China are impossible for Huawei to ignore. On the other hand, their consumer products are very different from the commercial routing and telecommunication branches. Yet, the high level US government folks are being forced not to use the consumer products. Why aren't they being prohibited from using other Chinese consumer electronics, like Lenovo, Xiaomi, etc?

torgian 8y ago
Exactly. It comes down to politics
clouddrover 8y ago
> Why aren't they being prohibited from using other Chinese consumer electronics, like Lenovo, Xiaomi, etc? I suppose it depends which "approved devices" list you're using. If I look at the US Department of Defense's approved products list I see Korean brands like LG and Samsung but I don't see Lenovo or Xiaomi: https://aplits.disa.mil/processAPList.action https://aplits.disa.mil/processAPList.action
- herewulf 8y ago
  I've done some consulting for a company fulfilling a defense contract and they had to switch their entire desktop anti-virus solution because they were using foreign made software and DISA was not happy about it. The origin of hardware/software is very much a concern for the US gov't.
SyneRyder 8y ago
There is a ban on Lenovo products. From 2013, regarding a ban imposed since approx 2005: "Chinese PC maker Lenovo has reportedly been banned from supplying equipment for the "secret" and “top secret” networks of many intelligence agencies, due to concerns its products are vulnerable to being hacked." ... "The ban is only thought to apply to the most highly restricted networks, and Lenovo remains a significant supplier of computers for “unclassified” government networks in these countries." https://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/news/10208578/Spy-agencies-ban-Lenovo-from-secret-networks.html https://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/news/10208578/Spy-age... (That said, I have a Lenovo X1 Thinkpad, bought partly because of all the recommendations on HN, and in particular seeing Troy Hunt using Lenovo. I'd forgotten that article when I bought it.)
- phishfi 8y ago
  I'm talking about the report from a few weeks ago banning top level government officials from using Huawei devices for personal use. At the time, they were considering banning them for all military members as well... But there was no mention of any other Chinese manufacturers. The only other one that's been in the news lately is ZTE.

ngcc_hk 8y ago

Not sure. Core network to me is always very dangerous. China for their own security show not use US products and vice visa. For product, they should prohibit (both sides) not to use the others desktop, laptop and handheld devices. Apply for Russia, the 3 main hacking communities. For the case, Huawei is unusual. It seems to have a few case (down to even the glass cover!) Hence the company ... But more important imagine if IBM ship to Iran their products via a faked HK company and lie to HSBC about it so money can be transferred (based on the limited amount we heard), the case is there but the difference is USA threaten Canada for doing what the treaty is bounded. Or would USA pool resources to do it in court instead in diploma channel. Now this action on country level (as seems in the news also in other European countries) not using just company resources but diplomatic resources. Is Huawei a firm represent the country? Is it a department of communist China? Back to the device part, the government and core network shall be on its own whatever the countries are. It is just dangerous for Russia/China/USA to use other hacking country.

spamizbad 8y ago

I'm surprised how few free/open market advocates have come rushing to Huawei's defense. It seems everyone's caught the protectionism bug these days. Fact of the matter is they're being singled out not because of the their Iran dealings (Numerous US corporations have done this in the past and paid only modest fines), but at the behest of corporate lobbying efforts on the part of Huawei's competitors whose high margin business models are under assault.

bassman9000 8y ago
Because the Chinese is not a free market, at least far less, by huge margins, than the US or any other Western nation one. Huawei has been free to operate, and even bid in large contracts. Name one Western company allowed the same degree of freedom in China. If Huawei wants to get equal treatment, its CEO should ask the Chinese government to truly open their economy, and allow outside companies to truly compete.
- vectorrain 8y ago
  But this time, it's US that impose restrictions on Huawei. That is your so called free market?
  - product50 8y ago
    Yeah - US is a free market and should everyone in. But China should exclude whoever they like. And it is all totally fair right? Why not, because US is a free market and how dare they didn't let Huawei in?
  - bassman9000 8y ago
    We all either play by the same rules, or none do. Though luck for Huawei. Check the WTO records on China.
hnmonkey 8y ago
You're stating that they're being singled out for just doing business and that businesses are just afraid of losing money. You seem to be ignoring the trade secret theft, IP theft, multiple intelligence agencies investigating them and stating that their hardware shouldn't be used, practically being an arm of the Chinese military intelligence, and probably more I'm forgetting. Seems like a very disingenuous argument to be making...

bassman9000 8y ago

https://www.digitaltrends.com/mobile/huawei-threat-to-the-us/ https://www.digitaltrends.com/mobile/huawei-threat-to-the-us... But Huawei is incredibly opaque – at least by Western standards. Ren’s still there (now about 70 years old) and still has veto power, but rarely makes public statements. He attributes Huawei’s success to collective leadership. That leadership? Huawei won’t say. National champions aren’t state-owned businesses, but they typically get market protection, financial support — sometimes as direct funding, but more often tax breaks, subsidies, low-interest loans, and government contracts — and even diplomatic help. That means the Chinese government could have a significant influence on Huawei, since so many purse-strings lead back to Beijing. And the company has a reputation for playing fast-and-loose with intellectual property: in 2003 Cisco accused Huawei of copying its source code and documentation – all the way down to typos. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ren_Zhengfei#Communist_Party_and_military_ties https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ren_Zhengfei#Communist_Party_a...

dade_ 8y ago
Like Xerox? https://books.google.ca/books?id=KIEIX2X-na8C&pg=PA68&lpg=PA68&dq=xerox+russian+espionage&source=bl&ots=2kp_BO-CWK&sig=ACfU3U3kKOVPt2pfcCV27Vl2KX9IlInNaQ&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjT6Y-XjeXgAhXo7oMKHaw4CYQQ6AEwB3oECAYQAQ#v=onepage&q=xerox%20russian%20espionage&f=false https://books.google.ca/books?id=KIEIX2X-na8C&pg=PA68&lpg=PA...
- bassman9000 8y ago
  Nice whataboutism you got there.
- Spooky23 8y ago
  Xerox owes its complete domination of print and document to its status as a US government protected company. Lol.
  - threeseed 8y ago
    Xerox has around 20% market share of managed print and document services. Not really a complete domination is it. Lol.

beams_of_light 8y ago

I'm not sure which is more dangerous with regard to Huawei - their utter disrespect for intellectual property, or their subservience to a totalitarian government that is in continual digital warfare with the United States. Platitudes directed at the US are exactly that, and should be ignored.

torgian 8y ago
And the States do the same thing. shrug Everyone is spying on eachother and we are not safe from that, despite what is said. I’m more afraid of the NSA having far reaching powers to spy on their own citizens than I am of China hacking into the NSA
- _iyig 8y ago
  If the NSA spies on your text messages as opposed to the CCP, you (and your family) are much less likely to be imprisoned, tortured, or killed on the basis of your religious or political beliefs.
  - izacus 8y ago
    Systemic harassment, no fly lists and personal surveillance of muslim people happening in USA makes your sentence a joke.
    - leereeves 8y ago
      While those are wrong, they aren't: > imprisoned, tortured, or killed on the basis of your religious or political beliefs You've entirely failed to refute the parent comment.
      - iforgotpassword 8y ago
        Uuh so China is doing drone bombings in the US then or how's that gonna work?

analognoise 8y ago

I don't think we should buy anything important from China because of their abysmal human rights abuses, surveillance state machinations, hacking and IP theft, down to the way they treat their neighbors (Taiwan, building BS "islands" to claim fishing territory, etc." I think we should isolate and contain them as much as possible, free market BS be damned, we should grow a spine and do without them by working as closely with the neighbors they've stepped on for years and who are much more open to ideals we agree with. We should actively work against them and I'm glad we're finally doing something. As much as I hate Trump, the one thing he's done I agree with is putting the screws to China. It's actually a popular stance with both parties, and it looks like it will continue after he's likely impeached. Good.

justicezyx 8y ago
Why do you assume that it was China vs. the world, not China and many others vs. US and many others? I hope you take a clearer look at the current geopolitical map and have a more updated view of the world.

dade_ 8y ago

And Canada now has zero credibility here. Between a US created diplomatic crisis with China and our Liberal government being exposed by it's on Attorney General, China has been proven right. Our courts are still at the control of our corrupt PMO. https://nationalpost.com/news/politics/the-tories-passed-a-measure-designed-to-catch-liberal-scandals-thirteen-years-later-it-caught-lavscam/amp https://nationalpost.com/news/politics/the-tories-passed-a-m... US/Canada human rights arguments arguments are pretty galling by a NA Aboriginal POV. I think the protester in Tianemen square had more of a chance than the students in Kent State. Kettle And pot are black as night.

eastWestMath 8y ago
>I think the protester in Tianemen square had more of a chance than the students in Kent State. There was literally ORDERS OF MAGNITUDE more killed at Tianemen square.
- autokad 8y ago
  I was curious to if this is true. but what does the data say? there were only 4 killed at kent, and anywhere between 1k-10k killed at Tianemen square. However, for 'more of a chance', you have to consider the denominator. https://www.britannica.com/event/Tiananmen-Square-incident https://www.britannica.com/event/Tiananmen-Square-incident from this, we get at least 1 million people at the protests, but I dont know how many in one day, etc, so this gets tricky. from wikipedia, I believe there was about 2k at the kent protests. so 4/2000 ~ .002 and 5k (middle of 10k) you get about .005 - but this would vary a lot depending on what numbers you use. to be pedantic (you did say literally), orders of magnitude would suggest a multiplier of at least 10, which it doesn't seem we have. Though I concede, who knows how many really died in the Tianemen protests. Kent is pretty well known, which does say something edit: does say something about the freedoms we have in press
threeseed 8y ago
So the entire judicial system in Canada has been coopted by the Trudeau government. Sure thing.
8y ago

rqs 8y ago

> We build base stations in the harshest environments, like the Arctic Circle, the Sahara, rainforests in South America, and even on Mount Everest. In the wake of disasters like the tsunami in Indonesia, the nuclear disaster in Japan, and the massive earthquake in Chile, our employees were some of the first on the ground, working tirelessly to restore communications networks and support disaster relief. Then, after your employees have done all that hard work, you just fire them and call them "mediocre"[0]. Hehe, this is the very reason of why I as a Chinese IT worker, refuse to pay my own money for any of their product. [0] https://bgr.com/2019/01/21/huawei-layoffs-ceo-mediocre-employees/ https://bgr.com/2019/01/21/huawei-layoffs-ceo-mediocre-emplo...

powerapple 8y ago
huh? Huawei pays very well, and there is a reason it is paid very well. You don't get that kind of money for being a baby.
- 420codebro 8y ago
  The wang-sucking dynasty champs have arrived.
- pertymcpert 8y ago
  Why is that being a "baby"? Shouldn't you expect high standards of behavior?
massivecali 8y ago
All communication companies have a similar quote. https://www.ericsson.com/en/about-us/sustainability-and-corporate-responsibility/technology-for-good/humanitarian-response/ericsson-response https://www.ericsson.com/en/about-us/sustainability-and-corp...

gonvaled 8y ago

Americans complaining about spying by other governments, even if true, would be the top of hypochresy. It is so blatantly clear that the motivations to fight Huawei are mainly because of losing the technology race, that it is not even funny. That the US pretends to dictate to free countries what they should buy or sanction (Iran) is not cool. That the US complains about state intervention when its whole technology lead was built on state investment is funny. That the US complains about technology stealing when it built its industrial base by stealing European technology is insufferable. You know what? Just let the world be.

natch 8y ago
>You know what? Just let the world be. So don't comment then, if you want to let the world be. >because of losing the technology race It's not that US companies are "losing the technology race." If you read accounts from actual employees of partners, contractors, and others in the industry who work with Huawei, what you will read is that apparently Huawei has set up systems and incentives for copying and stealing technology. And then to pair up with that, it sounds like they have been extremely aggressive about patenting everything they can identify as possibly patentable, which would include, if you think about it, others' technology innovations and techniques that they have stolen. So it seems these people, with these ethics, who also happen to be organized under a unit of the Chinese military, end up getting IP protection on things that others invented, in areas that are critical to sensitive global communication standards that will cover transmission of private, commercial, governmental, and otherwise sensitive data.
- __m 8y ago
  Looks like they are using the US history book on industrial revolution as a field manual.
- sovok_x 8y ago
  >If you read accounts from actual employees of partners I'd like to read those! Where can I find the direct cites or even comprehensive review with them (that didn't mystically pop up on the Net within the last year period)? Google seem to fail me.

dreamcompiler 8y ago

Huawei was created as a front organization for China's intelligence service. This has been known for years; long before the Iran deal. We know it and they deny it. That's how the game has always been played with respect to Huawei. Other Chinese companies like Lenovo have exhibited tendencies to spy, but AFAIK only Huawei originated as essentially an arm of the Chinese CIA. That's what makes Huawei different.

DDebbieDDowner 8y ago
> Huawei was created as a front organization for China's intelligence service. This has been known for years; long before the Iran deal. We know it and they deny it. Same as Google then, yet we don't see the same outrage from the western media as we see with the case of Huawei. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12841993 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12841993
apexalpha 8y ago
God I would love any form of backup or source on that statement.
lphnull 8y ago
I'm out of the loop and Google is of no help and may even be censored on my device. What's going on?
- thg 8y ago
  It's FUD based on the factless propaganda the US government is spouting out. Nothing more.
  - seppin 8y ago
    The founder was Chinese military, the early funding came from government sources, and several official gov white papers state Huawei as a national security priority. I don't know what you accomplish by denying something so basic and provable.

hguhghuff 8y ago

This reads as manipulative and cynical propaganda.

natch 8y ago

Translation: Journalists, please arrange private visits to our campuses where we can wine and dine you and offer you compelling incentives to work with us for mutual benefit. We won't necessarily openly bribe you but we are keeping a list and you will get a hidden "journalist credit score" which will be considered in such matters as applying for visas, etc. Your score may also influence the credit scores of others who associate with you.

__m 8y ago
How is that credit score hidden, when they are openly labeled as fake news?

CathayRe 8y ago

I don't think Huawei understands it, or they do but trying not to show. The West dont have problem with Huawei, the west have problems with CCP. And there isn't a single International Chinese company that doesn't have some form of Guanxi with CCP.

shdh 8y ago
Actually, Huawei has stolen IP from a number of western organizations. So the disdain isn't only for the CCP.

sasasassy 8y ago

In these cases I'm always reminded of an Obama speech he made shortly after the beginning of the Edward Snowden disclosures, where he guaranteed in national television that the US did not spy on national citizens. Imagine that, not being a national citizen, but from an allied country, and being told point blank that you are a-okay for spying without any kind of shame. AFAIK China does not intercept all of my country's communications, which the US has been doing for decades. Sigh, it's just a bad choice between sleazy US or dictatorial China. At least there are some other 5G choices available.

mschuster91 8y ago
> Imagine that, not being a national citizen, but from an allied country, and being told point blank that you are a-okay for spying without any kind of shame. This was the case from the beginning of modern countries - even back in old Greece or in 400 BC with the introduction of doves (per https://www.focus.de/wissen/mensch/tid-5865/geschichte-der-spionage_aid_57738.html https://www.focus.de/wissen/mensch/tid-5865/geschichte-der-s...). It was and is always a case of tacit acceptance - you as a country knew you were spied upon just as you were spying on other countries, and you relied on this to get your own spies traded back alive.
- flohofwoe 8y ago
  It's a difference though between spying on another country's government organizations (which is ok) vs. spying on its citizens (which is never ok).
  - 420codebro 8y ago
    I must have missed that made up rule.
  - mschuster91 8y ago
    > vs. spying on its citizens (which is never ok). Yet everyone does it. The NSA snoops up everyone and their dog, same does GCHQ, same does the BND, same do the Russians and Chinese for anything they can get their paws on. Doesn't even matter if it's own or other countries' citizens - the NSA simply asks BND or GCHQ to spy on US citizens on their behalf, and vice versa. Laws meaning to protect citizens from their own secret services are for all practical measures null and void.

otterwww 8y ago

Please believe us, not multiple security researchers and governments, they know not what they speak. China is good for you, we love you and your money. Come to us, let us feast on your data. What BGP hijacking...these are not the routes you are looking for

throw2016 8y ago

There is a lot of finger pointing at China and wild claims by people who don't care about these things. After Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria, Yemen, threatening Iran and now with open meddling and orchestrating coups in Venezuela its utterly absurd to pretend to care about human rights or democracy. Apparently you can do the same thing every time and cause catastrophic devastation, kill millions and put millions of families in disarray and continue to claim 'innocence'. And some here talk about Tienanmen in 1989 as if none of the above happened, while colluding with regressive regimes like Saudi Arabia as we speak to bomb Yemen. In the same way some care about surveillance, but only in China. The NSA revelations, secret courts, secret orders, Snowden and Assange being hounded and not a single person held accountable has nothing to do with surveillance, rule of law or democracy. Google, Facebook and others making billions spying on the world and building invasive profiles is not surveillance. US law enforcement demanding to go through your phones and laptops at airports like the stasi is not a police state. Credit scores and social credit are somehow different. This is a culture of smug finger pointing based on dissonance. This is an orchestrated sabotage of a company perceived to be a threat by some interests with zero evidence or due process in collusion with a global media that is apparently not too reliant on evidence or investigation. This will be lesson for many on capitalism, free trade and the 'natural constraints' of our global system.

stargrazer 8y ago

Here is an article [0] which may define the background to some serious concerns about Huawei. It was almost like Microsoft's purported 'embrace, extend, extinquish' philosophy. "Many Canadians believe that Huawei stole the core technologies and business strategies from Nortel and used that knowledge to drive Nortel out of world markets and into bankruptcy. " [0] https://www.assemblymag.com/blogs/14-assembly-blog/post/90631-did-outsourcing-and-corporate-espionage-kill-nortel https://www.assemblymag.com/blogs/14-assembly-blog/post/9063...

subjoriented 8y ago

The fact of the matter is that the United States considers strong industries in strategic technology fields in adversary nations a national security threat. This is why NSA seeks to modify US standards for export across the world. It's why US lawmakers have worked with US telecommunication firms to gain access to international communications. It's why the US has gone after Kaspersky AntiVirus. It's why the US has gone after Huawei, and intelligence officials have supported debunked stories about (e.g. SuperMicro). It's why the Trump Administration has stripped the regulations on 5G development (to speed it up so that American companies and technology can dominate the standard). This isn't a uniquely American thing. Russia and China are doing the same things (heard of the Great Firewall?) Opening doors to journalists is a good and appropriate step. It won't fix the underlying issues, though, as they stem from National Security competition - not wrote press misunderstanding.