16 ms·

In general, this is one of the news threads that I persistently don't understand. There is too much information missing. Why are European countries so keen on a

by 13415 8y ago

In general, this is one of the news threads that I persistently don't understand. There is too much information missing. Why are European countries so keen on allowing Huawei to build some critical infrastructure? Do they face threats from China? If so, how are these made? And then there is the other side of the coin, that the US allegations look credible overall, but it is also known that the NSA and GCHQ built spying tools into existing European infrastructure. Is the US trying to do this again but this wouldn't work if Huawei was involved? Which companies can actually build these kind of networks? Couldn't e.g. France and Germany build them on their own? Or would that be too expensive? Questions over questions...

jonathankoren 8y ago
> Why are European countries so keen on allowing Huawei to build some critical infrastructure? https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/22/technology/huawei-europe-china.html https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/22/technology/huawei-europe-...
gnode 8y ago
The desire to use Huawei is that they're a major player in the telecommunications infrastructure market. The governmental advice / requirements not to use Huawei equipment is because China is not trusted, and diplomatic relations with China are bad. There appears to be no hard evidence that Huawei have abused their trust, yet at the same time, that doesn't mean they couldn't. It's not possible to differentiate innocent security vulnerabilities with underhandedly engineered ones. Ultimately it doesn't matter whether Huawei are abusing their position of trust or not, but whether they could be used as a weapon by their host country, to which the answer is that they could be, as for any such company anywhere. So ultimately it's a diplomatic issue.
hacker_9 8y ago
It's cheap, and there is not enough conclusive evidence about the allegations. The US-led artificial trade war with China also gives pause when they are the accusers. If a credible EU country brought something up I'd expect it'd be taken much more seriously.
user5994461 8y ago
It's geopolitics. In short, when there is only a choice between US and Chinese manufacturers, whichever doesn't matter because they're both considered equally hostile. Chinese is cheaper though.
- pkaye 8y ago
  There is a third option... the EU countries develop its own technology.
  - cf498 8y ago
    Which would be quite expensive
- eznoonze 8y ago
  Intel is joining the 5G infrastructure game. https://newsroom.intel.com/news-releases/intel-modem-statement https://newsroom.intel.com/news-releases/intel-modem-stateme...
Someone1234 8y ago
It is really quite simple: The US has yet to provide their evidence to European countries, or has and their evidence is so unconvincing nobody actioned it. That's what this entire situation boils down to. The US has been making claims, now it is time to back those claims, until they do nobody should do anything. A lot of people suspect this is more about geopolitics than security for legitimate reasons.
rb808 8y ago
If all computers, networking and cell phones come from China, I dont see why local 5G transmitters should be any different. If Europeans save a lot of money choosing Huawei over Qualcomm its a good choice. Its not like Qualcomm is nice to Europeans. Also Europe is less insular and doesn't have the cold war mentality that our current government seems driven by.
KaiserPro 8y ago
1) there are always holes in network gear. They are either deliberately put in, or in there because network firmware is difficult time short and buggy as hell. or SS7. 2) allowing Huawei to bid brings the price down. There aren't many major players, so a lack of competition means comedy quotes. (https://www.greyb.com/companies-working-on-5g-technology/ https://www.greyb.com/companies-working-on-5g-technology/) 3) france and germany can build them on their own, see above. I suspect there are some specific flaws that are exploitable, perhaps. But, it depends on where the kit is. If its part of the core routing fabric, then yes, thats possibly a problem. However most networks have total oversight, because thats how GCHQ et al operate. At the very least keep a connetion record of every event that happens on the network

by 13415 8y ago

jonathankoren 8y ago

> Why are European countries so keen on allowing Huawei to build some critical infrastructure? https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/22/technology/huawei-europe-china.html https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/22/technology/huawei-europe-...

gnode 8y ago

The desire to use Huawei is that they're a major player in the telecommunications infrastructure market. The governmental advice / requirements not to use Huawei equipment is because China is not trusted, and diplomatic relations with China are bad. There appears to be no hard evidence that Huawei have abused their trust, yet at the same time, that doesn't mean they couldn't. It's not possible to differentiate innocent security vulnerabilities with underhandedly engineered ones. Ultimately it doesn't matter whether Huawei are abusing their position of trust or not, but whether they could be used as a weapon by their host country, to which the answer is that they could be, as for any such company anywhere. So ultimately it's a diplomatic issue.

hacker_9 8y ago

It's cheap, and there is not enough conclusive evidence about the allegations. The US-led artificial trade war with China also gives pause when they are the accusers. If a credible EU country brought something up I'd expect it'd be taken much more seriously.

user5994461 8y ago

It's geopolitics. In short, when there is only a choice between US and Chinese manufacturers, whichever doesn't matter because they're both considered equally hostile. Chinese is cheaper though.

pkaye 8y ago
There is a third option... the EU countries develop its own technology.
- cf498 8y ago
  Which would be quite expensive
eznoonze 8y ago
Intel is joining the 5G infrastructure game. https://newsroom.intel.com/news-releases/intel-modem-statement https://newsroom.intel.com/news-releases/intel-modem-stateme...

Someone1234 8y ago

It is really quite simple: The US has yet to provide their evidence to European countries, or has and their evidence is so unconvincing nobody actioned it. That's what this entire situation boils down to. The US has been making claims, now it is time to back those claims, until they do nobody should do anything. A lot of people suspect this is more about geopolitics than security for legitimate reasons.

rb808 8y ago

If all computers, networking and cell phones come from China, I dont see why local 5G transmitters should be any different. If Europeans save a lot of money choosing Huawei over Qualcomm its a good choice. Its not like Qualcomm is nice to Europeans. Also Europe is less insular and doesn't have the cold war mentality that our current government seems driven by.

KaiserPro 8y ago

1) there are always holes in network gear. They are either deliberately put in, or in there because network firmware is difficult time short and buggy as hell. or SS7. 2) allowing Huawei to bid brings the price down. There aren't many major players, so a lack of competition means comedy quotes. (https://www.greyb.com/companies-working-on-5g-technology/ https://www.greyb.com/companies-working-on-5g-technology/) 3) france and germany can build them on their own, see above. I suspect there are some specific flaws that are exploitable, perhaps. But, it depends on where the kit is. If its part of the core routing fabric, then yes, thats possibly a problem. However most networks have total oversight, because thats how GCHQ et al operate. At the very least keep a connetion record of every event that happens on the network