15 ms·
Huawei’s Ace in the Hole: Undersea Cables
- dillonmckay 7y agoAre there any good links about ‘landing stations’?
- mlacks 7y agohttps://www.submarinecablemap.com/ https://www.submarinecablemap.com/
- NeedMoreTea 7y agoOne of my more ancient bookmarks: http://atlantic-cable.com http://atlantic-cable.com Mainly history of the first transatlantic link, but also lots on Widemouth Bay and Porthcurno - the two landing stations. Widemouth Bay is the still active one with a GCHQ intercept nearby.
- robbiet480 7y agoTom Scott had a pretty good video about them: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nl2mQ2HiJZc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nl2mQ2HiJZc Minor correction: Tom Scott's video is great, but I was actually thinking of Motherboard's video which talks about modern undersea cables: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iMAThVcqzuk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iMAThVcqzuk
- niftich 7y agoCryptome is a classic source on topics like this [1]. As for what a landing station looks from the inside, Ars Technica had an excellent series [2] on submarine cables in 2016. [1] http://cryptome.org/eyeball/cable/cable-eyeball.htm http://cryptome.org/eyeball/cable/cable-eyeball.htm [2] https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2016/05/how-the-internet-works-submarine-cables-data-centres-last-mile/3/ https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2016/05/how-t...
- programd 7y agoTangentially related is this classic long form piece by Neal Stephenson from a 1996 editon of Wired "chronicling the laying of the longest wire on Earth". A great bit of recent transoceanic cable history. https://www.wired.com/1996/12/ffglass/ https://www.wired.com/1996/12/ffglass/
- wrycoder 7y agoAnd this piece served as his source research for the fiberoptic cable network portion of the plotline in Stephenson’s novel, Cryptonomicon.
- ohum 7y agohttps://outline.com/R7vGvk https://outline.com/R7vGvk is an outline version of the very good (from 1996...) Wired article, "Mother Board Mother Earth" https://www.wired.com/1996/12/ffglass/ https://www.wired.com/1996/12/ffglass/
- mikorym 7y agoSomewhat related: How difficult is it to access the "uncensored" internet for Chinese nationals (in China)? I can guess, but I'm sure other users know better.
- hangonhn 7y agoLast time I was there it wasn't too hard. But it depends on if the Chinese government is blocking your VPN or not. I usually connected to Seoul or Hong Kong.
- glhaynes 7y agoAre people there worried about being prosecuted (maybe severely) if they're caught bypassing the censorship?
- csense 7y agoIf I was a Chinese VPN user looking up things my government didn't want me to know, I'd be more worried about just being disappeared (i.e. kidnapped and tortured to death by security forces, buried in a shallow grave, and my organs sold on the black market. Then everyone pretends it didn't happen, because they all know that anyone who's too curious about what happened to this person will meet the same fate).
- DiogenesKynikos 7y ago
- X-Istence 7y ago> Specifically, on top of Japan, the U.S. and Australia, cables connected to NATO members should be off-limits to Huawei. I don't understand this at all... if the communications across the cable are properly secured then it shouldn't matter what cables it runs across.
- lallysingh 7y agoThese aren't military links. Lots of stuff is unencrypted or shittily so.
- jsty 7y agoSurely a few potential snooping countries have the capabilities to tap seabed fibre by now, and we'd be better served having carriers add encryption at the link level regardless of who laid the cable.
- lallysingh 7y agoThe carriers would get subpoena/NSL'd in a heartbeat
- glitchc 7y agoHuh? Are you kidding? Each cable bundle can transmit petabytes of data per second. Think of all the Netflix movies being watched in Japan and Australia transmitted over that cable. Why would anyone encrypt that? Furthermore, the hardware required to encrypt, even if feasible (and that’s unclear), would be astronomical in cost. Plus, it’s not just about access. A malicious actor could always damage or destroy the cable, cutting off a primary channel of communications.
- SoReadyToHelp 7y ago"Encryption is so expensive!" cries the 1990s
- 7y ago
- thepangolino 7y agoGiven the billions western nations sink into “cyber security” you’d think those governments would have done something to make sure all civilian communications are properly encrypted. Instead we’ve got Parliaments writing dumb laws regulating cookie policies.
- vorpalhex 7y agoBike shedding in the government? But who will think of the children!
- mrguyorama 7y agoAnd what color should we paint them?
- simias 7y agoThose two things are orthogonal. Pervasive online tracking wouldn't be fixed by implementing "proper encryption". Google will still track you, HTTPS or not. Besides something tells me that the same people who oppose things like the GDPR wouldn't exactly applaud if governments decided to pass a law to make TLS mandatory for instance. I'm sure if that were to happen we'd soon hit semantic satiation for the phrase "regulatory capture" in this very forum. So what exactly do you propose governments should do to solve this particular problem?
- scarejunba 7y agoI think you'd be wrong. Most ad tech companies use TLS and would be happy to comply. The cost of compliance is low. The gains are pretty big.
- drewmol 7y agoTo second this, it's my understanding that Google for instance is a proponent of transport security as it helps prevent middle men (ISP's, etc.) from stripping and replacing ads in transport.
- maxdo 7y agoHere comes Spacex Starlink + bezos copycat company with better then cable latency :)
- gnode 7y agoThey're unlikely to be competitive on capacity though. I expect, in most cases, these satellites would relay you to a ground-based base station with as few satellite hops as possible.
- maxdo 7y agoWith every launch, SpaceX will add about a terabit of “usable capacity,” Musk said, and two to three terabits overall. You probably right. But all those satellites that are above the ocean at the moment they can be used to transmit data over sea's or between small islands. In this way it will compete with optics. Think of countries like Indonesia.
- jauer 7y agoTwo to three Tbps aggregate won't change much except maybe for islands that are currently dependent on VSAT.
- zengid 7y ago> Huawei put the industry on notice late last year, when it completed a cable between South America and Africa. Somewhat tangential, but not I'm curious about how undersea cables deal with the tectonic plate movements and any volcanic activity on the plate boundary. Then I found this interesting article: https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2018/06/seafloor-cables-carry-world-s-internet-traffic-can-also-detect-earthquakes https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2018/06/seafloor-cables-carr...
- ceph_ 7y agoUndersea cables are laid with a significant amount of slack. It's needed for a cable repair ship to be able to haul up the cable from the ocean floor and perform repairs mid-span.
- packet_nerd 7y agoLooking at the cable map [1] makes me wonder, what do they do when cables are crisscrossed over and under each other? [1] https://www.submarinecablemap.com/ https://www.submarinecablemap.com/
- yyhhsj0521 7y agoIf a cable is picked up with another cable on it, the latter one just slides to the side?
- djsumdog 7y ago> Japan and Australia have essentially closed ranks with the U.S., and the Donald Trump administration is pressuring Britain, Germany and France to do the same -- reportedly going so far as to threaten to withhold important security information if they refuse. Australia cut off Huawei first way back in 2012/2013 when they locked the company out of Australia's 5G network. I'm no fan of Trump but I don't see how it's relevant to bring his name into this. This would have mostly likely been US policy under a democrat administration as well. Who wants to bet in 10 years we'll find leaked documents showing Apple and Samsung US lobbied the commerce department for this? Who wants to bet Intel, Microsoft and Google are about to sue because they're about to lose a few hundred million a peace? I'm curious if we'll see a Federal Court case on this within the next three months.
- chrischen 7y agoApple’s recent revenue cuts are from China. I don’t think it’s in their interest to jeopardy that. They also need China for cheap assembly labor.
- jiveturkey 7y agoI don't understand the comments here. TFA article says nothing about data capability, just that Huawei is in the business of running physical cable. TFA doesn't even state whether L1 repeaters are Huawei's equipment (part and parcel with the cable) or someone else's (Huawei just being physical installer). This article is completely worthless.
- YjSe2GMQ 7y agoPoorly done PR. Breaking News: The Suit is Back! http://www.paulgraham.com/submarine.html http://www.paulgraham.com/submarine.html
- timwaagh 7y agowhy are people so afraid of huawei? they are just a telco. they provide infrastructure. sure they can snoop on unencrypted traffic, but thats not their core business. so who cares if the 5g is american, russian or north-korean. if i were the us, i'd be afraid of 1. google and 2. facebook. their business is actually spying and selling that information. these know more about americans than any other company. they see data that is actually sensitive and encrypted. just because they are american companies, does not mean they will not leak to foreign intelligence entities. heck those are very likely on their client list already.
- spectramax 7y agoI think you forgot about the Chinese government who is interested in siphoning and censoring information.
- anonymouslambda 7y agoYes, here is the voluminous evidence that we have presented that Huawei spies for the Chinese government. /s https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_surveillance_disclosures_(2013%E2%80%93present) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_surveillance_disclosure...
- elorant 7y agoBecause they allegedly have strong ties to the Chinese government. So theoretically they could build backdoors to critical infrastructure used by ISPs and other network providers. As for you main argument, we can worry both for Huaewei and Google/FB. It's not either or the other(s).
- hrktb 7y agoI am not sure about how we should feel about Huawei, but by this line of argument nobody could lay undersea cables or get anyone to use them. From the article: > The leader in the global undersea cable market is SubCom of the U.S. Japan's NEC and Europe's Alcatel-Lucent Each of these have strong ties to their respective government and could build backdoors.
- ineedasername 7y agoMaybe this will result in net growth of global telecom infrastructure. After all, we can't allow there to be an underwater cable gap!
- freeflight 7y agoMeanwhile, FiveEye countries have been intercepting data through these cables, all over the world, for only God knows how long [0] [1]. Which is a common theme for this anti-China/Huawei push: Just accuse them of everything we are already guilty of. Anybody pointing out the hypocrisy can just be shut-up with a good dose of "whataboutism!". [0] https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2013/jun/21/gchq-cables-secret-world-communications-nsa https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2013/jun/21/gchq-cables-secre... [1] https://www.smartcompany.com.au/finance/economy/telstra-s-deal-with-the-devil-fbi-access-to-its-undersea-cables/ https://www.smartcompany.com.au/finance/economy/telstra-s-de...
- shawnz 7y ago> Anybody pointing out the hypocrisy can just be shut-up with a good dose of "whataboutism!". And that would be a completely appropriate response if someone were to imply that the US' actions somehow justify China's actions. Or vice versa.
- Barrin92 7y agowell if you're neither American or Chinese which is true for most people on the planet and you have to weigh which supplier of infrastructure you choose then you do indeed need to weigh who is the worse actor. That's not justification, it's just an evaluation.
- shawnz 7y agoSure, but what you are describing is much different than "pointing out the hypocrisy"
- freeflight 7y agoNot really, because as a German I've been directly affected by said hypocrisy and even when it came to light [0], quite spectacularly too, nothing changed. That's why I consider this current push of "China spying on everybody" quite cynical as it tries to sell a narrative where FiveEyes spying is the benevolent BigBrother only trying to protect us, but Chinese spying is evil incarnate. At this point, Germany might as well just go full-on post-privacy and just share all data about everybody with everybody, instead of playing these pretend games of "We care about privacy, except when it's in the way of US national security interests", which is an extremely weird stance to have for any country that's not the US. [0] http://www.europarl.europa.eu/document/activities/cont/201403/20140307ATT80674/20140307ATT80674EN.pdf http://www.europarl.europa.eu/document/activities/cont/20140...
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- 9nGQluzmnq3M 7y agoThe US may be able to strong-arm some close allies into shutting out Huawei, but it will not be able to do so globally. Huawei beaome the world's largest telco manufacturer with low prices (their market share is ~32%, twice that of #2 Nokia [despite absorbing Siemens, Lucent, Alcatel etc!]), but these days their technology is better than the incumbents as well: https://phys.org/news/2019-02-european-telecoms-dilemma-huawei-highway.html https://phys.org/news/2019-02-european-telecoms-dilemma-huaw...
- soup10 7y agoThis whole thing is about ease of spyware access by intel agencies, fuck em both.
- karmakaze 7y agoIt seems I should be reading between these lines. > The reality is, even if the U.S. succeeds in shutting out Huawei from 5G networks in major countries, the Chinese company could still thwart American efforts to maintain leadership in handling global data traffic. > Security policymakers in the U.S., Japan and Australia have started working together to address this potential threat. How is not maintaining leadership a threat? I would say it's a loss of market share and control to do as you please with the infrastructure. It's a threat in the same sense as citizens having encryption.
- asdff 7y agoBecause the Chinese government is dangerous and actively building a surveillance state and running a little genocide experiment at the same time?
- mantap 7y agoAnd the US doesn't engage in mass surveillance or war? I'm all for sanctioning countries that don't respect human rights but if the US is really suggesting that then they should be careful what they wish for.
- karmakaze 7y ago> maintain leadership in handling global data traffic It's basically saying China doing what the US does is a threat, meaning that what the US is doing is a threat to others symmetrically.
- AlexCoventry 7y agoIt's a threat to five eyes's leadership.
- 13of40 7y ago"Virtually all of the world's data transmissions go through cables on the bottom of the oceans." I'd be mildly surprised if me posting this comment went through a cable at the bottom of the ocean, but who knows?
- PappaPatat 7y agoChina Telecom’s Ace in the Hole: BGP Hijacking "China Telecom (CT) entered North American networks at the beginning of the 2000s, and has since grown to have 10 PoPs, eight in the US and two in Canada, spanning both coasts and all the major exchange points in the US. Few other non-American ISPs has such a wide-spread presence on US soil." "Using these numerous PoPs, CT has already relatively seamlessly hijacked domestic US and crossUS traffic and redirected it to China over days, weeks, and months as demonstrated in the examples below. The patterns of traffic revealed in traceroute research7 suggest repetitive IP hijack attacks committed by China Telecom. While one may argue such attacks can always be explained by ‘normal’ BGP behavior, these in particular suggest malicious intent, precisely because of their unusual transit characteristics – namely the lengthened routes and the abnormal durations." :s/CT/Huawei/ Source: https://scholarcommons.usf.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1050&context=mca https://scholarcommons.usf.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1...