6 ms·

An interesting threat vector arises here for Huawei... Ignore all the stuff about backdoors and such for a minute. I wonder if the administration fears that Hu

by MR4D 7y ago

An interesting threat vector arises here for Huawei... Ignore all the stuff about backdoors and such for a minute. I wonder if the administration fears that Huawai could simply attenuate their cell tower signals at a high wattage to disrupt all sorts of things. I never thought of that before - "5G as a weapon". Definitely a weird world. I need to start reading Judge Dredd again to start getting caught up on the future.

pbhjpbhj 7y ago
IIRC: In the late-2019 BBC Click interview with GCHQ on the subject of Huawei, 5G, and security the spokesperson said information security wasn't an issue as we have end-to-end to handle that, the greatest risk was remote shutdown of the network. I assumed they're alluding to "in a time of war", falling back to non-5G wouldn't seem to be a big problem ... but then lots of our comms send to run on Huawei hardware already. Personally I don't think that risk is worth avoiding Huawei over. But then I'd be happy to maintain the top level of infrastructure we already have in the UK and work on bringing breadth to the networks using 3G&4G and taking an upgrade-hiatus. I'm not convinced the average person will get much from 5G except more infringement of civil liberties ...?
- 3pt14159 7y ago
  Colour me skeptical. I've seen enough to know that MITM gives you enough information or threat vectors. That said, I agree with you about Huawei and non-5G. We shouldn't be talking about banning them on 5G, we should be talking about banning them (and anyone outside of the western alliance, really) from selling gear in our countries period. National security takes precedent. China doesn't even let reporters from the NYT in their country ffs. But whatever. Politicians are reactive and don't understand cybersecurity and the few that do don't have the sway or incentives to really push for this. Though I will say one thing, in a cyberwar we'd brick China just as badly as they would brick us, so at least we have MAD working for us.
  - nxc18 7y ago
    Should the Europeans ban American equipment? We know the NSA intercepts shipments and tampers with network equipment, on top of everything else they do. We also know a foreign agent (with considerable Chinese debt who was elected with the help of Russian intelligence) is now in the White House. I know it’s fashionable to shit on China (China China China), but it’s not like they’re doing something new and unique. How can you count on the US, or any other country, to be a reliable partner? The POTUS is openly inviting Russian interference in US affairs ffs.
    - MR4D 7y ago
      > Should the Europeans ban American equipment? That's up to them and their own risk assessment. One thing I know for sure is that if they did, the US would wage an economic war so fiercely on Europe, that Nokia & Ericsson would have a tough time doing anything in the US for years to come. Further, collateral damage would include all sorts of manufacturing, which would cripple Germany. Remember the imbalance here: European manufacturing is more dependent upon the US than the US is on Europe. Fully 50% of Germany's GDP is exports, and worse, Germany exported $118bn of goods, while the US exported only $50 to Germany.[1] While that doesn't seem a big difference, once you look at it as a share of each other's economies, it is immense (roughly 3% of German GDP, versus only 0.5% of US GDP). [1] - https://www.americanexpress.com/us/foreign-exchange/articles/international-trade-between-us-and-germany/ https://www.americanexpress.com/us/foreign-exchange/articles...
      - tamdar 7y ago
        You are talking about US vs EU and compare US to Germany.
        MR4D 6y ago
        True, but for a good reason. If you take out the economic engine of Germany, you’re done. They are the banking muscle of the EU, and once that goes, everything goes.
sa46 7y ago
You might like Ghost Fleet [1] (or [2] for more colorful review). Ghost Fleet is essentially a white paper turned into a Tom Clancy style techno-thriller on what war might look like between China and the United States. Tactics from Ghost Fleet include: - Infected microchips from Chinese suppliers used to target and destroy the US Pacific fleet. - Disabling GPS with anti-satellite missiles. - Cyber attacks to disrupt the DOD communications networks. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ghost_Fleet_(novel) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ghost_Fleet_(novel) [2]: https://morningconsult.com/2015/09/08/the-defense-wonks-who-just-killed-the-white-paper/ https://morningconsult.com/2015/09/08/the-defense-wonks-who-...
- matheusmoreira 6y ago
  Thanks for the recommendation. > Infected microchips from Chinese suppliers used to target and destroy the US Pacific fleet. Awesome, the ideas that are often posted here have somehow made their way into fiction. > Disabling GPS with anti-satellite missiles. Just GPS? I'd expect surveillance and communications satellites to be much higher priority targets.
- nateberkopec 6y ago
  Oh nice. Ghost Fleet looks like the 2015 version of Red Storm Rising.
crowtoe76 6y ago
5G is most certainly a weapon. If nothing else, it is a steroid injection to the surveillance state.

by MR4D 7y ago

pbhjpbhj 7y ago

IIRC: In the late-2019 BBC Click interview with GCHQ on the subject of Huawei, 5G, and security the spokesperson said information security wasn't an issue as we have end-to-end to handle that, the greatest risk was remote shutdown of the network. I assumed they're alluding to "in a time of war", falling back to non-5G wouldn't seem to be a big problem ... but then lots of our comms send to run on Huawei hardware already. Personally I don't think that risk is worth avoiding Huawei over. But then I'd be happy to maintain the top level of infrastructure we already have in the UK and work on bringing breadth to the networks using 3G&4G and taking an upgrade-hiatus. I'm not convinced the average person will get much from 5G except more infringement of civil liberties ...?

3pt14159 7y ago
Colour me skeptical. I've seen enough to know that MITM gives you enough information or threat vectors. That said, I agree with you about Huawei and non-5G. We shouldn't be talking about banning them on 5G, we should be talking about banning them (and anyone outside of the western alliance, really) from selling gear in our countries period. National security takes precedent. China doesn't even let reporters from the NYT in their country ffs. But whatever. Politicians are reactive and don't understand cybersecurity and the few that do don't have the sway or incentives to really push for this. Though I will say one thing, in a cyberwar we'd brick China just as badly as they would brick us, so at least we have MAD working for us.
- nxc18 7y ago
  Should the Europeans ban American equipment? We know the NSA intercepts shipments and tampers with network equipment, on top of everything else they do. We also know a foreign agent (with considerable Chinese debt who was elected with the help of Russian intelligence) is now in the White House. I know it’s fashionable to shit on China (China China China), but it’s not like they’re doing something new and unique. How can you count on the US, or any other country, to be a reliable partner? The POTUS is openly inviting Russian interference in US affairs ffs.
  - MR4D 7y ago
    > Should the Europeans ban American equipment? That's up to them and their own risk assessment. One thing I know for sure is that if they did, the US would wage an economic war so fiercely on Europe, that Nokia & Ericsson would have a tough time doing anything in the US for years to come. Further, collateral damage would include all sorts of manufacturing, which would cripple Germany. Remember the imbalance here: European manufacturing is more dependent upon the US than the US is on Europe. Fully 50% of Germany's GDP is exports, and worse, Germany exported $118bn of goods, while the US exported only $50 to Germany.[1] While that doesn't seem a big difference, once you look at it as a share of each other's economies, it is immense (roughly 3% of German GDP, versus only 0.5% of US GDP). [1] - https://www.americanexpress.com/us/foreign-exchange/articles/international-trade-between-us-and-germany/ https://www.americanexpress.com/us/foreign-exchange/articles...
    - tamdar 7y ago
      You are talking about US vs EU and compare US to Germany.
      - MR4D 6y ago
        True, but for a good reason. If you take out the economic engine of Germany, you’re done. They are the banking muscle of the EU, and once that goes, everything goes.

sa46 7y ago

You might like Ghost Fleet [1] (or [2] for more colorful review). Ghost Fleet is essentially a white paper turned into a Tom Clancy style techno-thriller on what war might look like between China and the United States. Tactics from Ghost Fleet include: - Infected microchips from Chinese suppliers used to target and destroy the US Pacific fleet. - Disabling GPS with anti-satellite missiles. - Cyber attacks to disrupt the DOD communications networks. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ghost_Fleet_(novel) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ghost_Fleet_(novel) [2]: https://morningconsult.com/2015/09/08/the-defense-wonks-who-just-killed-the-white-paper/ https://morningconsult.com/2015/09/08/the-defense-wonks-who-...

matheusmoreira 6y ago
Thanks for the recommendation. > Infected microchips from Chinese suppliers used to target and destroy the US Pacific fleet. Awesome, the ideas that are often posted here have somehow made their way into fiction. > Disabling GPS with anti-satellite missiles. Just GPS? I'd expect surveillance and communications satellites to be much higher priority targets.
nateberkopec 6y ago
Oh nice. Ghost Fleet looks like the 2015 version of Red Storm Rising.

crowtoe76 6y ago

5G is most certainly a weapon. If nothing else, it is a steroid injection to the surveillance state.