4 ms·

< KPN says in a response that it has no indications that lines were tapped or that customer data was stolen. So there is no story, but a potential story on a p

< KPN says in a response that it has no indications that lines were tapped or that customer data was stolen. So there is no story, but a potential story on a potential (fill in the blanks) < The Capgemini report stated that Huawei staff, both from within KPN buildings and from China, could eavesdrop on unauthorized, uncontrolled, and unlimited KPN mobile numbers. The company gained unauthorized access to the heart of the mobile network from China. How often that happened is not clear because it was not recorded anywhere. So you outsourced some services as many companies do and failed to keep tabs on it, just like many companies do. Forgetting to audit outsourced work is extremely prevalent. < Based on the Capgemini report, KPN decided to refrain from outsourcing the full maintenance of the mobile core network. To this day, the telecom company maintains its mobile core network itself, with the help of Western suppliers. To tackle the risks in the systems of the network, KPN said it was implementing an improvement plan. A report by Capgemini, a leading Western supplier for outsourced personnel to telecommuncations companies. No conflict of interest there.

lucb1e 6y ago
> So there is no story, but a potential story on a potential For what it's worth, GDPR fines have been handed out for missing access restrictions, e.g. for sensitive data not having or checking audit logging and applying 2FA. Though I do agree it makes for a more lousy news story than if it had happened.
MrsPeaches 6y ago
> A report by Capgemini, a leading Western supplier for outsourced personnel to telecommuncations companies. No conflict of interest there. Way to bury the lede! [1] [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capgemini https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capgemini
jryle70 6y ago
We have another thread actively discusses potential issues with Google's FloC [0], which is only a proposal at this time, no harm done yet. Do you think Huawei/China is less of a potential thread than Google? If not why do you think there is no story here? [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26854073 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26854073
- kube-system 6y ago
  ...a threat to who, and for what? There are two main concerns at play here that are very different: consumer privacy and national security. The consumer privacy concerns are generally subject to regulation by law, but national security concerns often are extralegal in nature. This makes a big difference in the availability of tools to address the problems. Google will follow your laws or pay fines until they comply. Spies won't.
  - friedman23 6y ago
    >...a threat to who, and for what? I'm sorry, are you just completely ignorant of everything that's happening across the globe? If so, why are you even commenting? China routinely harasses, threatens, and then acts on threats given to human rights activists and expats. Chinese citizens that speak with reporters and human rights activists are put at severe risk because people like you are fine with letting Chinese technology infiltrate all aspects of your infrastructure. Your ignorance is malicious.
    - kube-system 6y ago
      You completely misinterpreted what I was suggesting. The sentence you are quoting is not me questioning the importance of the issue, I am suggesting that there are two separate concerns at play which are both important.
ruskimir 6y ago
Oh man, the 50 cent army is out in force.
crote 6y ago
As the original article[0] states, the report explicitly says that public knowledge of the report would threaten the existance of KPN due to the massive loss of trust in the company. The report contains the sentence "Ongecontroleerde en ongeautoriseerde toegang vanuit China heeft na 28 oktober 2009 daadwerkelijk plaatsgevonden" which translates to "Uncontrolled and unauthorized access from China actually took place after October 28, 2009" KPN has zero incentive to admit to anything and every incentive to deny everything. I'd take such a PR statement with a grain of salt. [0]: https://www.volkskrant.nl/nieuws-achtergrond/huawei-kon-alle-gesprekken-van-mobiele-kpn-klanten-afluisteren-inclusief-die-van-de-premier~bd1aece1/ https://www.volkskrant.nl/nieuws-achtergrond/huawei-kon-alle...

lucb1e 6y ago

> So there is no story, but a potential story on a potential For what it's worth, GDPR fines have been handed out for missing access restrictions, e.g. for sensitive data not having or checking audit logging and applying 2FA. Though I do agree it makes for a more lousy news story than if it had happened.

MrsPeaches 6y ago

> A report by Capgemini, a leading Western supplier for outsourced personnel to telecommuncations companies. No conflict of interest there. Way to bury the lede! [1] [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capgemini https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capgemini

jryle70 6y ago

We have another thread actively discusses potential issues with Google's FloC [0], which is only a proposal at this time, no harm done yet. Do you think Huawei/China is less of a potential thread than Google? If not why do you think there is no story here? [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26854073 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26854073

kube-system 6y ago
...a threat to who, and for what? There are two main concerns at play here that are very different: consumer privacy and national security. The consumer privacy concerns are generally subject to regulation by law, but national security concerns often are extralegal in nature. This makes a big difference in the availability of tools to address the problems. Google will follow your laws or pay fines until they comply. Spies won't.
- friedman23 6y ago
  >...a threat to who, and for what? I'm sorry, are you just completely ignorant of everything that's happening across the globe? If so, why are you even commenting? China routinely harasses, threatens, and then acts on threats given to human rights activists and expats. Chinese citizens that speak with reporters and human rights activists are put at severe risk because people like you are fine with letting Chinese technology infiltrate all aspects of your infrastructure. Your ignorance is malicious.
  - kube-system 6y ago
    You completely misinterpreted what I was suggesting. The sentence you are quoting is not me questioning the importance of the issue, I am suggesting that there are two separate concerns at play which are both important.

ruskimir 6y ago

Oh man, the 50 cent army is out in force.

crote 6y ago

As the original article[0] states, the report explicitly says that public knowledge of the report would threaten the existance of KPN due to the massive loss of trust in the company. The report contains the sentence "Ongecontroleerde en ongeautoriseerde toegang vanuit China heeft na 28 oktober 2009 daadwerkelijk plaatsgevonden" which translates to "Uncontrolled and unauthorized access from China actually took place after October 28, 2009" KPN has zero incentive to admit to anything and every incentive to deny everything. I'd take such a PR statement with a grain of salt. [0]: https://www.volkskrant.nl/nieuws-achtergrond/huawei-kon-alle-gesprekken-van-mobiele-kpn-klanten-afluisteren-inclusief-die-van-de-premier~bd1aece1/ https://www.volkskrant.nl/nieuws-achtergrond/huawei-kon-alle...