3 ms·

Hackers could always claim they were security testing :) If that would have been the case, it would have been the first thing they'd mention though.

boomboomsubban 6y ago
It was? Those words came from the report done by the security testing team.
- NicoJuicy 6y ago
  Copy the lines + link that state that please. That's not my observation. Note: i'm a native dutch speaker. So no translation required.
  - boomboomsubban 6y ago
    From the original link >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. That quote clearly comes from the security testing team's report. It's not clear from the quote provided to me who is responsible for the "Uncontrolled and unauthorized access," but we know there was an ongoing security audit at the time mentioned.
    - NicoJuicy 6y ago
      Capgemini did the audit, not Huawei who had uncontrolled access. It should be clear that unauthorized access is not from those doing the audit, but from Huawei. Why is that so hard to understand? Lol
      - boomboomsubban 6y ago
        Why should it be clear? What evidence do you have? I can't read the report, you could easily find where they say "Huawei was responsible for the unauthorized access" that for some reason the articles don't directly quote. Instead you're acting like I'm being dumb for not making baseless assumptions. The articles aren't titled "Huawei eavesdropped on KPN" for a reason.
        NicoJuicy 6y ago
        Unauthorized access was detected from China outside of the procedure. With that access they could have done anything ( eg. eavesdropping ). Follow up requests are currently happening by the Dutch government ( other related news from today). KPN also mentioned: currently they have no access. While the report states: they had access. KPN mentioned that Huawei's employees with access were employed by KPN. Wick could be correct, but it didn't explain access from China since those employees are employed in the netherlands. A bit of wordplay going around. That's true. -- Capgemini: Huawei blijkt zich buiten de procedure om vanuit China toegang tot de kern van het netwerk te verschaffen. Veiligheidsmensen van KPN weten dat dit gebeurt, maar doen niets. ‘Ongecontroleerde en ongeautoriseerde toegang vanuit China heeft na 28 oktober 2009 daadwerkelijk plaatsgevonden’, vermeldt het rapport in april 2010. [...] De onderzoekers [van Capgemini] vragen het Chinese bedrijf daarom wie bij de gegevens kan en hoe de versleuteling is geregeld. ‘Pas na lang aandringen’ is Huawei bereid ‘duidelijkheid te verschaffen’. Huawei blijkt een uiterst zwakke versleuteling toe te passen en zelf het sleutelbeheer te doen. Capgemini: ‘Daarmee zijn nummers die onder de tap staan bekend bij Huawei’. Edit: couldn't respond below. Source is the origin of all foreign news articles, it's the original newspaper that is in possession of the Capgemini report: 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... ( Google cache is possible as a workaround fyi)
        boomboomsubban 6y ago
        Where is this Capgemeni statement from? It's extremely strange that they make several accusations yet the only part that's actually from the report is the same quote mentioned before. The [...] also moves on to a completely new topic. Overall, it says the same "Huawei could have done something" as the other sources I've seen.

boomboomsubban 6y ago

It was? Those words came from the report done by the security testing team.

NicoJuicy 6y ago
Copy the lines + link that state that please. That's not my observation. Note: i'm a native dutch speaker. So no translation required.
- boomboomsubban 6y ago
  From the original link >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. That quote clearly comes from the security testing team's report. It's not clear from the quote provided to me who is responsible for the "Uncontrolled and unauthorized access," but we know there was an ongoing security audit at the time mentioned.
  - NicoJuicy 6y ago
    Capgemini did the audit, not Huawei who had uncontrolled access. It should be clear that unauthorized access is not from those doing the audit, but from Huawei. Why is that so hard to understand? Lol
    - boomboomsubban 6y ago
      Why should it be clear? What evidence do you have? I can't read the report, you could easily find where they say "Huawei was responsible for the unauthorized access" that for some reason the articles don't directly quote. Instead you're acting like I'm being dumb for not making baseless assumptions. The articles aren't titled "Huawei eavesdropped on KPN" for a reason.
      - NicoJuicy 6y ago
        Unauthorized access was detected from China outside of the procedure. With that access they could have done anything ( eg. eavesdropping ). Follow up requests are currently happening by the Dutch government ( other related news from today). KPN also mentioned: currently they have no access. While the report states: they had access. KPN mentioned that Huawei's employees with access were employed by KPN. Wick could be correct, but it didn't explain access from China since those employees are employed in the netherlands. A bit of wordplay going around. That's true. -- Capgemini: Huawei blijkt zich buiten de procedure om vanuit China toegang tot de kern van het netwerk te verschaffen. Veiligheidsmensen van KPN weten dat dit gebeurt, maar doen niets. ‘Ongecontroleerde en ongeautoriseerde toegang vanuit China heeft na 28 oktober 2009 daadwerkelijk plaatsgevonden’, vermeldt het rapport in april 2010. [...] De onderzoekers [van Capgemini] vragen het Chinese bedrijf daarom wie bij de gegevens kan en hoe de versleuteling is geregeld. ‘Pas na lang aandringen’ is Huawei bereid ‘duidelijkheid te verschaffen’. Huawei blijkt een uiterst zwakke versleuteling toe te passen en zelf het sleutelbeheer te doen. Capgemini: ‘Daarmee zijn nummers die onder de tap staan bekend bij Huawei’. Edit: couldn't respond below. Source is the origin of all foreign news articles, it's the original newspaper that is in possession of the Capgemini report: 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... ( Google cache is possible as a workaround fyi)
        boomboomsubban 6y ago
        Where is this Capgemeni statement from? It's extremely strange that they make several accusations yet the only part that's actually from the report is the same quote mentioned before. The [...] also moves on to a completely new topic. Overall, it says the same "Huawei could have done something" as the other sources I've seen.