5 ms·
Yes, Huawei has never done anything untoward. /s There's a whole section[0], and another entire page[1] on Wikipedia detailing accusations against them. China,
by dleslie 5y ago
Yes, Huawei has never done anything untoward. /s
There's a whole section[0], and another entire page[1] on Wikipedia detailing accusations against them. China, too, has quite the detailed presence[2]. So let's not pretend they're trustworthy.
0: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Huawei#Controversies https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Huawei#Controversies
1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Huawei https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Huawei
2: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_intelligence_activity_abroad https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_intelligence_activity_...
- Dah00n 5y agoI'm sorry but this is a very low effort post that a quick look at any article about Snowden's revelations would crush. Wikipedia simply cannot be used like this. You might as well count words on pro and against articles. Especially not useful as most facts in this area are at best poisoned facts -knowledge that has a biased source that cannot be trusted like the US intelligence community- and you are using a mainly US English site which in itself will have a bias against China. If you really do want to compare you could compare proven backdoors (which would destroy Cisco but not Huawei) instead of looking at accusations, which is pointless.
- encryptluks2 5y agoI would mention that you can find an equal amount of controversies, if not vast amounts more, about the US government, and that there are entire agencies that manipulate media and Wikipedia articles. An accusation is far from a finding of fact and a discovered peer-reviewed exploit. Also, the US could seem to care less if the home routers, modems, phones, and other equipment made in China are backdoored that these business employees are still using.
- dleslie 5y agoOf course there exists plenty of evidence of American surveillance. But when the USA spies, it does so in the interests of the American state and in the shared interests of the Five Eyes. When China spies it does so in the interest of China. For Americans, or citizens of the Five Eyes, there is at least some aligned interest with the state they inhabit and some political recourse available within it. Nothing like that exists for them with China.
- dirtyid 5y ago>citizens of the Five Eyes, there is at least some aligned interest The FVEY surveilliance sharing mechanism is designed explicitly to circumvent limits on domestic spying by domestic agencies. It is quite literally an institution designed to undermine the civilian interests of Five Eye countries. AU Prime Minsiter Turnbull literally admitted the reason why Huawei was banned from AU networks was because Huawei hardware made it harder to surveil on AU/FVEY citizens.
- dleslie 5y agoI am aware; being spied on by allies is still a world of difference than being spied on by China, or Russia, or Iran, or other adversarial nations. At the very least, citizens of Five Eyes nations can attempt to end it by contacting their representatives.
- encryptluks2 5y agoHow is it worse? I also don't have a lot of faith in representatives passing the same legislation you'd be trying to argue against, especially with the near-trillion dollar lobbying industry.
- dleslie 5y agoAdversaries have malicious intent, or at least self-serving intent; our countries and their allies have a greater interest in preserving our well-being than malicious adversaries.
- guilhas 5y agoSo many allegations and accusations, solid case right there Also for most points, you could just replace Huawei with any big USA technology company
- dleslie 5y agoYes, American companies also engage in surveillance; we know that to be true. For Americans, and citizens of the Five Eyes, that is a world of difference than being spied on by China. At least those citizens have aligned interests and political recourse with their states; with China, they have no such relationship.
- ZoomerCretin 5y ago> At least those citizens have aligned interests and political recourse with their states; I’m curious to know what recourse you think western citizens have for unknown abuses from their governments’ surveillance states.