Huawei CEO is 'open' to selling 5G chip to 'great company' Apple

2456

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 101
    GeorgeBMacGeorgeBMac Posts: 4,490member
    MacPro said:

    As long as the Feds have a espionage warning on Huawei, Apple ain't  gonna put Huawei chips in their products. Any attempt will just make the spooks more suspicious.
    The "Feds" don't.   Trump does.  But his propaganda machine could scare people off.
    The "Feds" and the Congress sure do. Going back to at least 2011-12. 

    I am not going to bother with giving you any links, since I have little doubt that you know how to do an internet search.
    Congress seems unable to do anything, well the House, at any rate, they are simply ignored.
    Yeh, Trump & his mobsters are trying to ignore them and hoping that they'll give up and go away. 
  • Reply 22 of 101
    tmaytmay Posts: 3,762member
    avon b7 said:
    avon b7 said:

    As long as the Feds have a espionage warning on Huawei, Apple ain't  gonna put Huawei chips in their products. Any attempt will just make the spooks more suspicious.
    The "Feds" don't.   Trump does.  But his propaganda machine could scare people off.
    The "Feds" and the Congress sure do. Going back to at least 2011-12. 

    I am not going to bother with giving you any links, since I have little doubt that you know how to do an internet search.
    And all these years later they still have nothing. Off the record they are even admitting as much. 

    It has been said time and time again, anyone involved in spying doesn't care which hardware is being run.

    If anything, Huawei's products are likely to be more secure as, not only are they scrutinised more but when issues are found, solutions are demanded of them.

    Apple would have more to gain than lose, not least in time to market.
    Groan, you Huawei apologists are back out in force again.

    1) Please send a link on who's admitting what "off the record." Otherwise, delete the post.

    2) "They have nothing"? We'll see when Meng Wanzhou shows up in a US court. (Canada's formally started the extradition proceedings, as you likely know). Until then, I'd advise you to hold spouting off.
    Your link:

    https://www.latimes.com/projects/la-fi-tn-huawei-5g-trade-war/

    "They have yet to provide hard evidence and, privately, these officials admit they don’t have any. Instead, they frequently fall back on a 2012 House Intelligence Committee report."

    Sound familiar? Same old story. Yes. 'Groan'
    https://www.axios.com/report-australian-intelligence-know-huawei-1541285886-42f1eb64-98de-422f-9686-4174e41ef37e.html

    https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2019/jan/11/huawei-employee-arrested-in-poland-over-chinese-spy-allegations

    https://qz.com/africa/1192493/china-spied-on-african-union-headquarters-for-five-years/

    https://asd.gov.au/speeches/20181029-aspi-national-security-dinner.htm

    https://technode.com/2019/04/02/discussing-huawei-in-a-chinese-coffee-shop/

    https://www.npr.org/2019/04/12/711779130/as-china-hacked-u-s-businesses-turned-a-blind-eye

    https://www.smh.com.au/world/europe/considerable-grounds-for-concern-top-british-mp-sounds-warning-on-huawei-20190406-p51bfh.html

    'Huawei insists it does not spy on behalf of the Chinese government but, on a recent visit to London, former prime minister Malcolm Turnbull told MPs that the West should not provide China with any capability to spy as "intent can change in a heartbeat"."

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/03/13/huawei-is-better-positioned-spy-us-than-we-think/


    I have doubts about Huawei, and you have no "evidence" that Huawei is not acting, nor will act in the future, as an agent of China. More to the point, there is plenty of evidence that Chinese hacking has specifically benefitted Huawei, as well as China's industrial policy, and Huawei's work in the Chinese security apparatus.

    So, yeah, I have doubts about China, and Huawei, and at a minimum, would like to see the Five Eyes free of any Chinese Telecom equipment. Why would any country risk their infrastructure by using equipment from an autocracy known for its illiberal policies?


    Oh, and an excerpt from that LA times article;

    "Beyond the risk of spying, critics of Huawei worry the company’s massive global footprint in places such as Europe could give China immense leverage in a time of conflict.

    “There is a direct connection between [British Telecom] and Shenzhen,” said Lewis of the Center for Strategic and International Studies. “Huawei pumps out software updates and patches…. That’s where the risk is. [The British] could get one update that says, ‘Turn everything off.’ ”

    Huawei is adamant it won’t cave to government pressure to do anything of the sort. It commissioned a Chinese law firm last year to argue in a report that Chinese law doesn’t require the company to cooperate in intelligence gathering. That’s been met by skepticism overseas, given the Communist Party’s penchant for superseding the country’s laws.

    Critics also point to passage of China’s National Intelligence Law, which became effective in 2017. It requires that any Chinese organization or citizen “shall support, assist in, and cooperate in national intelligence work” in accordance with other Chinese laws.

    One recent example suggests it might not be easy to resist government pressure, particularly during a national crisis or a deepening U.S.-China conflict. Didi, China’s equivalent to Uber, tried unsuccessfully to resist revealing its database to a government supervisory agency last year.

    Ren says that Huawei has already told the European Union that it would be willing to sign a “no-spy” agreement, promising not to engage in any kind of illegal intelligence-gathering and not to have any kind of “back door” embedded in Huawei equipment or software. He says he also believes that the Chinese government would join other nations in signing a similar agreement. He says, however, that U.S. unwillingness to consider “no-spy” agreements has slowed their progress."

    Nobody in their right mind would believe that last paragraph.


    edited April 15 ericthehalfbeelerxtanantksundaram
  • Reply 23 of 101
    GeorgeBMacGeorgeBMac Posts: 4,490member
    tmay said:
    avon b7 said:
    avon b7 said:

    As long as the Feds have a espionage warning on Huawei, Apple ain't  gonna put Huawei chips in their products. Any attempt will just make the spooks more suspicious.
    The "Feds" don't.   Trump does.  But his propaganda machine could scare people off.
    The "Feds" and the Congress sure do. Going back to at least 2011-12. 

    I am not going to bother with giving you any links, since I have little doubt that you know how to do an internet search.
    And all these years later they still have nothing. Off the record they are even admitting as much. 

    It has been said time and time again, anyone involved in spying doesn't care which hardware is being run.

    If anything, Huawei's products are likely to be more secure as, not only are they scrutinised more but when issues are found, solutions are demanded of them.

    Apple would have more to gain than lose, not least in time to market.
    Groan, you Huawei apologists are back out in force again.

    1) Please send a link on who's admitting what "off the record." Otherwise, delete the post.

    2) "They have nothing"? We'll see when Meng Wanzhou shows up in a US court. (Canada's formally started the extradition proceedings, as you likely know). Until then, I'd advise you to hold spouting off.
    Your link:

    https://www.latimes.com/projects/la-fi-tn-huawei-5g-trade-war/

    "They have yet to provide hard evidence and, privately, these officials admit they don’t have any. Instead, they frequently fall back on a 2012 House Intelligence Committee report."

    Sound familiar? Same old story. Yes. 'Groan'

    ... you have no "evidence" that Huawei is not acting, nor will act in the future, as an agent of China.
    Likewise:
    'you have no "evidence" that Trump is not acting, nor will act in the future, as an agent of Russia.'

    But, fortunately for both Huawei and Trump, that's not how it works.  
    muthuk_vanalingam
  • Reply 24 of 101
    tmaytmay Posts: 3,762member
    tmay said:
    avon b7 said:
    avon b7 said:

    As long as the Feds have a espionage warning on Huawei, Apple ain't  gonna put Huawei chips in their products. Any attempt will just make the spooks more suspicious.
    The "Feds" don't.   Trump does.  But his propaganda machine could scare people off.
    The "Feds" and the Congress sure do. Going back to at least 2011-12. 

    I am not going to bother with giving you any links, since I have little doubt that you know how to do an internet search.
    And all these years later they still have nothing. Off the record they are even admitting as much. 

    It has been said time and time again, anyone involved in spying doesn't care which hardware is being run.

    If anything, Huawei's products are likely to be more secure as, not only are they scrutinised more but when issues are found, solutions are demanded of them.

    Apple would have more to gain than lose, not least in time to market.
    Groan, you Huawei apologists are back out in force again.

    1) Please send a link on who's admitting what "off the record." Otherwise, delete the post.

    2) "They have nothing"? We'll see when Meng Wanzhou shows up in a US court. (Canada's formally started the extradition proceedings, as you likely know). Until then, I'd advise you to hold spouting off.
    Your link:

    https://www.latimes.com/projects/la-fi-tn-huawei-5g-trade-war/

    "They have yet to provide hard evidence and, privately, these officials admit they don’t have any. Instead, they frequently fall back on a 2012 House Intelligence Committee report."

    Sound familiar? Same old story. Yes. 'Groan'

    ... you have no "evidence" that Huawei is not acting, nor will act in the future, as an agent of China.
    Likewise:
    'you have no "evidence" that Trump is not acting, nor will act in the future, as an agent of Russia.'

    But, fortunately for both Huawei and Trump, that's not how it works.  
    You might want to consider adding something intelligent to the conversation.

    Oh, wait, that might not be possible...
    MplsPericthehalfbeelerxtanantksundaram
  • Reply 25 of 101
    wood1208wood1208 Posts: 1,959member
    If needed than I would wait for few years for 5G iPhone with either Intel,Qualcomm or Apple's own chip than buy 5G iPhone with Huawei's 5G chip inside. I will switch to Samsung.At least it won't have spy chip.
    Huawei making political statement offering 5G chip to Apple. Apple will never consider knowing a slap on USA goverment's face.
    edited April 15 tmayanantksundaram
  • Reply 26 of 101
    sflocalsflocal Posts: 4,620member
    tmay said:

    ... you have no "evidence" that Huawei is not acting, nor will act in the future, as an agent of China.
    Likewise:
    'you have no "evidence" that Trump is not acting, nor will act in the future, as an agent of Russia.'

    But, fortunately for both Huawei and Trump, that's not how it works.  
    The tired "I can't come up with a valid counter-argument, hence I will insert "Trump" into the conversation because... it's the default clueless response."

    Huawei has been in this mess long before Trump was elected.  Enough of this Trump nonsense.  You cheapen your arguments when you go that route.
    tmayJWSClerxtanantksundaram
  • Reply 27 of 101
    GeorgeBMacGeorgeBMac Posts: 4,490member
    tmay said:
    tmay said:
    avon b7 said:
    avon b7 said:

    As long as the Feds have a espionage warning on Huawei, Apple ain't  gonna put Huawei chips in their products. Any attempt will just make the spooks more suspicious.
    The "Feds" don't.   Trump does.  But his propaganda machine could scare people off.
    The "Feds" and the Congress sure do. Going back to at least 2011-12. 

    I am not going to bother with giving you any links, since I have little doubt that you know how to do an internet search.
    And all these years later they still have nothing. Off the record they are even admitting as much. 

    It has been said time and time again, anyone involved in spying doesn't care which hardware is being run.

    If anything, Huawei's products are likely to be more secure as, not only are they scrutinised more but when issues are found, solutions are demanded of them.

    Apple would have more to gain than lose, not least in time to market.
    Groan, you Huawei apologists are back out in force again.

    1) Please send a link on who's admitting what "off the record." Otherwise, delete the post.

    2) "They have nothing"? We'll see when Meng Wanzhou shows up in a US court. (Canada's formally started the extradition proceedings, as you likely know). Until then, I'd advise you to hold spouting off.
    Your link:

    https://www.latimes.com/projects/la-fi-tn-huawei-5g-trade-war/

    "They have yet to provide hard evidence and, privately, these officials admit they don’t have any. Instead, they frequently fall back on a 2012 House Intelligence Committee report."

    Sound familiar? Same old story. Yes. 'Groan'

    ... you have no "evidence" that Huawei is not acting, nor will act in the future, as an agent of China.
    Likewise:
    'you have no "evidence" that Trump is not acting, nor will act in the future, as an agent of Russia.'

    But, fortunately for both Huawei and Trump, that's not how it works.  
    You might want to consider adding something intelligent to the conversation.

    Oh, wait, that might not be possible...
    Since I was quoting you, that might be a correct statement.  A first for you!    Good job!
  • Reply 28 of 101
    avon b7avon b7 Posts: 3,795member
    tmay said:
    avon b7 said:
    avon b7 said:

    As long as the Feds have a espionage warning on Huawei, Apple ain't  gonna put Huawei chips in their products. Any attempt will just make the spooks more suspicious.
    The "Feds" don't.   Trump does.  But his propaganda machine could scare people off.
    The "Feds" and the Congress sure do. Going back to at least 2011-12. 

    I am not going to bother with giving you any links, since I have little doubt that you know how to do an internet search.
    And all these years later they still have nothing. Off the record they are even admitting as much. 

    It has been said time and time again, anyone involved in spying doesn't care which hardware is being run.

    If anything, Huawei's products are likely to be more secure as, not only are they scrutinised more but when issues are found, solutions are demanded of them.

    Apple would have more to gain than lose, not least in time to market.
    Groan, you Huawei apologists are back out in force again.

    1) Please send a link on who's admitting what "off the record." Otherwise, delete the post.

    2) "They have nothing"? We'll see when Meng Wanzhou shows up in a US court. (Canada's formally started the extradition proceedings, as you likely know). Until then, I'd advise you to hold spouting off.
    Your link:

    https://www.latimes.com/projects/la-fi-tn-huawei-5g-trade-war/

    "They have yet to provide hard evidence and, privately, these officials admit they don’t have any. Instead, they frequently fall back on a 2012 House Intelligence Committee report."

    Sound familiar? Same old story. Yes. 'Groan'
    https://www.axios.com/report-australian-intelligence-know-huawei-1541285886-42f1eb64-98de-422f-9686-4174e41ef37e.html

    https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2019/jan/11/huawei-employee-arrested-in-poland-over-chinese-spy-allegations

    https://qz.com/africa/1192493/china-spied-on-african-union-headquarters-for-five-years/

    https://asd.gov.au/speeches/20181029-aspi-national-security-dinner.htm

    https://technode.com/2019/04/02/discussing-huawei-in-a-chinese-coffee-shop/

    https://www.npr.org/2019/04/12/711779130/as-china-hacked-u-s-businesses-turned-a-blind-eye

    https://www.smh.com.au/world/europe/considerable-grounds-for-concern-top-british-mp-sounds-warning-on-huawei-20190406-p51bfh.html

    'Huawei insists it does not spy on behalf of the Chinese government but, on a recent visit to London, former prime minister Malcolm Turnbull told MPs that the West should not provide China with any capability to spy as "intent can change in a heartbeat"."

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/03/13/huawei-is-better-positioned-spy-us-than-we-think/


    I have doubts about Huawei, and you have no "evidence" that Huawei is not acting, nor will act in the future, as an agent of China. More to the point, there is plenty of evidence that Chinese hacking has specifically benefitted Huawei, as well as China's industrial policy, and Huawei's work in the Chinese security apparatus.

    So, yeah, I have doubts about China, and Huawei, and at a minimum, would like to see the Five Eyes free of any Chinese Telecom equipment. Why would any country risk their infrastructure by using equipment from an autocracy known for its illiberal policies?


    Oh, and an excerpt from that LA times article;

    "Beyond the risk of spying, critics of Huawei worry the company’s massive global footprint in places such as Europe could give China immense leverage in a time of conflict.

    “There is a direct connection between [British Telecom] and Shenzhen,” said Lewis of the Center for Strategic and International Studies. “Huawei pumps out software updates and patches…. That’s where the risk is. [The British] could get one update that says, ‘Turn everything off.’ ”

    Huawei is adamant it won’t cave to government pressure to do anything of the sort. It commissioned a Chinese law firm last year to argue in a report that Chinese law doesn’t require the company to cooperate in intelligence gathering. That’s been met by skepticism overseas, given the Communist Party’s penchant for superseding the country’s laws.

    Critics also point to passage of China’s National Intelligence Law, which became effective in 2017. It requires that any Chinese organization or citizen “shall support, assist in, and cooperate in national intelligence work” in accordance with other Chinese laws.

    One recent example suggests it might not be easy to resist government pressure, particularly during a national crisis or a deepening U.S.-China conflict. Didi, China’s equivalent to Uber, tried unsuccessfully to resist revealing its database to a government supervisory agency last year.

    Ren says that Huawei has already told the European Union that it would be willing to sign a “no-spy” agreement, promising not to engage in any kind of illegal intelligence-gathering and not to have any kind of “back door” embedded in Huawei equipment or software. He says he also believes that the Chinese government would join other nations in signing a similar agreement. He says, however, that U.S. unwillingness to consider “no-spy” agreements has slowed their progress."

    Nobody in their right mind would believe that last paragraph.


    In the real world evidence comes first. If you make accusations - back them up!

    Huawei says the US has been throwing the same line for 10 years now and they still have nothing. Wow! Are you surprised that other governments called their bluff and decided to do their own thing?

    Why not check into reality?

    This is about power and influence. That's it. There is little else. The US dropped the ball on one of the biggest tech revolutions which is about to go live worldwide and hates the idea of someone else being in the driving seat.

    You refuse to admit this but the way things are playing out doesn't clearly gives the US government cause for concern. However, that concern isn't national security.

    So, after 10 years of the same treatment with senators even going on record as saying they want Huawei destroyed, Huawei os sueing the US government. Let's see what comes floating to the surface when that one gets underway.

    Intent? 

    Please wisen up on reality. Security experts have already gone on record as saying it is impossible to stop spying - from all sides! Should we ban US created communications hardware worldwide because the NSA wants its tentacles in everybody's pie? Because, while the US has nothing on Huawei, the world has a fair bit (thanks to Snowden) on US activity. Is Cisco a willing tool of the US government. Should China start throwing that line around? After all no evidence is needed, right?

    We already know the intent of the US and, in time of need, laws can get passed very quickly to make companies comply with its desires. In fact we already know that AT&T has been known to be a willing servant of the government! 

    And you keep mixing Huawei with China - deliberately now - as I have brought this to your attention many times and you continue to mix things up. They are not the same. Very poor on your part.

    Let's put the pieces together:

    We have a company (not a country!) That's been in the business for thirty years. Not one single major security breach in 30 years in spite of operating in over 170 countries.

    A company that would go out of business tomorrow if any bad faith were proven.

    A government (US) that has harked on about the same national security issues for 10 years and not dug up anything to prove their point. Far from it in fact and although people love to mention those security committees they fail to see that there was nothing solid even from the outset. One of them even went so far as to mistake a company that just happened to have the word ' Huawei' in its name for the Huawei that works in ICT. To quote a famous US tennis player: "you cannot be serious".

    After urging other countries to heed US warnings, those countries asked for the evidence to be brought forward and when none was given, the US started threatening them with reprisals. To the point of sending people on a world tour to drive the message home! Did no one in the US think that it is not nice to be threatened by a foreign country over your domestic affairs? Would the US like to be pushed around in the same way? Threatened even?

    Why? Because the US thinks it can in fact visit other countries and and start telling them what to do. That's 'how things work' because they think they have the power and influence to do so. This is not new of course. The NSA and its activities cannot be swept under the carpet at will. 

    So the US has been outed by the world on its attempts to interfere with other countries' communications, even having to apologise to Germany for example but has failed to demonstrate its accusations on Huawei.

    On a political level, it has backfired. The EU has said, 'we will go our own way thank you very much' and now has plans to depend on itself more and more, above all in technology.

    China, with its lead in the development of 5G, is taking the 5G wheel and is demonstrably ahead on many fronts with regards to the forthcoming telecommunications revolution. The US dropped the ball and is frantically trying to slow China's progress down - any way it can. That means derailing Huawei because Huawei has delivered the goods. Not only in China but worldwide. 

    The US will lose economic influence.
    The US will lose technological influence.
    The US is already losing political influence.

    In the case of Huawei, Donald Trump has scored a number of own goals and effectively undermined all efforts to influence foreign affairs on Huawei around the world.

    His tweets have gone so far as to put question marks over much of what has been put forward.

    In the meantime, and in spite of the bullying, much of the rest of the world is doing its own thing and not bending over for the US.

    It is supremely ironic that if you speak to ICT specialists, the companies that deploy and control the technology (the companies that know about security) none of them share the fears of the the US. They are waiting on government to give them the go ahead before making purchases and if they eventually get the go ahead, you can bet that many will be incluiding Huawei gear in their plans.

    Food for thought.



    Carnage
  • Reply 29 of 101
    tmaytmay Posts: 3,762member
    tmay said:
    tmay said:
    avon b7 said:
    avon b7 said:

    As long as the Feds have a espionage warning on Huawei, Apple ain't  gonna put Huawei chips in their products. Any attempt will just make the spooks more suspicious.
    The "Feds" don't.   Trump does.  But his propaganda machine could scare people off.
    The "Feds" and the Congress sure do. Going back to at least 2011-12. 

    I am not going to bother with giving you any links, since I have little doubt that you know how to do an internet search.
    And all these years later they still have nothing. Off the record they are even admitting as much. 

    It has been said time and time again, anyone involved in spying doesn't care which hardware is being run.

    If anything, Huawei's products are likely to be more secure as, not only are they scrutinised more but when issues are found, solutions are demanded of them.

    Apple would have more to gain than lose, not least in time to market.
    Groan, you Huawei apologists are back out in force again.

    1) Please send a link on who's admitting what "off the record." Otherwise, delete the post.

    2) "They have nothing"? We'll see when Meng Wanzhou shows up in a US court. (Canada's formally started the extradition proceedings, as you likely know). Until then, I'd advise you to hold spouting off.
    Your link:

    https://www.latimes.com/projects/la-fi-tn-huawei-5g-trade-war/

    "They have yet to provide hard evidence and, privately, these officials admit they don’t have any. Instead, they frequently fall back on a 2012 House Intelligence Committee report."

    Sound familiar? Same old story. Yes. 'Groan'

    ... you have no "evidence" that Huawei is not acting, nor will act in the future, as an agent of China.
    Likewise:
    'you have no "evidence" that Trump is not acting, nor will act in the future, as an agent of Russia.'

    But, fortunately for both Huawei and Trump, that's not how it works.  
    You might want to consider adding something intelligent to the conversation.

    Oh, wait, that might not be possible...
    Since I was quoting you, that might be a correct statement.  A first for you!    Good job!
    Funny thing is, I'm about as far away from a Trump supporter as you could possibly imagine, and yet your constant interjection of Trump into these conversations adds nothing.

    But I repeat myself; you might want to consider adding something intelligent to the conversation.
    MplsPJWSCnhtanantksundarammuthuk_vanalingam
  • Reply 30 of 101
    GeorgeBMacGeorgeBMac Posts: 4,490member
    sflocal said:
    tmay said:

    ... you have no "evidence" that Huawei is not acting, nor will act in the future, as an agent of China.
    Likewise:
    'you have no "evidence" that Trump is not acting, nor will act in the future, as an agent of Russia.'

    But, fortunately for both Huawei and Trump, that's not how it works.  
    The tired "I can't come up with a valid counter-argument, hence I will insert "Trump" into the conversation because... it's the default clueless response."

    Huawei has been in this mess long before Trump was elected.  Enough of this Trump nonsense.  You cheapen your arguments when you go that route.
    The statement was simply to point out that making somebody or something have to prove their innocence because somebody (especially a known liar and conman) made an accusation is just not how things work.   Well, they didn't used to.  But we entered a post-truth world a couple years ago where facts and alternative facts became interchangeable.
    muthuk_vanalingam
  • Reply 31 of 101
    tmaytmay Posts: 3,762member
    avon b7 said:
    tmay said:
    avon b7 said:
    avon b7 said:

    As long as the Feds have a espionage warning on Huawei, Apple ain't  gonna put Huawei chips in their products. Any attempt will just make the spooks more suspicious.
    The "Feds" don't.   Trump does.  But his propaganda machine could scare people off.
    The "Feds" and the Congress sure do. Going back to at least 2011-12. 

    I am not going to bother with giving you any links, since I have little doubt that you know how to do an internet search.
    And all these years later they still have nothing. Off the record they are even admitting as much. 

    It has been said time and time again, anyone involved in spying doesn't care which hardware is being run.

    If anything, Huawei's products are likely to be more secure as, not only are they scrutinised more but when issues are found, solutions are demanded of them.

    Apple would have more to gain than lose, not least in time to market.
    Groan, you Huawei apologists are back out in force again.

    1) Please send a link on who's admitting what "off the record." Otherwise, delete the post.

    2) "They have nothing"? We'll see when Meng Wanzhou shows up in a US court. (Canada's formally started the extradition proceedings, as you likely know). Until then, I'd advise you to hold spouting off.
    Your link:

    https://www.latimes.com/projects/la-fi-tn-huawei-5g-trade-war/

    "They have yet to provide hard evidence and, privately, these officials admit they don’t have any. Instead, they frequently fall back on a 2012 House Intelligence Committee report."

    Sound familiar? Same old story. Yes. 'Groan'
    https://www.axios.com/report-australian-intelligence-know-huawei-1541285886-42f1eb64-98de-422f-9686-4174e41ef37e.html

    https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2019/jan/11/huawei-employee-arrested-in-poland-over-chinese-spy-allegations

    https://qz.com/africa/1192493/china-spied-on-african-union-headquarters-for-five-years/

    https://asd.gov.au/speeches/20181029-aspi-national-security-dinner.htm

    https://technode.com/2019/04/02/discussing-huawei-in-a-chinese-coffee-shop/

    https://www.npr.org/2019/04/12/711779130/as-china-hacked-u-s-businesses-turned-a-blind-eye

    https://www.smh.com.au/world/europe/considerable-grounds-for-concern-top-british-mp-sounds-warning-on-huawei-20190406-p51bfh.html

    'Huawei insists it does not spy on behalf of the Chinese government but, on a recent visit to London, former prime minister Malcolm Turnbull told MPs that the West should not provide China with any capability to spy as "intent can change in a heartbeat"."

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/03/13/huawei-is-better-positioned-spy-us-than-we-think/


    I have doubts about Huawei, and you have no "evidence" that Huawei is not acting, nor will act in the future, as an agent of China. More to the point, there is plenty of evidence that Chinese hacking has specifically benefitted Huawei, as well as China's industrial policy, and Huawei's work in the Chinese security apparatus.

    So, yeah, I have doubts about China, and Huawei, and at a minimum, would like to see the Five Eyes free of any Chinese Telecom equipment. Why would any country risk their infrastructure by using equipment from an autocracy known for its illiberal policies?


    Oh, and an excerpt from that LA times article;

    "Beyond the risk of spying, critics of Huawei worry the company’s massive global footprint in places such as Europe could give China immense leverage in a time of conflict.

    “There is a direct connection between [British Telecom] and Shenzhen,” said Lewis of the Center for Strategic and International Studies. “Huawei pumps out software updates and patches…. That’s where the risk is. [The British] could get one update that says, ‘Turn everything off.’ ”

    Huawei is adamant it won’t cave to government pressure to do anything of the sort. It commissioned a Chinese law firm last year to argue in a report that Chinese law doesn’t require the company to cooperate in intelligence gathering. That’s been met by skepticism overseas, given the Communist Party’s penchant for superseding the country’s laws.

    Critics also point to passage of China’s National Intelligence Law, which became effective in 2017. It requires that any Chinese organization or citizen “shall support, assist in, and cooperate in national intelligence work” in accordance with other Chinese laws.

    One recent example suggests it might not be easy to resist government pressure, particularly during a national crisis or a deepening U.S.-China conflict. Didi, China’s equivalent to Uber, tried unsuccessfully to resist revealing its database to a government supervisory agency last year.

    Ren says that Huawei has already told the European Union that it would be willing to sign a “no-spy” agreement, promising not to engage in any kind of illegal intelligence-gathering and not to have any kind of “back door” embedded in Huawei equipment or software. He says he also believes that the Chinese government would join other nations in signing a similar agreement. He says, however, that U.S. unwillingness to consider “no-spy” agreements has slowed their progress."

    Nobody in their right mind would believe that last paragraph.


    In the real world evidence comes first. If you make accusations - back them up!

    Huawei says the US has been throwing the same line for 10 years now and they still have nothing. Wow! Are you surprised that other governments called their bluff and decided to do their own thing?

    Why not check into reality?

    This is about power and influence. That's it. There is little else. The US dropped the ball on one of the biggest tech revolutions which is about to go live worldwide and hates the idea of someone else being in the driving seat.

    You refuse to admit this but the way things are playing out doesn't clearly gives the US government cause for concern. However, that concern isn't national security.

    So, after 10 years of the same treatment with senators even going on record as saying they want Huawei destroyed, Huawei os sueing the US government. Let's see what comes floating to the surface when that one gets underway.

    Intent? 

    Please wisen up on reality. Security experts have already gone on record as saying it is impossible to stop spying - from all sides! Should we ban US created communications hardware worldwide because the NSA wants its tentacles in everybody's pie? Because, while the US has nothing on Huawei, the world has a fair bit (thanks to Snowden) on US activity. Is Cisco a willing tool of the US government. Should China start throwing that line around? After all no evidence is needed, right?

    We already know the intent of the US and, in time of need, laws can get passed very quickly to make companies comply with its desires. In fact we already know that AT&T has been known to be a willing servant of the government! 

    And you keep mixing Huawei with China - deliberately now - as I have brought this to your attention many times and you continue to mix things up. They are not the same. Very poor on your part.

    Let's put the pieces together:

    We have a company (not a country!) That's been in the business for thirty years. Not one single major security breach in 30 years in spite of operating in over 170 countries.

    A company that would go out of business tomorrow if any bad faith were proven.

    A government (US) that has harked on about the same national security issues for 10 years and not dug up anything to prove their point. Far from it in fact and although people love to mention those security committees they fail to see that there was nothing solid even from the outset. One of them even went so far as to mistake a company that just happened to have the word ' Huawei' in its name for the Huawei that works in ICT. To quote a famous US tennis player: "you cannot be serious".

    After urging other countries to heed US warnings, those countries asked for the evidence to be brought forward and when none was given, the US started threatening them with reprisals. To the point of sending people on a world tour to drive the message home! Did no one in the US think that it is not nice to be threatened by a foreign country over your domestic affairs? Would the US like to be pushed around in the same way? Threatened even?

    Why? Because the US thinks it can in fact visit other countries and and start telling them what to do. That's 'how things work' because they think they have the power and influence to do so. This is not new of course. The NSA and its activities cannot be swept under the carpet at will. 

    So the US has been outed by the world on its attempts to interfere with other countries' communications, even having to apologise to Germany for example but has failed to demonstrate its accusations on Huawei.

    On a political level, it has backfired. The EU has said, 'we will go our own way thank you very much' and now has plans to depend on itself more and more, above all in technology.

    China, with its lead in the development of 5G, is taking the 5G wheel and is demonstrably ahead on many fronts with regards to the forthcoming telecommunications revolution. The US dropped the ball and is frantically trying to slow China's progress down - any way it can. That means derailing Huawei because Huawei has delivered the goods. Not only in China but worldwide. 

    The US will lose economic influence.
    The US will lose technological influence.
    The US is already losing political influence.

    In the case of Huawei, Donald Trump has scored a number of own goals and effectively undermined all efforts to influence foreign affairs on Huawei around the world.

    His tweets have gone so far as to put question marks over much of what has been put forward.

    In the meantime, and in spite of the bullying, much of the rest of the world is doing its own thing and not bending over for the US.

    It is supremely ironic that if you speak to ICT specialists, the companies that deploy and control the technology (the companies that know about security) none of them share the fears of the the US. They are waiting on government to give them the go ahead before making purchases and if they eventually get the go ahead, you can bet that many will be incluiding Huawei gear in their plans.

    Food for thought.



    I guess you missed the part where I provided evidence.

    As far as U.S. "reprisals", the only one I am aware of is that the U.S. Intelligence would not be shared over any insecure network, and as you have pointed out, the U.S. collects a lot of intelligence that is valuable to our partners.

    You are very emotional about this, whereas I look at limiting Huawei's 5G infrastructure unemotionally as protecting our, and our allies, National Security. 


    edited April 15 lerxtanantksundaram
  • Reply 32 of 101
    sflocalsflocal Posts: 4,620member
    sflocal said:
    The tired "I can't come up with a valid counter-argument, hence I will insert "Trump" into the conversation because... it's the default clueless response."

    Huawei has been in this mess long before Trump was elected.  Enough of this Trump nonsense.  You cheapen your arguments when you go that route.
    The statement was simply to point out that making somebody or something have to prove their innocence because somebody (especially a known liar and conman) made an accusation is just not how things work.   Well, they didn't used to.  But we entered a post-truth world a couple years ago where facts and alternative facts became interchangeable.
    No... we didn't enter a post-truth world a couple years ago.  It was far longer than that.  Again... all this was going on far before #45.  Sure, "Alternative facts" became a popular phrase a couple years ago, but it only put an official tag on what was already going on prior to that.

    I quote Abraham Lincoln: "Don't believe everything you read on the Internet".

    AvonB7's shilling is well known.  He talks a lot, but says little.  I don't bother responding to his nonsense anymore as he pushes so much "alternative facts" at everyone, neatly wrapped in long paragraphs in an attempt to push his agenda, that it's just a waste of time.  His tactic is to continue writing endlessly until he tires everyone out.

    I have no doubt that Huawei is up to no good.  They've been caught countless of times of doing really sketchy things.. all prior to 2016.  It's just that politics, and today's limited attention-span of humans lets then get away with it.  China obviously doesn't help, but to imply that China doesn't have a say in what Huawei can or can't do is downright bullshit.  China's been documented to a ridiculous length of forcing companies (particularly foreign companies doing business in China) to bending to its will.  There is no way that Huawei can magically be exempt.
    tmayanantksundaramconitor
  • Reply 33 of 101
    tmaytmay Posts: 3,762member
    sflocal said:
    tmay said:

    ... you have no "evidence" that Huawei is not acting, nor will act in the future, as an agent of China.
    Likewise:
    'you have no "evidence" that Trump is not acting, nor will act in the future, as an agent of Russia.'

    But, fortunately for both Huawei and Trump, that's not how it works.  
    The tired "I can't come up with a valid counter-argument, hence I will insert "Trump" into the conversation because... it's the default clueless response."

    Huawei has been in this mess long before Trump was elected.  Enough of this Trump nonsense.  You cheapen your arguments when you go that route.
    The statement was simply to point out that making somebody or something have to prove their innocence because somebody (especially a known liar and conman) made an accusation is just not how things work.   Well, they didn't used to.  But we entered a post-truth world a couple years ago where facts and alternative facts became interchangeable.
    Many Intelligence Agencies from around that world have made accusations; should they not be at least considered? Ren's or Huawei's denial and assurances mean nothing when the context is National Security, which is all about risk and intent.
    lerxtanantksundaram
  • Reply 34 of 101
    GeorgeBMacGeorgeBMac Posts: 4,490member
    sflocal said:
    sflocal said:
    The tired "I can't come up with a valid counter-argument, hence I will insert "Trump" into the conversation because... it's the default clueless response."

    Huawei has been in this mess long before Trump was elected.  Enough of this Trump nonsense.  You cheapen your arguments when you go that route.
    The statement was simply to point out that making somebody or something have to prove their innocence because somebody (especially a known liar and conman) made an accusation is just not how things work.   Well, they didn't used to.  But we entered a post-truth world a couple years ago where facts and alternative facts became interchangeable.
    No... we didn't enter a post-truth world a couple years ago.  It was far longer than that.  Again... all this was going on far before #45.  Sure, "Alternative facts" became a popular phrase a couple years ago, but it only put an official tag on what was already going on prior to that.

    I quote Abraham Lincoln: "Don't believe everything you read on the Internet".

    AvonB7's shilling is well known.  He talks a lot, but says little.  I don't bother responding to his nonsense anymore as he pushes so much "alternative facts" at everyone, neatly wrapped in long paragraphs in an attempt to push his agenda, that it's just a waste of time.  His tactic is to continue writing endlessly until he tires everyone out.

    I have no doubt that Huawei is up to no good.  They've been caught countless of times of doing really sketchy things.. all prior to 2016.  It's just that politics, and today's limited attention-span of humans lets then get away with it.  China obviously doesn't help, but to imply that China doesn't have a say in what Huawei can or can't do is downright bullshit.  China's been documented to a ridiculous length of forcing companies (particularly foreign companies doing business in China) to bending to its will.  There is no way that Huawei can magically be exempt.
    Sure, whatever set of "facts" -- alternative or otherwise -- proves your point.   Go with it if it makes you feel good.   I'll stick to reality.  It works better.
  • Reply 35 of 101
    GeorgeBMacGeorgeBMac Posts: 4,490member
    tmay said:
    sflocal said:
    tmay said:

    ... you have no "evidence" that Huawei is not acting, nor will act in the future, as an agent of China.
    Likewise:
    'you have no "evidence" that Trump is not acting, nor will act in the future, as an agent of Russia.'

    But, fortunately for both Huawei and Trump, that's not how it works.  
    The tired "I can't come up with a valid counter-argument, hence I will insert "Trump" into the conversation because... it's the default clueless response."

    Huawei has been in this mess long before Trump was elected.  Enough of this Trump nonsense.  You cheapen your arguments when you go that route.
    The statement was simply to point out that making somebody or something have to prove their innocence because somebody (especially a known liar and conman) made an accusation is just not how things work.   Well, they didn't used to.  But we entered a post-truth world a couple years ago where facts and alternative facts became interchangeable.
    Many Intelligence Agencies from around that world have made accusations; should they not be at least considered? Ren's or Huawei's denial and assurances mean nothing when the context is National Security, which is all about risk and intent.
    Actually, those who asked Trump for proof of his allegations got none and are going with Huawei.
  • Reply 36 of 101
    GeorgeBMacGeorgeBMac Posts: 4,490member
    tmay said:
    avon b7 said:
    tmay said:
    avon b7 said:
    avon b7 said:

    As long as the Feds have a espionage warning on Huawei, Apple ain't  gonna put Huawei chips in their products. Any attempt will just make the spooks more suspicious.
    The "Feds" don't.   Trump does.  But his propaganda machine could scare people off.
    The "Feds" and the Congress sure do. Going back to at least 2011-12. 

    I am not going to bother with giving you any links, since I have little doubt that you know how to do an internet search.
    And all these years later they still have nothing. Off the record they are even admitting as much. 

    It has been said time and time again, anyone involved in spying doesn't care which hardware is being run.

    If anything, Huawei's products are likely to be more secure as, not only are they scrutinised more but when issues are found, solutions are demanded of them.

    Apple would have more to gain than lose, not least in time to market.
    Groan, you Huawei apologists are back out in force again.

    1) Please send a link on who's admitting what "off the record." Otherwise, delete the post.

    2) "They have nothing"? We'll see when Meng Wanzhou shows up in a US court. (Canada's formally started the extradition proceedings, as you likely know). Until then, I'd advise you to hold spouting off.
    Your link:

    https://www.latimes.com/projects/la-fi-tn-huawei-5g-trade-war/

    "They have yet to provide hard evidence and, privately, these officials admit they don’t have any. Instead, they frequently fall back on a 2012 House Intelligence Committee report."

    Sound familiar? Same old story. Yes. 'Groan'
    https://www.axios.com/report-australian-intelligence-know-huawei-1541285886-42f1eb64-98de-422f-9686-4174e41ef37e.html

    https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2019/jan/11/huawei-employee-arrested-in-poland-over-chinese-spy-allegations

    https://qz.com/africa/1192493/china-spied-on-african-union-headquarters-for-five-years/

    https://asd.gov.au/speeches/20181029-aspi-national-security-dinner.htm

    https://technode.com/2019/04/02/discussing-huawei-in-a-chinese-coffee-shop/

    https://www.npr.org/2019/04/12/711779130/as-china-hacked-u-s-businesses-turned-a-blind-eye

    https://www.smh.com.au/world/europe/considerable-grounds-for-concern-top-british-mp-sounds-warning-on-huawei-20190406-p51bfh.html

    'Huawei insists it does not spy on behalf of the Chinese government but, on a recent visit to London, former prime minister Malcolm Turnbull told MPs that the West should not provide China with any capability to spy as "intent can change in a heartbeat"."

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/03/13/huawei-is-better-positioned-spy-us-than-we-think/


    I have doubts about Huawei, and you have no "evidence" that Huawei is not acting, nor will act in the future, as an agent of China. More to the point, there is plenty of evidence that Chinese hacking has specifically benefitted Huawei, as well as China's industrial policy, and Huawei's work in the Chinese security apparatus.

    So, yeah, I have doubts about China, and Huawei, and at a minimum, would like to see the Five Eyes free of any Chinese Telecom equipment. Why would any country risk their infrastructure by using equipment from an autocracy known for its illiberal policies?


    Oh, and an excerpt from that LA times article;

    "Beyond the risk of spying, critics of Huawei worry the company’s massive global footprint in places such as Europe could give China immense leverage in a time of conflict.

    “There is a direct connection between [British Telecom] and Shenzhen,” said Lewis of the Center for Strategic and International Studies. “Huawei pumps out software updates and patches…. That’s where the risk is. [The British] could get one update that says, ‘Turn everything off.’ ”

    Huawei is adamant it won’t cave to government pressure to do anything of the sort. It commissioned a Chinese law firm last year to argue in a report that Chinese law doesn’t require the company to cooperate in intelligence gathering. That’s been met by skepticism overseas, given the Communist Party’s penchant for superseding the country’s laws.

    Critics also point to passage of China’s National Intelligence Law, which became effective in 2017. It requires that any Chinese organization or citizen “shall support, assist in, and cooperate in national intelligence work” in accordance with other Chinese laws.

    One recent example suggests it might not be easy to resist government pressure, particularly during a national crisis or a deepening U.S.-China conflict. Didi, China’s equivalent to Uber, tried unsuccessfully to resist revealing its database to a government supervisory agency last year.

    Ren says that Huawei has already told the European Union that it would be willing to sign a “no-spy” agreement, promising not to engage in any kind of illegal intelligence-gathering and not to have any kind of “back door” embedded in Huawei equipment or software. He says he also believes that the Chinese government would join other nations in signing a similar agreement. He says, however, that U.S. unwillingness to consider “no-spy” agreements has slowed their progress."

    Nobody in their right mind would believe that last paragraph.


    In the real world evidence comes first. If you make accusations - back them up!

    Huawei says the US has been throwing the same line for 10 years now and they still have nothing. Wow! Are you surprised that other governments called their bluff and decided to do their own thing?

    Why not check into reality?

    This is about power and influence. That's it. There is little else. The US dropped the ball on one of the biggest tech revolutions which is about to go live worldwide and hates the idea of someone else being in the driving seat.

    You refuse to admit this but the way things are playing out doesn't clearly gives the US government cause for concern. However, that concern isn't national security.

    So, after 10 years of the same treatment with senators even going on record as saying they want Huawei destroyed, Huawei os sueing the US government. Let's see what comes floating to the surface when that one gets underway.

    Intent? 

    Please wisen up on reality. Security experts have already gone on record as saying it is impossible to stop spying - from all sides! Should we ban US created communications hardware worldwide because the NSA wants its tentacles in everybody's pie? Because, while the US has nothing on Huawei, the world has a fair bit (thanks to Snowden) on US activity. Is Cisco a willing tool of the US government. Should China start throwing that line around? After all no evidence is needed, right?

    We already know the intent of the US and, in time of need, laws can get passed very quickly to make companies comply with its desires. In fact we already know that AT&T has been known to be a willing servant of the government! 

    And you keep mixing Huawei with China - deliberately now - as I have brought this to your attention many times and you continue to mix things up. They are not the same. Very poor on your part.

    Let's put the pieces together:

    We have a company (not a country!) That's been in the business for thirty years. Not one single major security breach in 30 years in spite of operating in over 170 countries.

    A company that would go out of business tomorrow if any bad faith were proven.

    A government (US) that has harked on about the same national security issues for 10 years and not dug up anything to prove their point. Far from it in fact and although people love to mention those security committees they fail to see that there was nothing solid even from the outset. One of them even went so far as to mistake a company that just happened to have the word ' Huawei' in its name for the Huawei that works in ICT. To quote a famous US tennis player: "you cannot be serious".

    After urging other countries to heed US warnings, those countries asked for the evidence to be brought forward and when none was given, the US started threatening them with reprisals. To the point of sending people on a world tour to drive the message home! Did no one in the US think that it is not nice to be threatened by a foreign country over your domestic affairs? Would the US like to be pushed around in the same way? Threatened even?

    Why? Because the US thinks it can in fact visit other countries and and start telling them what to do. That's 'how things work' because they think they have the power and influence to do so. This is not new of course. The NSA and its activities cannot be swept under the carpet at will. 

    So the US has been outed by the world on its attempts to interfere with other countries' communications, even having to apologise to Germany for example but has failed to demonstrate its accusations on Huawei.

    On a political level, it has backfired. The EU has said, 'we will go our own way thank you very much' and now has plans to depend on itself more and more, above all in technology.

    China, with its lead in the development of 5G, is taking the 5G wheel and is demonstrably ahead on many fronts with regards to the forthcoming telecommunications revolution. The US dropped the ball and is frantically trying to slow China's progress down - any way it can. That means derailing Huawei because Huawei has delivered the goods. Not only in China but worldwide. 

    The US will lose economic influence.
    The US will lose technological influence.
    The US is already losing political influence.

    In the case of Huawei, Donald Trump has scored a number of own goals and effectively undermined all efforts to influence foreign affairs on Huawei around the world.

    His tweets have gone so far as to put question marks over much of what has been put forward.

    In the meantime, and in spite of the bullying, much of the rest of the world is doing its own thing and not bending over for the US.

    It is supremely ironic that if you speak to ICT specialists, the companies that deploy and control the technology (the companies that know about security) none of them share the fears of the the US. They are waiting on government to give them the go ahead before making purchases and if they eventually get the go ahead, you can bet that many will be incluiding Huawei gear in their plans.

    Food for thought.



    I guess you missed the part where I provided evidence.

    As far as U.S. "reprisals", the only one I am aware of is that the U.S. Intelligence would not be shared over any insecure network, and as you have pointed out, the U.S. collects a lot of intelligence that is valuable to our partners.

    You are very emotional about this, whereas I look at limiting Huawei's 5G infrastructure unemotionally as protecting our, and our allies, National Security. 


    We got a lot of 'it might be's' and 'it might happen's' -- but no evidence.  
    Europe asked for evidence too.  They didn't get any either.  So, in yet another slap at Trump, it looks like their going with Huawei.
  • Reply 37 of 101
    JWSCJWSC Posts: 438member
    tmay said:
    avon b7 said:
    avon b7 said:

    As long as the Feds have a espionage warning on Huawei, Apple ain't  gonna put Huawei chips in their products. Any attempt will just make the spooks more suspicious.
    The "Feds" don't.   Trump does.  But his propaganda machine could scare people off.
    The "Feds" and the Congress sure do. Going back to at least 2011-12. 

    I am not going to bother with giving you any links, since I have little doubt that you know how to do an internet search.
    And all these years later they still have nothing. Off the record they are even admitting as much. 

    It has been said time and time again, anyone involved in spying doesn't care which hardware is being run.

    If anything, Huawei's products are likely to be more secure as, not only are they scrutinised more but when issues are found, solutions are demanded of them.

    Apple would have more to gain than lose, not least in time to market.
    Groan, you Huawei apologists are back out in force again.

    1) Please send a link on who's admitting what "off the record." Otherwise, delete the post.

    2) "They have nothing"? We'll see when Meng Wanzhou shows up in a US court. (Canada's formally started the extradition proceedings, as you likely know). Until then, I'd advise you to hold spouting off.
    Your link:

    https://www.latimes.com/projects/la-fi-tn-huawei-5g-trade-war/

    "They have yet to provide hard evidence and, privately, these officials admit they don’t have any. Instead, they frequently fall back on a 2012 House Intelligence Committee report."

    Sound familiar? Same old story. Yes. 'Groan'

    ... you have no "evidence" that Huawei is not acting, nor will act in the future, as an agent of China.
    Likewise:
    'you have no "evidence" that Trump is not acting, nor will act in the future, as an agent of Russia.'

    But, fortunately for both Huawei and Trump, that's not how it works.  
    I was going to quote that but you beat me to it.  He’s asking us to prove a negative.  Logical fail!
  • Reply 38 of 101
    tmaytmay Posts: 3,762member
    tmay said:
    sflocal said:
    tmay said:

    ... you have no "evidence" that Huawei is not acting, nor will act in the future, as an agent of China.
    Likewise:
    'you have no "evidence" that Trump is not acting, nor will act in the future, as an agent of Russia.'

    But, fortunately for both Huawei and Trump, that's not how it works.  
    The tired "I can't come up with a valid counter-argument, hence I will insert "Trump" into the conversation because... it's the default clueless response."

    Huawei has been in this mess long before Trump was elected.  Enough of this Trump nonsense.  You cheapen your arguments when you go that route.
    The statement was simply to point out that making somebody or something have to prove their innocence because somebody (especially a known liar and conman) made an accusation is just not how things work.   Well, they didn't used to.  But we entered a post-truth world a couple years ago where facts and alternative facts became interchangeable.
    Many Intelligence Agencies from around that world have made accusations; should they not be at least considered? Ren's or Huawei's denial and assurances mean nothing when the context is National Security, which is all about risk and intent.
    Actually, those who asked Trump for proof of his allegations got none and are going with Huawei.
    Actually, relevant EU countries that are still on the fence, which is most, are going with a "prove that a vendor's hardware is secure" analysis, not direct rejection of the U.S. call for a ban. Make it tight enough, and Huawei will likely not make the grade. The other tack is to keep Huawei out of mission critical networks, which by the definition of technology, makes most 5G networks "mission critical".

    Even then, Huawei has petitioned the WTO to challenge Australia's ban on Huawei. I'd surmise that Australia has plenty of data available to survive that challenge.

    Most of the EU National Security Agencies are not in favor of Huawei. If you read some of my posts above; oh wait, that isn't ever going to happen is it?
    edited April 15 lerxt
  • Reply 39 of 101
    JWSCJWSC Posts: 438member
    tmay said:
    avon b7 said:
    avon b7 said:

    As long as the Feds have a espionage warning on Huawei, Apple ain't  gonna put Huawei chips in their products. Any attempt will just make the spooks more suspicious.
    The "Feds" don't.   Trump does.  But his propaganda machine could scare people off.
    The "Feds" and the Congress sure do. Going back to at least 2011-12. 

    I am not going to bother with giving you any links, since I have little doubt that you know how to do an internet search.
    And all these years later they still have nothing. Off the record they are even admitting as much. 

    It has been said time and time again, anyone involved in spying doesn't care which hardware is being run.

    If anything, Huawei's products are likely to be more secure as, not only are they scrutinised more but when issues are found, solutions are demanded of them.

    Apple would have more to gain than lose, not least in time to market.
    Groan, you Huawei apologists are back out in force again.

    1) Please send a link on who's admitting what "off the record." Otherwise, delete the post.

    2) "They have nothing"? We'll see when Meng Wanzhou shows up in a US court. (Canada's formally started the extradition proceedings, as you likely know). Until then, I'd advise you to hold spouting off.
    Your link:

    https://www.latimes.com/projects/la-fi-tn-huawei-5g-trade-war/

    "They have yet to provide hard evidence and, privately, these officials admit they don’t have any. Instead, they frequently fall back on a 2012 House Intelligence Committee report."

    Sound familiar? Same old story. Yes. 'Groan'
    https://www.axios.com/report-australian-intelligence-know-huawei-1541285886-42f1eb64-98de-422f-9686-4174e41ef37e.html

    https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2019/jan/11/huawei-employee-arrested-in-poland-over-chinese-spy-allegations

    https://qz.com/africa/1192493/china-spied-on-african-union-headquarters-for-five-years/

    https://asd.gov.au/speeches/20181029-aspi-national-security-dinner.htm

    https://technode.com/2019/04/02/discussing-huawei-in-a-chinese-coffee-shop/

    https://www.npr.org/2019/04/12/711779130/as-china-hacked-u-s-businesses-turned-a-blind-eye

    https://www.smh.com.au/world/europe/considerable-grounds-for-concern-top-british-mp-sounds-warning-on-huawei-20190406-p51bfh.html

    'Huawei insists it does not spy on behalf of the Chinese government but, on a recent visit to London, former prime minister Malcolm Turnbull told MPs that the West should not provide China with any capability to spy as "intent can change in a heartbeat"."

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/03/13/huawei-is-better-positioned-spy-us-than-we-think/


    I have doubts about Huawei, and you have no "evidence" that Huawei is not acting, nor will act in the future, as an agent of China. More to the point, there is plenty of evidence that Chinese hacking has specifically benefitted Huawei, as well as China's industrial policy, and Huawei's work in the Chinese security apparatus.

    So, yeah, I have doubts about China, and Huawei, and at a minimum, would like to see the Five Eyes free of any Chinese Telecom equipment. Why would any country risk their infrastructure by using equipment from an autocracy known for its illiberal policies?


    Oh, and an excerpt from that LA times article;

    "Beyond the risk of spying, critics of Huawei worry the company’s massive global footprint in places such as Europe could give China immense leverage in a time of conflict.

    “There is a direct connection between [British Telecom] and Shenzhen,” said Lewis of the Center for Strategic and International Studies. “Huawei pumps out software updates and patches…. That’s where the risk is. [The British] could get one update that says, ‘Turn everything off.’ ”

    Huawei is adamant it won’t cave to government pressure to do anything of the sort. It commissioned a Chinese law firm last year to argue in a report that Chinese law doesn’t require the company to cooperate in intelligence gathering. That’s been met by skepticism overseas, given the Communist Party’s penchant for superseding the country’s laws.

    Critics also point to passage of China’s National Intelligence Law, which became effective in 2017. It requires that any Chinese organization or citizen “shall support, assist in, and cooperate in national intelligence work” in accordance with other Chinese laws.

    One recent example suggests it might not be easy to resist government pressure, particularly during a national crisis or a deepening U.S.-China conflict. Didi, China’s equivalent to Uber, tried unsuccessfully to resist revealing its database to a government supervisory agency last year.

    Ren says that Huawei has already told the European Union that it would be willing to sign a “no-spy” agreement, promising not to engage in any kind of illegal intelligence-gathering and not to have any kind of “back door” embedded in Huawei equipment or software. He says he also believes that the Chinese government would join other nations in signing a similar agreement. He says, however, that U.S. unwillingness to consider “no-spy” agreements has slowed their progress."

    Nobody in their right mind would believe that last paragraph.


    Dude, I’ve read some of those articles.  Absent, hard evidence.  No Huawei hardware to do the dastardly deed.

    A lot of ‘Chinese whispers’ and innuendo, with one article referring to another and so on.  These guys are saying, well, so-and-so told me and he’s credible so I believe him/her.  Someone is orchestrating this media campaign.  To what purpose one can only speculate.

    muthuk_vanalingam
  • Reply 40 of 101
    avon b7avon b7 Posts: 3,795member
    tmay said:
    avon b7 said:
    tmay said:
    avon b7 said:
    avon b7 said:

    As long as the Feds have a espionage warning on Huawei, Apple ain't  gonna put Huawei chips in their products. Any attempt will just make the spooks more suspicious.
    The "Feds" don't.   Trump does.  But his propaganda machine could scare people off.
    The "Feds" and the Congress sure do. Going back to at least 2011-12. 

    I am not going to bother with giving you any links, since I have little doubt that you know how to do an internet search.
    And all these years later they still have nothing. Off the record they are even admitting as much. 

    It has been said time and time again, anyone involved in spying doesn't care which hardware is being run.

    If anything, Huawei's products are likely to be more secure as, not only are they scrutinised more but when issues are found, solutions are demanded of them.

    Apple would have more to gain than lose, not least in time to market.
    Groan, you Huawei apologists are back out in force again.

    1) Please send a link on who's admitting what "off the record." Otherwise, delete the post.

    2) "They have nothing"? We'll see when Meng Wanzhou shows up in a US court. (Canada's formally started the extradition proceedings, as you likely know). Until then, I'd advise you to hold spouting off.
    Your link:

    https://www.latimes.com/projects/la-fi-tn-huawei-5g-trade-war/

    "They have yet to provide hard evidence and, privately, these officials admit they don’t have any. Instead, they frequently fall back on a 2012 House Intelligence Committee report."

    Sound familiar? Same old story. Yes. 'Groan'
    https://www.axios.com/report-australian-intelligence-know-huawei-1541285886-42f1eb64-98de-422f-9686-4174e41ef37e.html

    https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2019/jan/11/huawei-employee-arrested-in-poland-over-chinese-spy-allegations

    https://qz.com/africa/1192493/china-spied-on-african-union-headquarters-for-five-years/

    https://asd.gov.au/speeches/20181029-aspi-national-security-dinner.htm

    https://technode.com/2019/04/02/discussing-huawei-in-a-chinese-coffee-shop/

    https://www.npr.org/2019/04/12/711779130/as-china-hacked-u-s-businesses-turned-a-blind-eye

    https://www.smh.com.au/world/europe/considerable-grounds-for-concern-top-british-mp-sounds-warning-on-huawei-20190406-p51bfh.html

    'Huawei insists it does not spy on behalf of the Chinese government but, on a recent visit to London, former prime minister Malcolm Turnbull told MPs that the West should not provide China with any capability to spy as "intent can change in a heartbeat"."

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/03/13/huawei-is-better-positioned-spy-us-than-we-think/


    I have doubts about Huawei, and you have no "evidence" that Huawei is not acting, nor will act in the future, as an agent of China. More to the point, there is plenty of evidence that Chinese hacking has specifically benefitted Huawei, as well as China's industrial policy, and Huawei's work in the Chinese security apparatus.

    So, yeah, I have doubts about China, and Huawei, and at a minimum, would like to see the Five Eyes free of any Chinese Telecom equipment. Why would any country risk their infrastructure by using equipment from an autocracy known for its illiberal policies?


    Oh, and an excerpt from that LA times article;

    "Beyond the risk of spying, critics of Huawei worry the company’s massive global footprint in places such as Europe could give China immense leverage in a time of conflict.

    “There is a direct connection between [British Telecom] and Shenzhen,” said Lewis of the Center for Strategic and International Studies. “Huawei pumps out software updates and patches…. That’s where the risk is. [The British] could get one update that says, ‘Turn everything off.’ ”

    Huawei is adamant it won’t cave to government pressure to do anything of the sort. It commissioned a Chinese law firm last year to argue in a report that Chinese law doesn’t require the company to cooperate in intelligence gathering. That’s been met by skepticism overseas, given the Communist Party’s penchant for superseding the country’s laws.

    Critics also point to passage of China’s National Intelligence Law, which became effective in 2017. It requires that any Chinese organization or citizen “shall support, assist in, and cooperate in national intelligence work” in accordance with other Chinese laws.

    One recent example suggests it might not be easy to resist government pressure, particularly during a national crisis or a deepening U.S.-China conflict. Didi, China’s equivalent to Uber, tried unsuccessfully to resist revealing its database to a government supervisory agency last year.

    Ren says that Huawei has already told the European Union that it would be willing to sign a “no-spy” agreement, promising not to engage in any kind of illegal intelligence-gathering and not to have any kind of “back door” embedded in Huawei equipment or software. He says he also believes that the Chinese government would join other nations in signing a similar agreement. He says, however, that U.S. unwillingness to consider “no-spy” agreements has slowed their progress."

    Nobody in their right mind would believe that last paragraph.


    In the real world evidence comes first. If you make accusations - back them up!

    Huawei says the US has been throwing the same line for 10 years now and they still have nothing. Wow! Are you surprised that other governments called their bluff and decided to do their own thing?

    Why not check into reality?

    This is about power and influence. That's it. There is little else. The US dropped the ball on one of the biggest tech revolutions which is about to go live worldwide and hates the idea of someone else being in the driving seat.

    You refuse to admit this but the way things are playing out doesn't clearly gives the US government cause for concern. However, that concern isn't national security.

    So, after 10 years of the same treatment with senators even going on record as saying they want Huawei destroyed, Huawei os sueing the US government. Let's see what comes floating to the surface when that one gets underway.

    Intent? 

    Please wisen up on reality. Security experts have already gone on record as saying it is impossible to stop spying - from all sides! Should we ban US created communications hardware worldwide because the NSA wants its tentacles in everybody's pie? Because, while the US has nothing on Huawei, the world has a fair bit (thanks to Snowden) on US activity. Is Cisco a willing tool of the US government. Should China start throwing that line around? After all no evidence is needed, right?

    We already know the intent of the US and, in time of need, laws can get passed very quickly to make companies comply with its desires. In fact we already know that AT&T has been known to be a willing servant of the government! 

    And you keep mixing Huawei with China - deliberately now - as I have brought this to your attention many times and you continue to mix things up. They are not the same. Very poor on your part.

    Let's put the pieces together:

    We have a company (not a country!) That's been in the business for thirty years. Not one single major security breach in 30 years in spite of operating in over 170 countries.

    A company that would go out of business tomorrow if any bad faith were proven.

    A government (US) that has harked on about the same national security issues for 10 years and not dug up anything to prove their point. Far from it in fact and although people love to mention those security committees they fail to see that there was nothing solid even from the outset. One of them even went so far as to mistake a company that just happened to have the word ' Huawei' in its name for the Huawei that works in ICT. To quote a famous US tennis player: "you cannot be serious".

    After urging other countries to heed US warnings, those countries asked for the evidence to be brought forward and when none was given, the US started threatening them with reprisals. To the point of sending people on a world tour to drive the message home! Did no one in the US think that it is not nice to be threatened by a foreign country over your domestic affairs? Would the US like to be pushed around in the same way? Threatened even?

    Why? Because the US thinks it can in fact visit other countries and and start telling them what to do. That's 'how things work' because they think they have the power and influence to do so. This is not new of course. The NSA and its activities cannot be swept under the carpet at will. 

    So the US has been outed by the world on its attempts to interfere with other countries' communications, even having to apologise to Germany for example but has failed to demonstrate its accusations on Huawei.

    On a political level, it has backfired. The EU has said, 'we will go our own way thank you very much' and now has plans to depend on itself more and more, above all in technology.

    China, with its lead in the development of 5G, is taking the 5G wheel and is demonstrably ahead on many fronts with regards to the forthcoming telecommunications revolution. The US dropped the ball and is frantically trying to slow China's progress down - any way it can. That means derailing Huawei because Huawei has delivered the goods. Not only in China but worldwide. 

    The US will lose economic influence.
    The US will lose technological influence.
    The US is already losing political influence.

    In the case of Huawei, Donald Trump has scored a number of own goals and effectively undermined all efforts to influence foreign affairs on Huawei around the world.

    His tweets have gone so far as to put question marks over much of what has been put forward.

    In the meantime, and in spite of the bullying, much of the rest of the world is doing its own thing and not bending over for the US.

    It is supremely ironic that if you speak to ICT specialists, the companies that deploy and control the technology (the companies that know about security) none of them share the fears of the the US. They are waiting on government to give them the go ahead before making purchases and if they eventually get the go ahead, you can bet that many will be incluiding Huawei gear in their plans.

    Food for thought.



    I guess you missed the part where I provided evidence.

    As far as U.S. "reprisals", the only one I am aware of is that the U.S. Intelligence would not be shared over any insecure network, and as you have pointed out, the U.S. collects a lot of intelligence that is valuable to our partners.

    You are very emotional about this, whereas I look at limiting Huawei's 5G infrastructure unemotionally as protecting our, and our allies, National Security. 


    Can you see any irony in this:

    "European and Asian officials have complained privately that recent American intelligence briefings for allies did not share any sort of classified information that clearly demonstrated how the Chinese government used Huawei to steal information, according to people familiar with the discussions. European officials have told counterparts that if the United States has evidence the Chinese government has used its companies to do so, they should disclose it.

    One senior European telecommunications executive said that no American officials had presented “actual facts” about China’s abuse of Huawei networks."

    https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/17/us/politics/huawei-ban.html

    So with threats of witholding intelligence not yet applied, are we to understand that they are in fact witholding it, or, on the other hand are we to understand that it simply doesn't exist?

    You have not presented evidence because none exists. As I said, if evidence existed the world would be dumping Huawei and nobody could blame them.

    As for being emotional, how far off the mark can you get? The only thing I'm interested in are the facts.

    That means when US journalists start including references to private or off the record conversations they have had with government representatives and affirm that they have no evidence, I not only take note, but take it as a true statement.

    In the same way that it would be crazy for Huawei to knowingly sacrifice its entire business, journalists don't make those references without being able to back them up either.



    muthuk_vanalingam
Sign In or Register to comment.