I think being wary of Huawei is appropriate. They follow their country’s attitude in believing that stealing other countries product designs is fair. When that happens, they are able to copy things and sell them cheaper then the companies who designed them.
Once you allow that, what is preventing them from coping everything and replacing local companies that you buy your products from?
You sure as hell don’t let them get into our infrastructure, once that happens, they can hack their way into, our power grid, defense network, and anything else that connects to the internet a lot easier than before. They are still a communist country and are cozy allies with Russia, another communist country with a Cold War spy as their dictator, yet we think of Russians as our friends and disregard the last 40 years of mistrust.
You can say that’s tinfoil hat talk, but why even take the risk?
Almost a decade of US accusations without a shred of evidence presented. To the point that the U.S government had to admit it had none, but at the same time claiming none was even necessary.
Can you link me to the evidence that Russia interfered in the US election? Our US intelligence agencies say they did, but we as citizens never saw the evidence. But we believe them, because intelligence rarely gives us their evidence.
Just as we believe these same six US intelligence agencies who now say the risk is too high and the CCP simply cannot be trusted. All Chinese companies must obey the CCP. They are “arms of the state”. There’s no getting around this FACT. It’s an authoritarian regime state. Thus, no trusty-trusty.
Anyone who says otherwise is nuts. (I traveled China for a few weeks in university as part of my studies. The Chinese people were great, but their form of government sucks)
Almost a decade of US accusations without a shred of evidence presented. To the point that the U.S government had to admit it had none, but at the same time claiming none was even necessary.
All the while, the realities of this quote from the article have thrown a huge shadow over everything the U.S has claimed:
"the 170 countries and regions in which we currently operate would stop buying our products, and our company would collapse."
That shadow had been there for the last decade.
What would there be to gain? A $100 bn company, the pride of China, a technological leader, would die an instant death. And unnecessarily.
The Chinese government doesn't need Huawei to be able to 'spy'.
Huawei network equipment is managed by the carriers.
Most internet traffic already touches Huawei infrastructure at some point.
No other communications company on the planet is scrutinised on a security level like Huawei. To the point of having its source code inspected. No other company is as advanced as Huawei in areas like 5G.
As a result of U.S actions, Huawei is taking court action to defend itself. The U.S is now officially claiming that the action against Huawei was necessary based solely on the 'possible threat' to national security (of course, there is zero hard evidence of this).
At the same time, the U.S president has undermined the official claims of the government by implying Huawei could be included in a trade deal with China. China has insisted that there will be no negotiation until Huawei has restrictions lifted.
It is clear that Huawei is being used as a trade pawn on one level, and being attacked on another level because of U.S fears of being left behind in a new technological revolution, in which China may play a pivotal role. 'National security' is a ruse and the US case is crumbling. We have seen some very clear comments on this coming out of South Africa and just today there have been some very unfavourable comments attributed to the UK ambassador in Washington.
Now the U.S wants us to believe that Huawei has 'close' ties to the Chinese government (once again without any hard evidence) whereas at the same time it has shown how 'executive orders' can be used to negate the need for ties and force domestic companies ( and even those that are not U.S) to buckle under its demands.
Huawei has a full portfolio of cloud infrastructure built on data privacy. In the case of the EU, with strict user protections, Huawei insists no user files ever leave the EU. It is ironic that some major U.S companies have been investigated for breaching E.U privacy rules.
The U.S action not only caused an estimated $30 billion hole in Huawei revenues but set off a chain reaction that now cannot be stopped or reversed..
Ren recently made another comment (which went largely unreported) that will have sent shockwaves through the U.S tech manufacturing sector.
He said this situation will never happen again as in - two - years, Huawei will have reduced its U.S dependence to zero.
Of course you would show up to defend Ren and Huawei, and yet, Huawei still hasn't been wanting to answer those questions of ownership in any transparent way.
Until then, it's prudent to state that Huawei is an SOE, State Owned Enterprise.
I'm going to do you a favor and only post a single link.
"Chinese border authorities have planted the malware onto travelers' phones as they passed through Irkeshtam port at the border between Kyrgyzstan and China, a tourist who crossed the border said. A member of the reporting team from Süddeutsche Zeitung also entered China through this point and verified that malware is installed on devices.
After being "side-loaded" onto the phone rather than downloaded from the Google Play Store, the malware uploads the device's text messages, calendar entries, phone logs and contacts to a server, multiple technical analysescommissioned by the reporting team found. The malware also scans the phone for over 73,000 different files. The investigation found these files include clearly extremist material such as Islamic State propaganda, but also passages from the Quran, PDFs related to the Dalai Lama, and music from a Japanese metal group called Unholy Grave. Unholy Grave has a song called "Taiwan: Another China."
Hey Ren, now might be a good time to talk to your government about that malware...which, for the record, can't be installed on any iPhone.
As usual. Utterly incapable for you to understand the difference between Huawei and the Chinese government.
As usual, our cheerleader/turfer incapable of admitting that there is no effective difference. The CCP rules China, and all private companies MUST comply with the CCP (of which the CEO is a ranking member lol). There is no choice. This is one reason why six US intelligence agencies refer to the knockoffs as “an arm of the Chinese government”. Period.
Almost a decade of US accusations without a shred of evidence presented...
I stopped reading after the first sentence. Same rant, different day.
You showed up right on cue to defend the supreme right hand of the Chinese government regurgitating the same BS.
They have been caught, numerous times spanning DECADES. You just refuse to acknowledge it and instead, use deception and “alternative facts”.
just stop it. It’s getting really old.
You should inform the U.S government of your information.
This is from just a few months ago when EU telecoms executives demanded hard evidence to support U.S claims:
"Europeans pushed back, too. During one closed-door session, senior representatives from European telecom operators pressed a U.S. official for hard evidence that Huawei presented a security risk. One executive demanded to see a smoking gun, recalled the U.S. official.
The American official fired back: “If the gun is smoking, you’ve already been shot. I don’t know why you’re lining up in front of a loaded weapon.”
There you have it. The U.S sent a special delegation of its highest ranking officials specifically to ward countries off Huawei. They even made a tour out of it but when it came to actually putting evidence on the table, for all the bluster and threats, there was nothing to be had. Huawei even had a message for EU governments of its own that the U.S didn't see coming:
"Prism, Prism on the wall. Who’s the most trustworthy of them all?” he said. Guo was referring to a mass U.S. foreign-surveillance operation called Prism that was disclosed by former NSA contractor Snowden. The barb drew laughter from the audience"
Perhaps you should have continued reading. I don't rant and as you can see, your post comes over as nothing but that, a rant. Use the 'ignore' button if necessary. If you don't even read what you are replying too your argument is severely weakened.
If you believe Huawei is not a pawn in a trade war I suggest you argue that point. As well as its privacy claims because many big U.S companies have been found wanting when it comes to privacy.
Far from ranting. I provided some extra information that could be very relevant two years from now and as most people agree, the U.S miscalculated in a massive way by dragging Huawei into a trade war and holding a gun to its head to provoke a response from China.
Now, everybody (and I mean literally everybody) has accelerated plans to eliminate future dependency on U.S technology by developing it in-house or acquiring it from (who would have thought? China and of course the EU). Hence the link to South Africa's opinion on Huawei. Don't think the rest of developing Africa and and South America isn't interested either.
I think it is a shame that so many U.S companies will lose billions (they are already bleeding by the million) against their will. They have urged Trump to change course, industry representatives have written to the government, they have declared to special committees, the bigger companies have directly lobbied the government and others have found ways to skirt the ban (much to the anger of U.S hawks).
The Fed has changed policy guidance, many U.S companies have seen their books decimated by losing access to Huawei. Google fears for the worst and has a lot to potentially lose. So much that it even argued that banning Huawei was a national security issue! Incredible.
The worst thing is that Trump is now at odds with his own hawks because he is going to lose out whatever he does.
We can think back and look at his "not on my watch" comments and then look into a future where the U.S loses billions in technology sales, loses world influence as a result and sees superior technologies rise and displace U.S efforts (5G for example) and remember that, while the fallout will take a few years to arrive, the problem actually did begin on his watch.
Almost a decade of US accusations without a shred of evidence presented. To the point that the U.S government had to admit it had none, but at the same time claiming none was even necessary.
All the while, the realities of this quote from the article have thrown a huge shadow over everything the U.S has claimed:
"the 170 countries and regions in which we currently operate would stop buying our products, and our company would collapse."
That shadow had been there for the last decade.
What would there be to gain? A $100 bn company, the pride of China, a technological leader, would die an instant death. And unnecessarily.
The Chinese government doesn't need Huawei to be able to 'spy'.
Huawei network equipment is managed by the carriers.
Most internet traffic already touches Huawei infrastructure at some point.
No other communications company on the planet is scrutinised on a security level like Huawei. To the point of having its source code inspected. No other company is as advanced as Huawei in areas like 5G.
As a result of U.S actions, Huawei is taking court action to defend itself. The U.S is now officially claiming that the action against Huawei was necessary based solely on the 'possible threat' to national security (of course, there is zero hard evidence of this).
At the same time, the U.S president has undermined the official claims of the government by implying Huawei could be included in a trade deal with China. China has insisted that there will be no negotiation until Huawei has restrictions lifted.
It is clear that Huawei is being used as a trade pawn on one level, and being attacked on another level because of U.S fears of being left behind in a new technological revolution, in which China may play a pivotal role. 'National security' is a ruse and the US case is crumbling. We have seen some very clear comments on this coming out of South Africa and just today there have been some very unfavourable comments attributed to the UK ambassador in Washington.
Now the U.S wants us to believe that Huawei has 'close' ties to the Chinese government (once again without any hard evidence) whereas at the same time it has shown how 'executive orders' can be used to negate the need for ties and force domestic companies ( and even those that are not U.S) to buckle under its demands.
Huawei has a full portfolio of cloud infrastructure built on data privacy. In the case of the EU, with strict user protections, Huawei insists no user files ever leave the EU. It is ironic that some major U.S companies have been investigated for breaching E.U privacy rules.
The U.S action not only caused an estimated $30 billion hole in Huawei revenues but set off a chain reaction that now cannot be stopped or reversed..
Ren recently made another comment (which went largely unreported) that will have sent shockwaves through the U.S tech manufacturing sector.
He said this situation will never happen again as in - two - years, Huawei will have reduced its U.S dependence to zero.
You present facts.
The Trumpettes present alternative facts.
So, which should believe?
Oh wait! Even Trump essentially admitted lying about Huawei when he admitted he was using it as part of his trade war. But, the Trumpettes soldier on chanting "USA! USA! USA!" so loud they never heard him.
What is this gibberish? Trumpettes? You do realize these concerns began under Obama’s administration, right? And that the six US intelligence agencies operate independently from the executive and have been at odds with him many times already?
Learn to curb your emotions and separate your hate for the president from what our intelligence agencies report. Just like when they reported Russia interfered, that N. Korea killed that kid, and that the Saudi Prince is a murderer. You believe them then, right? Only not now? Why? Be specific.
That said, the track record of our government(s) isn't exactly pretty either. I'm just not sure who to believe anymore. And, I haven't caught Huawei in a lie yet... I catch our government (USA at least) regularly.
Apple isn't owned by the US government.
Neither is Huawei owned by any government.
In China they may as well be. They are beholden to the CCP. They must obey the CCP. They don’t have a choice in the matter. CEO Ren is CCP.
That said, the track record of our government(s) isn't exactly pretty either. I'm just not sure who to believe anymore. And, I haven't caught Huawei in a lie yet... I catch our government (USA at least) regularly.
Apple isn't owned by the US government.
Neither is Huawei owned by any government.
"If Huawei says it isn't state owned and, as a private, company doesn't need the transparency you demand, it is up to the accuser to demonstrate otherwise."
That's horseshit.
From a National Security perspective, and taking into account that the Chinese Government is an Authoritarian, repressive one, why would any country give Huawei the "benefit of the doubt" for something as critical as its communication infrastructure.
I know it’s completely insane. US intelligence isn’t about giving the benefit of the doubt. China and its CCP are an authoritarian, murderous regime, there is no freedom of the press or ability to protest. And these goofballs want to put them in charge of US comms? “Yyyyyeaaaaahhhhhh...”
That said, the track record of our government(s) isn't exactly pretty either. I'm just not sure who to believe anymore. And, I haven't caught Huawei in a lie yet... I catch our government (USA at least) regularly.
Apple isn't owned by the US government.
Neither is Huawei owned by any government.
"Neither is Huawei owned by any government."
You seem certain of that, yet even Avon B7 stated that there was no way to tell, whereas I at least have links that analyzed this.
"If Huawei says it isn't state owned and, as a private, company doesn't need the transparency you demand, it is up to the accuser to demonstrate otherwise."
That's horseshit.
From a National Security perspective, and taking into account that the Chinese Government is an Authoritarian, repressive one, why would any country give Huawei the "benefit of the doubt" for something as critical as its communication infrastructure.
"I haven't caught Huawei in a lie yet"
Try harder.
In response to: "If Huawei says it isn't state owned and, as a private, company
doesn't need the transparency you demand, it is up to the accuser to
demonstrate otherwise."
You sad: "That's horseshit. "
Ok -- if it isn't up to the accuser, then who is it up to? Or, let's try this a different way: Prove to me that you won't rob a bank next week. ... Accusations are easy. Truth and proof are hard -- as Trump is finding out...
And you said: 'From a National Security perspective, and taking into account that
the Chinese Government is an Authoritarian, repressive one, why would
any country give Huawei the "benefit of the doubt" for something as
critical as its communication infrastructure. "
You could say that about any company. Any company in the world. Especially one that you want to use as leverage in a Trade War --- which Trump has already admitted to.
And, sorry. But, so far nobody has caught Huawei in a lie -- unlike its accuser Mr Trump. So, who would you believe: A company with a sterling reputation throughout the world, or a known, documented, compulsive liar. ... Oh that's right. You've said that. You believe the known, documented, compulsive liar.
You should really give this up. The known, documented, compulsive liar has already started walking back his nonsense claims. Not only did the rest of the world call "bull" but the victim started to fight back. Bullies don't like to be challenged.
That said, the track record of our government(s) isn't exactly pretty either. I'm just not sure who to believe anymore. And, I haven't caught Huawei in a lie yet... I catch our government (USA at least) regularly.
"I'm not sure who to believe anymore"
You really want to state that to all of us?
Lame.
China has no independent journalism, and is an authoritarian, repressive government. At least in the U.S., there are in fact many quality resources for information, in spite of President Trump's attempts to control the message, badly, I might add. cgWerks said:
Almost a decade of US accusations without a shred of evidence presented...
They have been caught, numerous times spanning DECADES.
I haven't been following closely enough... but where did that information come from? (Need I mention 'weapons of mass destruction' or 'babies being thrown out of incubators' or 'chemical weapons on his own people' ...)
"I haven't been following closely enough"
You don't wear "poorly informed" very well as your argument.
There's a shit ton of information about Chinese Government directed hacking of Western countries, especially of the U.S. as a shortcut for their militarization, and to advance their commercial interests. Sure, it's fair game to do that, love and war, blah, blah, blah, but do you really want to argue that the U.S. is more repressive than China?
There's also direct evidence that Huawei has stolen technology from Cisco. You might look that up.
I've posted a ton of links in the past to that effect, but, it doesn't seem like some people have an interest.
Here'a a hint; do some research on Belt Road Initiative, and also China's militarization of the South China Seas, Africa, and the Middle East.
That said, the track record of our government(s) isn't exactly pretty either. I'm just not sure who to believe anymore. And, I haven't caught Huawei in a lie yet... I catch our government (USA at least) regularly.
"I'm not sure who to believe anymore"
You really want to state that to all of us?
Lame.
China has no independent journalism, and is an authoritarian, repressive government. At least in the U.S., there are in fact many quality resources for information, in spite of President Trump's attempts to control the message, badly, I might add. cgWerks said:
Almost a decade of US accusations without a shred of evidence presented...
They have been caught, numerous times spanning DECADES.
I haven't been following closely enough... but where did that information come from? (Need I mention 'weapons of mass destruction' or 'babies being thrown out of incubators' or 'chemical weapons on his own people' ...)
"I haven't been following closely enough"
You don't wear "poorly informed" very well as your argument.
There's a shit ton of information about Chinese Government directed hacking of Western countries, especially of the U.S. as a shortcut for their militarization, and to advance their commercial interests. Sure, it's fair game to do that, love and war, blah, blah, blah, but do you really want to argue that the U.S. is more repressive than China?
There's also direct evidence that Huawei has stolen technology from Cisco. You might look that up.
I've posted a ton of links in the past to that effect, but, it doesn't seem like some people have an interest.
Here'a a hint; do some research on Belt Road Initiative, and also China's militarization of the South China Seas, Africa, and the Middle East.
Again. Your anti-China stance is well known and admitted by yourself but China isn't Huawei.
Why would I have admitted something that I didn't state, because that would be a falsehood. I am a China Hawk, but that isn't the same as being anti-China. If anything, it is that I do not want to see China's expansionism in Indochina and the Pacific.
Huawei is a SOE, (State Owned Enterprise), based on the information that I have seen. As I stated, Huawei certainly has the ability to open its books to Westerners, so why haven't they?
You, on the other hand, take it on faith that Huawei is a private company.
Almost a decade of US accusations without a shred of evidence presented...
I stopped reading after the first sentence. Same rant, different day.
You showed up right on cue to defend the supreme right hand of the Chinese government regurgitating the same BS.
They have been caught, numerous times spanning DECADES. You just refuse to acknowledge it and instead, use deception and “alternative facts”.
just stop it. It’s getting really old.
You should inform the U.S government of your information.
This is from just a few months ago when EU telecoms executives demanded hard evidence to support U.S claims:
"Europeans pushed back, too. During one closed-door session, senior representatives from European telecom operators pressed a U.S. official for hard evidence that Huawei presented a security risk. One executive demanded to see a smoking gun, recalled the U.S. official.
The American official fired back: “If the gun is smoking, you’ve already been shot. I don’t know why you’re lining up in front of a loaded weapon.”
There you have it. The U.S sent a special delegation of its highest ranking officials specifically to ward countries off Huawei. They even made a tour out of it but when it came to actually putting evidence on the table, for all the bluster and threats, there was nothing to be had. Huawei even had a message for EU governments of its own that the U.S didn't see coming:
"Prism, Prism on the wall. Who’s the most trustworthy of them all?” he said. Guo was referring to a mass U.S. foreign-surveillance operation called Prism that was disclosed by former NSA contractor Snowden. The barb drew laughter from the audience"
Perhaps you should have continued reading. I don't rant and as you can see, your post comes over as nothing but that, a rant. Use the 'ignore' button if necessary. If you don't even read what you are replying too your argument is severely weakened.
If you believe Huawei is not a pawn in a trade war I suggest you argue that point. As well as its privacy claims because many big U.S companies have been found wanting when it comes to privacy.
Far from ranting. I provided some extra information that could be very relevant two years from now and as most people agree, the U.S miscalculated in a massive way by dragging Huawei into a trade war and holding a gun to its head to provoke a response from China.
Now, everybody (and I mean literally everybody) has accelerated plans to eliminate future dependency on U.S technology by developing it in-house or acquiring it from (who would have thought? China and of course the EU). Hence the link to South Africa's opinion on Huawei. Don't think the rest of developing Africa and and South America isn't interested either.
I think it is a shame that so many U.S companies will lose billions (they are already bleeding by the million) against their will. They have urged Trump to change course, industry representatives have written to the government, they have declared to special committees, the bigger companies have directly lobbied the government and others have found ways to skirt the ban (much to the anger of U.S hawks).
The Fed has changed policy guidance, many U.S companies have seen their books decimated by losing access to Huawei. Google fears for the worst and has a lot to potentially lose. So much that it even argued that banning Huawei was a national security issue! Incredible.
The worst thing is that Trump is now at odds with his own hawks because he is going to lose out whatever he does.
We can think back and look at his "not on my watch" comments and then look into a future where the U.S loses billions in technology sales, loses world influence as a result and sees superior technologies rise and displace U.S efforts (5G for example) and remember that, while the fallout will take a few years to arrive, the problem actually did begin on his watch.
What the link states;
"In early 2018, in a complex of low-rise buildings in the Australian capital, a team of government hackers was engaging in a destructive digital war game.
The operatives – agents of the Australian Signals Directorate, the nation’s top-secret eavesdropping agency – had been given a challenge. With all the offensive cyber tools at their disposal, what harm could they inflict if they had access to equipment installed in the 5G network, the next-generation mobile communications technology, of a target nation?
What the team found, say current and former government officials, was sobering for Australian security and political leaders: The offensive potential of 5G was so great that if Australia were on the receiving end of such attacks, the country could be seriously exposed. The understanding of how 5G could be exploited for spying and to sabotage critical infrastructure changed everything for the Australians, according to people familiar with the deliberations.
Mike Burgess, the head of the signals directorate, recently explained why the security of fifth generation, or 5G, technology was so important: It will be integral to the communications at the heart of a country's critical infrastructure - everything from electric power to water supplies to sewage, he said in a March speech at a Sydney research institute.
Washington is widely seen as having taken the initiative in the global campaign against Huawei Technologies Co Ltd, a tech juggernaut that in the three decades since its founding has become a pillar of Beijing’s bid to expand its global influence. Yet Reuters interviews with more than two dozen current and former Western officials show it was the Australians who led the way in pressing for action on 5G; that the United States was initially slow to act; and that Britain and other European countries are caught between security concerns and the competitive prices offered by Huawei."
You seem unaware that this link actually supports my contention that this is a National Security issue. I know that it is because I posted that same link weeks ago in response one of your posts.
As well, you seem unaware that Trump still considers Huawei a National Security issue; his Secretary of State Michael Pompeii is the one who continues to argue for the ban on Huawei Telecom. At best, Huawei will continue to be allowed to use U.S. technology for its consumer products.
That said, the track record of our government(s) isn't exactly pretty either. I'm just not sure who to believe anymore. And, I haven't caught Huawei in a lie yet... I catch our government (USA at least) regularly.
Oh yeah, the US government = the Chinese government.
The sheer idiocy of that premise runs the risk of making everything you post entirely absurd.
Guys I can’t believe all this merry go round of Huawei did or did not do X and you conveniently leave out the really pertinent facts.
1. Huawei was caught with backdoors into the modem software that they supplied to the Italian Vodaphone. When asked about it Huawei’s response at first was to deny it happened, then when proof was brought to the table their response changed to “oh that one, it is old and we wouldn’t use it anyway. Trust us”. If the hand wasn’t caught in the cookie jar, I don’t know what is.
2. Employee of Huawei in Poland was caught soliciting intelligence secrets. Upon being caught, Huawei denied any knowledge and sacked the guy. So now their record of being involved in intelligence gathering is clean, according to Huawei, because the guy doesn’t work for them anymore.
3. It is more than just the American Intelligence agencies that are ringing the bell of the Huawei/5G problem. Australia was the first to raise the red flag, sorry about the pun, on the problems with Chinese communications companies supplying the 5G infrastructure and the possible problems it could create. So if you don’t trust the US agencies advice, trust the Australian Intelligence agencies work, especially as they had to raise the alarm to the American counterparts first before the US agencies started to run with it.
4. The big issue with Huawei and any other company in China is the Chinese law. It clearly states that the government of China has the ability to take over or insist on certain actions be fulfilled by any company and the affected company has no right of refusal or reply against the government and has to remain silent about the request. There is no equivalent law in other democracies around the world and I t is this law that makes the whole 5G situation untenable. If the CCP changed this law it might make things a little easier, but now the trust has been broken it is hard to gain back to the same level without a lot of work on the CCP’s side to build that trust back up.
I’m not going to post links to substantiate the above points, it is easy enough to search for the references yourself if you’re interested. Now go back to your respective corners and start slinging mud.
Almost a decade of US accusations without a shred of evidence presented...
I stopped reading after the first sentence. Same rant, different day.
You showed up right on cue to defend the supreme right hand of the Chinese government regurgitating the same BS.
They have been caught, numerous times spanning DECADES. You just refuse to acknowledge it and instead, use deception and “alternative facts”.
just stop it. It’s getting really old.
You should inform the U.S government of your information.
This is from just a few months ago when EU telecoms executives demanded hard evidence to support U.S claims:
"Europeans pushed back, too. During one closed-door session, senior representatives from European telecom operators pressed a U.S. official for hard evidence that Huawei presented a security risk. One executive demanded to see a smoking gun, recalled the U.S. official.
The American official fired back: “If the gun is smoking, you’ve already been shot. I don’t know why you’re lining up in front of a loaded weapon.”
There you have it. The U.S sent a special delegation of its highest ranking officials specifically to ward countries off Huawei. They even made a tour out of it but when it came to actually putting evidence on the table, for all the bluster and threats, there was nothing to be had. Huawei even had a message for EU governments of its own that the U.S didn't see coming:
"Prism, Prism on the wall. Who’s the most trustworthy of them all?” he said. Guo was referring to a mass U.S. foreign-surveillance operation called Prism that was disclosed by former NSA contractor Snowden. The barb drew laughter from the audience"
Perhaps you should have continued reading. I don't rant and as you can see, your post comes over as nothing but that, a rant. Use the 'ignore' button if necessary. If you don't even read what you are replying too your argument is severely weakened.
If you believe Huawei is not a pawn in a trade war I suggest you argue that point. As well as its privacy claims because many big U.S companies have been found wanting when it comes to privacy.
Far from ranting. I provided some extra information that could be very relevant two years from now and as most people agree, the U.S miscalculated in a massive way by dragging Huawei into a trade war and holding a gun to its head to provoke a response from China.
Now, everybody (and I mean literally everybody) has accelerated plans to eliminate future dependency on U.S technology by developing it in-house or acquiring it from (who would have thought? China and of course the EU). Hence the link to South Africa's opinion on Huawei. Don't think the rest of developing Africa and and South America isn't interested either.
I think it is a shame that so many U.S companies will lose billions (they are already bleeding by the million) against their will. They have urged Trump to change course, industry representatives have written to the government, they have declared to special committees, the bigger companies have directly lobbied the government and others have found ways to skirt the ban (much to the anger of U.S hawks).
The Fed has changed policy guidance, many U.S companies have seen their books decimated by losing access to Huawei. Google fears for the worst and has a lot to potentially lose. So much that it even argued that banning Huawei was a national security issue! Incredible.
The worst thing is that Trump is now at odds with his own hawks because he is going to lose out whatever he does.
We can think back and look at his "not on my watch" comments and then look into a future where the U.S loses billions in technology sales, loses world influence as a result and sees superior technologies rise and displace U.S efforts (5G for example) and remember that, while the fallout will take a few years to arrive, the problem actually did begin on his watch.
What the link states;
"In early 2018, in a complex of low-rise buildings in the Australian capital, a team of government hackers was engaging in a destructive digital war game.
The operatives – agents of the Australian Signals Directorate, the nation’s top-secret eavesdropping agency – had been given a challenge. With all the offensive cyber tools at their disposal, what harm could they inflict if they had access to equipment installed in the 5G network, the next-generation mobile communications technology, of a target nation?
What the team found, say current and former government officials, was sobering for Australian security and political leaders: The offensive potential of 5G was so great that if Australia were on the receiving end of such attacks, the country could be seriously exposed. The understanding of how 5G could be exploited for spying and to sabotage critical infrastructure changed everything for the Australians, according to people familiar with the deliberations.
Mike Burgess, the head of the signals directorate, recently explained why the security of fifth generation, or 5G, technology was so important: It will be integral to the communications at the heart of a country's critical infrastructure - everything from electric power to water supplies to sewage, he said in a March speech at a Sydney research institute.
Washington is widely seen as having taken the initiative in the global campaign against Huawei Technologies Co Ltd, a tech juggernaut that in the three decades since its founding has become a pillar of Beijing’s bid to expand its global influence. Yet Reuters interviews with more than two dozen current and former Western officials show it was the Australians who led the way in pressing for action on 5G; that the United States was initially slow to act; and that Britain and other European countries are caught between security concerns and the competitive prices offered by Huawei."
You seem unaware that this link actually supports my contention that this is a National Security issue. I know that it is because I posted that same link weeks ago in response one of your posts.
As well, you seem unaware that Trump still considers Huawei a National Security issue; his Secretary of State Michael Pompeii is the one who continues to argue for the ban on Huawei Telecom. At best, Huawei will continue to be allowed to use U.S. technology for its consumer products.
As I said further up. The Chinese (and of course the U.S) don't need 'special access' to 5G equipment. 'Huawei' is irrelevant!
If Cisco were Huawei it wouldn't change anything.
Don't you think it is just a little strange that only the Australians reached that conclusion? The U.K for example, has intimate knowledge of pretty much everything Huawei has deployed in the U.K. and will have the same knowledge of 5G equipment. Huawei has signed over 50 5G commercial contracts.
Before awarding those contracts, all technical issues were scrutinised. There is NOTHING - vendor specific - to support a higher risk from using Huawei.
Any communication system is a prime target for attack and misuse. That includes equipment from Nokia and Ericsson (and Cisco and many others).
Can't you see that? National security is national security. It isn't only 'Huawei'!
The Russian submarine that was in the news recently was suspected of having the capability of interfering with undersea communications cables. It was reported that the U.S directed a cyber attack at Iran recently. Systems get attacked every day and I can guarantee you that it doesn't matter whose equipment is targeted. Global communications depends on interoperability. Huawei is no more a threat than anyone else.
If you take governments into account you will find they don't care about vendor specific leanings.
All carriers can do is implement the necessary protocols to better protect themselves. Of course, with government oversight where necessary, which leads to the ironic situation of the U.K getting access to Huawei source code for 'security' reasons but also trying its best to defeat the protections put in place by Huawei (and Nokia and Ericsson).
So why didn't the rest of the world see what the Australian's saw? You'd think it was cut and dried. Of course, it isn't.
I'm surprised you haven't brought up the latest 'paper' by Mr. Balding btw.
And it's 'Pompeo' I think.
And in case weren't aware, I read the Reuters piece the day it came out.
Guys I can’t believe all this merry go round of Huawei did or did not do X and you conveniently leave out the really pertinent facts.
1. Huawei was caught with backdoors into the modem software that they supplied to the Italian Vodaphone. When asked about it Huawei’s response at first was to deny it happened, then when proof was brought to the table their response changed to “oh that one, it is old and we wouldn’t use it anyway. Trust us”. If the hand wasn’t caught in the cookie jar, I don’t know what is.
2. Employee of Huawei in Poland was caught soliciting intelligence secrets. Upon being caught, Huawei denied any knowledge and sacked the guy. So now their record of being involved in intelligence gathering is clean, according to Huawei, because the guy doesn’t work for them anymore.
3. It is more than just the American Intelligence agencies that are ringing the bell of the Huawei/5G problem. Australia was the first to raise the red flag, sorry about the pun, on the problems with Chinese communications companies supplying the 5G infrastructure and the possible problems it could create. So if you don’t trust the US agencies advice, trust the Australian Intelligence agencies work, especially as they had to raise the alarm to the American counterparts first before the US agencies started to run with it.
4. The big issue with Huawei and any other company in China is the Chinese law. It clearly states that the government of China has the ability to take over or insist on certain actions be fulfilled by any company and the affected company has no right of refusal or reply against the government and has to remain silent about the request. There is no equivalent law in other democracies around the world and I t is this law that makes the whole 5G situation untenable. If the CCP changed this law it might make things a little easier, but now the trust has been broken it is hard to gain back to the same level without a lot of work on the CCP’s side to build that trust back up.
I’m not going to post links to substantiate the above points, it is easy enough to search for the references yourself if you’re interested. Now go back to your respective corners and start slinging mud.
So instead you believe the guy who has lied over 11,000 times? OK....
“The guy who has lied over 11,000 times...” was a late arrival to already well-known facts from prior administrations as well as the Congress.
The fact that that you keep harping on Trump is a bit pathetic, really.
Sorry, but this is ALL Trump. No, make that A L L 1 0 0 % Trump. It has nothing to do possible warnings & cautions given years ago -- and for which no action was taken. That's an excuse. It does however have everything to do with his Trade War -- which he, the Liar in Chief, has already admitted.
But, you are free to believe him if you want -- although even Trump has been walking back that fairy tale. For myself, I prefer reality.
Almost a decade of US accusations without a shred of evidence presented...
I stopped reading after the first sentence. Same rant, different day.
You showed up right on cue to defend the supreme right hand of the Chinese government regurgitating the same BS.
They have been caught, numerous times spanning DECADES. You just refuse to acknowledge it and instead, use deception and “alternative facts”.
just stop it. It’s getting really old.
You should inform the U.S government of your information.
This is from just a few months ago when EU telecoms executives demanded hard evidence to support U.S claims:
"Europeans pushed back, too. During one closed-door session, senior representatives from European telecom operators pressed a U.S. official for hard evidence that Huawei presented a security risk. One executive demanded to see a smoking gun, recalled the U.S. official.
The American official fired back: “If the gun is smoking, you’ve already been shot. I don’t know why you’re lining up in front of a loaded weapon.”
There you have it. The U.S sent a special delegation of its highest ranking officials specifically to ward countries off Huawei. They even made a tour out of it but when it came to actually putting evidence on the table, for all the bluster and threats, there was nothing to be had. Huawei even had a message for EU governments of its own that the U.S didn't see coming:
"Prism, Prism on the wall. Who’s the most trustworthy of them all?” he said. Guo was referring to a mass U.S. foreign-surveillance operation called Prism that was disclosed by former NSA contractor Snowden. The barb drew laughter from the audience"
Perhaps you should have continued reading. I don't rant and as you can see, your post comes over as nothing but that, a rant. Use the 'ignore' button if necessary. If you don't even read what you are replying too your argument is severely weakened.
If you believe Huawei is not a pawn in a trade war I suggest you argue that point. As well as its privacy claims because many big U.S companies have been found wanting when it comes to privacy.
Far from ranting. I provided some extra information that could be very relevant two years from now and as most people agree, the U.S miscalculated in a massive way by dragging Huawei into a trade war and holding a gun to its head to provoke a response from China.
Now, everybody (and I mean literally everybody) has accelerated plans to eliminate future dependency on U.S technology by developing it in-house or acquiring it from (who would have thought? China and of course the EU). Hence the link to South Africa's opinion on Huawei. Don't think the rest of developing Africa and and South America isn't interested either.
I think it is a shame that so many U.S companies will lose billions (they are already bleeding by the million) against their will. They have urged Trump to change course, industry representatives have written to the government, they have declared to special committees, the bigger companies have directly lobbied the government and others have found ways to skirt the ban (much to the anger of U.S hawks).
The Fed has changed policy guidance, many U.S companies have seen their books decimated by losing access to Huawei. Google fears for the worst and has a lot to potentially lose. So much that it even argued that banning Huawei was a national security issue! Incredible.
The worst thing is that Trump is now at odds with his own hawks because he is going to lose out whatever he does.
We can think back and look at his "not on my watch" comments and then look into a future where the U.S loses billions in technology sales, loses world influence as a result and sees superior technologies rise and displace U.S efforts (5G for example) and remember that, while the fallout will take a few years to arrive, the problem actually did begin on his watch.
What the link states;
"In early 2018, in a complex of low-rise buildings in the Australian capital, a team of government hackers was engaging in a destructive digital war game.
The operatives – agents of the Australian Signals Directorate, the nation’s top-secret eavesdropping agency – had been given a challenge. With all the offensive cyber tools at their disposal, what harm could they inflict if they had access to equipment installed in the 5G network, the next-generation mobile communications technology, of a target nation?
What the team found, say current and former government officials, was sobering for Australian security and political leaders: The offensive potential of 5G was so great that if Australia were on the receiving end of such attacks, the country could be seriously exposed. The understanding of how 5G could be exploited for spying and to sabotage critical infrastructure changed everything for the Australians, according to people familiar with the deliberations.
Mike Burgess, the head of the signals directorate, recently explained why the security of fifth generation, or 5G, technology was so important: It will be integral to the communications at the heart of a country's critical infrastructure - everything from electric power to water supplies to sewage, he said in a March speech at a Sydney research institute.
Washington is widely seen as having taken the initiative in the global campaign against Huawei Technologies Co Ltd, a tech juggernaut that in the three decades since its founding has become a pillar of Beijing’s bid to expand its global influence. Yet Reuters interviews with more than two dozen current and former Western officials show it was the Australians who led the way in pressing for action on 5G; that the United States was initially slow to act; and that Britain and other European countries are caught between security concerns and the competitive prices offered by Huawei."
You seem unaware that this link actually supports my contention that this is a National Security issue. I know that it is because I posted that same link weeks ago in response one of your posts.
As well, you seem unaware that Trump still considers Huawei a National Security issue; his Secretary of State Michael Pompeii is the one who continues to argue for the ban on Huawei Telecom. At best, Huawei will continue to be allowed to use U.S. technology for its consumer products.
OK.... The analogy here is: Father in a harsh, angry voice tells son: "You are grounded for 2 weeks!" Son: "Why? What did I do?" Father: "Absolutely nothing! But I know you will!"
But, as I have said, even Trump is walking back that stupidity and admitting that he was just using Huawei as a politcal pawn in his Trade War -- and as soon as he gets what he wants out of Xi he'll open the doors to Huawei.
Some comments here remind me of the guys who want Apple to burn because the US is corrupt(China being a saint). This his like wanting a mans house to burn down because his neighbor is a jerk. The stretches and lengths people go to doom Apple are sad.
Comments
They follow their country’s attitude in believing that stealing other countries product designs is fair. When that happens, they are able to copy things and sell them cheaper then the companies who designed them.
Once you allow that, what is preventing them from coping everything and replacing local companies that you buy your products from?
You sure as hell don’t let them get into our infrastructure, once that happens, they can hack their way into, our power grid, defense network, and anything else that connects to the internet a lot easier than before.
They are still a communist country and are cozy allies with Russia, another communist country with a Cold War spy as their dictator, yet we think of Russians as our friends and disregard the last 40 years of mistrust.
You can say that’s tinfoil hat talk, but why even take the risk?
Just as we believe these same six US intelligence agencies who now say the risk is too high and the CCP simply cannot be trusted. All Chinese companies must obey the CCP. They are “arms of the state”. There’s no getting around this FACT. It’s an authoritarian regime state. Thus, no trusty-trusty.
Anyone who says otherwise is nuts. (I traveled China for a few weeks in university as part of my studies. The Chinese people were great, but their form of government sucks)
As usual, our cheerleader/turfer incapable of admitting that there is no effective difference. The CCP rules China, and all private companies MUST comply with the CCP (of which the CEO is a ranking member lol). There is no choice. This is one reason why six US intelligence agencies refer to the knockoffs as “an arm of the Chinese government”. Period.
Nope, but I do believe the heads of six US intelligence agencies. The same guys who said Russia interfered on Trump’s behalf.
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/02/13/chinas-hauwei-top-us-intelligence-chiefs-caution-americans-away.html
https://www.fastcompany.com/40530898/six-u-s-intelligence-agencies-warn-against-using-huawei-phones
https://www.cio.com.au/article/633134/huawei-effectively-an-arm-chinese-government-us-senator/
This is from just a few months ago when EU telecoms executives demanded hard evidence to support U.S claims:
"Europeans pushed back, too. During one closed-door session, senior representatives from European telecom operators pressed a U.S. official for hard evidence that Huawei presented a security risk. One executive demanded to see a smoking gun, recalled the U.S. official.
The American official fired back: “If the gun is smoking, you’ve already been shot. I don’t know why you’re lining up in front of a loaded weapon.”
There you have it. The U.S sent a special delegation of its highest ranking officials specifically to ward countries off Huawei. They even made a tour out of it but when it came to actually putting evidence on the table, for all the bluster and threats, there was nothing to be had. Huawei even had a message for EU governments of its own that the U.S didn't see coming:
"Prism, Prism on the wall. Who’s the most trustworthy of them all?” he said. Guo was referring to a mass U.S. foreign-surveillance operation called Prism that was disclosed by former NSA contractor Snowden. The barb drew laughter from the audience"
https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/huawei-usa-campaign/
Perhaps you should have continued reading. I don't rant and as you can see, your post comes over as nothing but that, a rant. Use the 'ignore' button if necessary. If you don't even read what you are replying too your argument is severely weakened.
If you believe Huawei is not a pawn in a trade war I suggest you argue that point. As well as its privacy claims because many big U.S companies have been found wanting when it comes to privacy.
Far from ranting. I provided some extra information that could be very relevant two years from now and as most people agree, the U.S miscalculated in a massive way by dragging Huawei into a trade war and holding a gun to its head to provoke a response from China.
Now, everybody (and I mean literally everybody) has accelerated plans to eliminate future dependency on U.S technology by developing it in-house or acquiring it from (who would have thought? China and of course the EU). Hence the link to South Africa's opinion on Huawei. Don't think the rest of developing Africa and and South America isn't interested either.
I think it is a shame that so many U.S companies will lose billions (they are already bleeding by the million) against their will. They have urged Trump to change course, industry representatives have written to the government, they have declared to special committees, the bigger companies have directly lobbied the government and others have found ways to skirt the ban (much to the anger of U.S hawks).
The Fed has changed policy guidance, many U.S companies have seen their books decimated by losing access to Huawei. Google fears for the worst and has a lot to potentially lose. So much that it even argued that banning Huawei was a national security issue! Incredible.
The worst thing is that Trump is now at odds with his own hawks because he is going to lose out whatever he does.
We can think back and look at his "not on my watch" comments and then look into a future where the U.S loses billions in technology sales, loses world influence as a result and sees superior technologies rise and displace U.S efforts (5G for example) and remember that, while the fallout will take a few years to arrive, the problem actually did begin on his watch.
What is this gibberish? Trumpettes? You do realize these concerns began under Obama’s administration, right? And that the six US intelligence agencies operate independently from the executive and have been at odds with him many times already?
Learn to curb your emotions and separate your hate for the president from what our intelligence agencies report. Just like when they reported Russia interfered, that N. Korea killed that kid, and that the Saudi Prince is a murderer. You believe them then, right? Only not now? Why? Be specific.
In China they may as well be. They are beholden to the CCP. They must obey the CCP. They don’t have a choice in the matter. CEO Ren is CCP.
I know it’s completely insane. US intelligence isn’t about giving the benefit of the doubt. China and its CCP are an authoritarian, murderous regime, there is no freedom of the press or ability to protest. And these goofballs want to put them in charge of US comms? “Yyyyyeaaaaahhhhhh...”
"If Huawei says it isn't state owned and, as a private, company doesn't need the transparency you demand, it is up to the accuser to demonstrate otherwise."
Or, let's try this a different way: Prove to me that you won't rob a bank next week.
... Accusations are easy. Truth and proof are hard -- as Trump is finding out...
And you said:
'From a National Security perspective, and taking into account that the Chinese Government is an Authoritarian, repressive one, why would any country give Huawei the "benefit of the doubt" for something as critical as its communication infrastructure. "
You could say that about any company. Any company in the world. Especially one that you want to use as leverage in a Trade War --- which Trump has already admitted to.
And, sorry. But, so far nobody has caught Huawei in a lie -- unlike its accuser Mr Trump. So, who would you believe: A company with a sterling reputation throughout the world, or a known, documented, compulsive liar.
... Oh that's right. You've said that. You believe the known, documented, compulsive liar.
You should really give this up. The known, documented, compulsive liar has already started walking back his nonsense claims. Not only did the rest of the world call "bull" but the victim started to fight back. Bullies don't like to be challenged.
Huawei is a SOE, (State Owned Enterprise), based on the information that I have seen. As I stated, Huawei certainly has the ability to open its books to Westerners, so why haven't they?
You, on the other hand, take it on faith that Huawei is a private company.
"In early 2018, in a complex of low-rise buildings in the Australian capital, a team of government hackers was engaging in a destructive digital war game.
The operatives – agents of the Australian Signals Directorate, the nation’s top-secret eavesdropping agency – had been given a challenge. With all the offensive cyber tools at their disposal, what harm could they inflict if they had access to equipment installed in the 5G network, the next-generation mobile communications technology, of a target nation?
What the team found, say current and former government officials, was sobering for Australian security and political leaders: The offensive potential of 5G was so great that if Australia were on the receiving end of such attacks, the country could be seriously exposed. The understanding of how 5G could be exploited for spying and to sabotage critical infrastructure changed everything for the Australians, according to people familiar with the deliberations.
Mike Burgess, the head of the signals directorate, recently explained why the security of fifth generation, or 5G, technology was so important: It will be integral to the communications at the heart of a country's critical infrastructure - everything from electric power to water supplies to sewage, he said in a March speech at a Sydney research institute.
Washington is widely seen as having taken the initiative in the global campaign against Huawei Technologies Co Ltd, a tech juggernaut that in the three decades since its founding has become a pillar of Beijing’s bid to expand its global influence. Yet Reuters interviews with more than two dozen current and former Western officials show it was the Australians who led the way in pressing for action on 5G; that the United States was initially slow to act; and that Britain and other European countries are caught between security concerns and the competitive prices offered by Huawei."
You seem unaware that this link actually supports my contention that this is a National Security issue. I know that it is because I posted that same link weeks ago in response one of your posts.
As well, you seem unaware that Trump still considers Huawei a National Security issue; his Secretary of State Michael Pompeii is the one who continues to argue for the ban on Huawei Telecom. At best, Huawei will continue to be allowed to use U.S. technology for its consumer products.
The sheer idiocy of that premise runs the risk of making everything you post entirely absurd.
The fact that that you keep harping on Trump is a bit pathetic, really.
1. Huawei was caught with backdoors into the modem software that they supplied to the Italian Vodaphone. When asked about it Huawei’s response at first was to deny it happened, then when proof was brought to the table their response changed to “oh that one, it is old and we wouldn’t use it anyway. Trust us”. If the hand wasn’t caught in the cookie jar, I don’t know what is.
2. Employee of Huawei in Poland was caught soliciting intelligence secrets. Upon being caught, Huawei denied any knowledge and sacked the guy. So now their record of being involved in intelligence gathering is clean, according to Huawei, because the guy doesn’t work for them anymore.
3. It is more than just the American Intelligence agencies that are ringing the bell of the Huawei/5G problem. Australia was the first to raise the red flag, sorry about the pun, on the problems with Chinese communications companies supplying the 5G infrastructure and the possible problems it could create. So if you don’t trust the US agencies advice, trust the Australian Intelligence agencies work, especially as they had to raise the alarm to the American counterparts first before the US agencies started to run with it.
4. The big issue with Huawei and any other company in China is the Chinese law. It clearly states that the government of China has the ability to take over or insist on certain actions be fulfilled by any company and the affected company has no right of refusal or reply against the government and has to remain silent about the request. There is no equivalent law in other democracies around the world and I t is this law that makes the whole 5G situation untenable. If the CCP changed this law it might make things a little easier, but now the trust has been broken it is hard to gain back to the same level without a lot of work on the CCP’s side to build that trust back up.
I’m not going to post links to substantiate the above points, it is easy enough to search for the references yourself if you’re interested. Now go back to your respective corners and start slinging mud.
If Cisco were Huawei it wouldn't change anything.
Don't you think it is just a little strange that only the Australians reached that conclusion? The U.K for example, has intimate knowledge of pretty much everything Huawei has deployed in the U.K. and will have the same knowledge of 5G equipment. Huawei has signed over 50 5G commercial contracts.
Before awarding those contracts, all technical issues were scrutinised. There is NOTHING - vendor specific - to support a higher risk from using Huawei.
Any communication system is a prime target for attack and misuse. That includes equipment from Nokia and Ericsson (and Cisco and many others).
Can't you see that? National security is national security. It isn't only 'Huawei'!
The Russian submarine that was in the news recently was suspected of having the capability of interfering with undersea communications cables. It was reported that the U.S directed a cyber attack at Iran recently. Systems get attacked every day and I can guarantee you that it doesn't matter whose equipment is targeted. Global communications depends on interoperability. Huawei is no more a threat than anyone else.
If you take governments into account you will find they don't care about vendor specific leanings.
All carriers can do is implement the necessary protocols to better protect themselves. Of course, with government oversight where necessary, which leads to the ironic situation of the U.K getting access to Huawei source code for 'security' reasons but also trying its best to defeat the protections put in place by Huawei (and Nokia and Ericsson).
So why didn't the rest of the world see what the Australian's saw? You'd think it was cut and dried. Of course, it isn't.
I'm surprised you haven't brought up the latest 'paper' by Mr. Balding btw.
And it's 'Pompeo' I think.
And in case weren't aware, I read the Reuters piece the day it came out.
If your first affirmation is wrong, why believe the rest?
It has nothing to do possible warnings & cautions given years ago -- and for which no action was taken. That's an excuse. It does however have everything to do with his Trade War -- which he, the Liar in Chief, has already admitted.
But, you are free to believe him if you want -- although even Trump has been walking back that fairy tale. For myself, I prefer reality.
Father in a harsh, angry voice tells son: "You are grounded for 2 weeks!"
Son: "Why? What did I do?"
Father: "Absolutely nothing! But I know you will!"
But, as I have said, even Trump is walking back that stupidity and admitting that he was just using Huawei as a politcal pawn in his Trade War -- and as soon as he gets what he wants out of Xi he'll open the doors to Huawei.