Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

UK Defence Secretary Gavin Williamson Sacked over Huawei Leak

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 60 posts

Re: UK Defence Secretary Gavin Williamson Sacked over Huawei Leak

#41

Post by strainer »

DelightOne wrote: post #37
strainer wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A telnet service responds to a plain port scan. So it was categorically not hidden. Vodaphone explain this themselves in the linked register article: >It added the Telnet service was found during an audit, which means it can't have been that secret or hidden: "The issues were identified by independent security testing, initiated by Vodafone as part of our routine security measures, and fixed at the time by Huawei.

So a backdoor is okay incase it's not hidden?

If its not hidden, its not a threat to national security kind of "backdoor". A hidden backdoor will only respond to a secret token, you cant just knock on it and get asked "whats the hardcoded password?"

Re: UK Defence Secretary Gavin Williamson Sacked over Huawei Leak

#42

Post by gnode »

DelightOne wrote: post #37
strainer wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A telnet service responds to a plain port scan. So it was categorically not hidden. Vodaphone explain this themselves in the linked register article: >It added the Telnet service was found during an audit, which means it can't have been that secret or hidden: "The issues were identified by independent security testing, initiated by Vodafone as part of our routine security measures, and fixed at the time by Huawei.

So a backdoor is okay incase it's not hidden?

A vulnerability is not as damning if it wasn't intentionally inserted to be a backdoor. It being easily discoverable suggests that there was no intention to hide it, and thus it was not intended to be a backdoor.

If conversely the vulnerability was difficult to find externally, was publically unknown, and was seen being used for attacks, that would be suggestive of a deliberate backdoor, and far more damning.

Re: UK Defence Secretary Gavin Williamson Sacked over Huawei Leak

#43

Post by kodz4 »

inflatableDodo wrote: post #28
kodz4 wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quite sure thats a Yes Minister episode.

All of Thatcher-In-The-Rye's tenure has been an extended 'Yes Minister' episode. Though I think the writers would never have gone quite as far as Boris 'Fuck Business' Johnson. Who may very well become our next PM.

I had to google Thatcher in the Rye :) Thanks for the laugh. That said I have hope. The more clowns in power, the more pressure on real leaders to step up. This is a phase where the media and social media have allowed things to happen that no one expected. But we learn from that and things change. For the better. They always do. Or we'd still have a King running things.

Re: UK Defence Secretary Gavin Williamson Sacked over Huawei Leak

#44

Post by CharlesColeman »

rb808 wrote: post #34

The concern I dont understand. If all traffic is encrypted, what is the risk of Huawei equipment handling traffic? Are people worried about spying or being able to switch interrupt service?

There's still metadata. Also I'd think that lawful-intercept features mean that telecom traffic is not end-to-end encrypted, so unencrypted streams might be accessible to telecom equipment like this unless the customer is using a nonstandard encrypted phone.

Re: UK Defence Secretary Gavin Williamson Sacked over Huawei Leak

#45

Post by M2Ys4U »

emilfihlman wrote: post #32

I wonder, if Huawei is really spying for China and May (and other politicians) know about this and endorse that, shouldn't that be treason?

I'm not sure it qualifies under the Treason Act 1351:

> When a Man doth compass or imagine the Death of our Lord the King, or of our Lady his Queen or of their eldest Son and Heir; or if a Man do violate the King’s Companion, or the King’s eldest Daughter unmarried, or the Wife of the King’s eldest Son and Heir; or if a Man do levy War against our Lord the King in his Realm, or be adherent to the King’s Enemies in his Realm, giving to them Aid and Comfort in the Realm, or elsewhere, and thereof be probably attainted of open Deed by the People of their Condition, and if a Man slea the Chancellor,Treasurer, or the King’s Justices of the one Bench or the other, Justices in Eyre, or Justices of Assise, and all other Justices assigned to hear and determine, being in their Places, doing their Offices: And it is to be understood, that in the Cases above rehearsed, that ought to be judged Treason which extends to our Lord the King,and his Royal Majesty.

or the Treason Felony Act 1848:

> If any person whatsoever shall, within the United Kingdom or without, compass, imagine, invent, devise, or intend to deprive or depose our Most Gracious Lady the Queen, from the style, honour, or royal name of the imperial crown of the United Kingdom, or of any other of her Majesty’s dominions and countries, or to levy war against her Majesty, within any part of the United Kingdom, in order by force or constraint to compel her to change her measures or counsels, or in order to put any force or constraint upon or in order to intimidate or overawe both Houses or either House of Parliament, or to move or stir any foreigner or stranger with force to invade the United Kingdom or any other of her Majesty’s dominions or countries under the obeisance of her Majesty, and such compassings, imaginations, inventions, devices, or intentions, or any of them, shall express, utter, or declare, by publishing any printing or writing or by any overt act or deed, every person so offending shall be guilty of felony, and being convicted thereof shall be liable to be transported beyond the seas for the term or his or her natural life

Re: UK Defence Secretary Gavin Williamson Sacked over Huawei Leak

#46

Post by stiffnovigrad »

I love that people are rationalizing for a dictatorship-lead China with concentration camps in the west (xinjiang), religious oppression in the south (tibet), democratic oppression in the east (hong kong), and aggression in the east (artificial islands in south china sea, nearly crashing into US battleships, massive buildup in warships), that is seeking to invade Europe with spy technologies from its state firm is:

huawei doesn't have backdoors => the backdoors are (easily?) found by security audits. nothing to see here.

Re: UK Defence Secretary Gavin Williamson Sacked over Huawei Leak

#47

Post by dang »

stiffnovigrad wrote: post #46

I love that people are rationalizing for a dictatorship-lead China with concentration camps in the west (xinjiang), religious oppression in the south (tibet), democratic oppression in the east (hong kong), and aggression in the east (artificial islands in south china sea, nearly crashing into US battleships, massive buildup in warships), that is seeking to invade Europe with spy technologies from its state firm is: h…

Please don't take HN threads into nationalistic flamewar. It's not what this site is for. Please read the guidelines: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html.

We detached this comment from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19800040 and marked it off-topic.

Re: UK Defence Secretary Gavin Williamson Sacked over Huawei Leak

#48

Post by rwmj »

rb808 wrote: post #34

The concern I dont understand. If all traffic is encrypted, what is the risk of Huawei equipment handling traffic? Are people worried about spying or being able to switch interrupt service?

One worry is that in a war situation (cyber or shooting) the Chinese govt might be able to disable UK networks, for example by sending an obscure sequence of plaintext bytes which is understood by the routers.

Re: UK Defence Secretary Gavin Williamson Sacked over Huawei Leak

#49

Post by supergirl »

maybe conspiracy but I have a feeling this is part of US strategy to kick Huawei out of Europe, from the last few countries that didn't already ban them, UK and Italy. I can't imagine any way for UK to allow Huawei to build 5G once US said it is forbidden

Re: UK Defence Secretary Gavin Williamson Sacked over Huawei Leak

#50

Post by M2Ys4U »

switch007 wrote: post #23
mathieuh wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The UK has a Crown Prosecution Service which is a public service responsible for bringing charges against people. It’s not up to HMG.

According to wikipedia Attorney General is responsible for the CPS, who answers to the Ministry of Justice...which is a Government department.

An AG interfering with or blocking the CPS from bringing a prosecution would be a _big_ deal.
Post reply on HN