"The chance of a vulnerability with a Huawei piece of kit is much higher than other vendors," Is this British slang or a typo ?
Piece of kit is a british idiom, yes if that's what you mean.
Just LOLed away
Hobbling Huawei: Inside the U.S. war on China’s tech giant
51–60 of 108 posts
Re: Hobbling Huawei: Inside the U.S. war on China’s tech giant
#52Earlier quoted context omitted.
A modern wireless operator in its most simple terms is comprised of two very different networks: a radio access network of cell sites (aka RAN), and a data and packet processing network (aka Core). The two types of network are not heterogenous because their layer 1 characters are completely different (electromagnetic spectrum vs. wires), which has led to vendor specialization over the years as few companies are/were…
Couldn’t one argue that their strength in cost efficiency was largely built on the theft of IP? Without the IP barriers western countries abide by, they were able to take the best technology from multiple companies, implement it and sell it at a fraction of the price?
One could also argue that IP hampers innovation and that this is a self-inflicted wound.
Re: Hobbling Huawei: Inside the U.S. war on China’s tech giant
#53Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Citing unidentified intelligence sources" An option would be to confidentially share with UK or German intelligence agencies and verify, but they chose instead to publish a vague article. Seems doubtful this will result in anything concrete.
Reuters has proven to be a trustworthy news organization. It’s understandable that Intelligence services don’t want to go on the record for having an ongoing investigation into a Chinese telecom
Their reputation notwithstanding, it makes little difference if all they are doing is taking notes or passing along statements, rather than digging & getting answers. That’s the forgotten duty of true reportage & journalism.
They don’t get a free pass as a “trustworthy news organisation” just because what they report isn’t wrong, if they also aren’t reporting anything useful.
Re: Hobbling Huawei: Inside the U.S. war on China’s tech giant
#54Hypocrisy and arrogance at its finest - its ok for us to engage in illegal spying but not other countries. US leads the world in illegal activities and spying/stealing from foreign nations.
[flagged]
Re: Hobbling Huawei: Inside the U.S. war on China’s tech giant
#55Can somebody TLDR; why 5G is so much more dangerous (security wise) vs 4G? Plus I do like the two-facedness - nobody should spy unless it's us.
[deleted]
Re: Hobbling Huawei: Inside the U.S. war on China’s tech giant
#56Can somebody TLDR; why 5G is so much more dangerous (security wise) vs 4G? Plus I do like the two-facedness - nobody should spy unless it's us.
Haha! “Nobody can spy unless it’s us.” Touché! (Best uttered while spying on the world through a prism.)
Re: Hobbling Huawei: Inside the U.S. war on China’s tech giant
#57Can somebody TLDR; why 5G is so much more dangerous (security wise) vs 4G? Plus I do like the two-facedness - nobody should spy unless it's us.
It's not more dangerous, it's that the existing infrastructure is not (as) compromised as new infrastructure to be built with Huawei goods. It should be self evident that turning over domestic communications infrastructure to a global rival with the largest military on the planet, nuclear first strike capability, a history of violence, newly minted dictator, and global ambitions is a terrible idea. Also, the US gover…
[deleted]
Re: Hobbling Huawei: Inside the U.S. war on China’s tech giant
#58Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's not more dangerous, it's that the existing infrastructure is not (as) compromised as new infrastructure to be built with Huawei goods. It should be self evident that turning over domestic communications infrastructure to a global rival with the largest military on the planet, nuclear first strike capability, a history of violence, newly minted dictator, and global ambitions is a terrible idea. Also, the US gover…
> Also, the US government isn't stealing US IP and giving it to Chinese businesses. The PLA is, and their ties to Huawei run deep. No, it's stealing "allies" IP and giving it to US businesses [0] while subsidizing Intel to the tune of billions [1]. Still, nobody writes headlines along the lines of "State-sponsored Intel processors come with ME backdoor for government spying." instead we get, super trustworthy, articl…
Well said!
Re: Hobbling Huawei: Inside the U.S. war on China’s tech giant
#59Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's not more dangerous, it's that the existing infrastructure is not (as) compromised as new infrastructure to be built with Huawei goods. It should be self evident that turning over domestic communications infrastructure to a global rival with the largest military on the planet, nuclear first strike capability, a history of violence, newly minted dictator, and global ambitions is a terrible idea. Also, the US gover…
> the largest military on the planet, nuclear first strike capability, a history of violence, newly minted dictator, When you say it like that it's not quite clear whether you are referring to China or the US.
Precisely!
Re: Hobbling Huawei: Inside the U.S. war on China’s tech giant
#60Looks like the new cold war has found its money-pit. At least it's not nuclear this time. > agents of the Australian Signals Directorate, the nation’s top-secret eavesdropping agency Straight from the geniuses that outlawed mathematics. I'm sure not all of the "cyber security" people are complete idiots, but how many can resist an offer of unlimited funding, and all you have to do say things are terrible and very sca…
In practice, 5G is less about speed and more about massive IoT deployments, which could lead to massive surveillance. It's no surprise that those in the surveillance business are wary of foreign actors.