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

US says it can prove Huawei has backdoor access to mobile-phone networks

arstechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 296 posts

Re: US says it can prove Huawei has backdoor access to mobile-phone networks

#31

Post by kube-system »

wlkr wrote: post #25
kube-system wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The answer is you choose the one which is the closer ally. Which, given the lack of US 5G manufacturers, is exactly the choice the US has already made.

I don't have an answer for this question but just to play devil's advocate, is this universally true or just sometimes true for governments and certain corporations? For example, as a citizen, is my data really better off with an ally, who can use it to exploit me instantly and personally? E.g. searches for medical information increasing insurance costs.

I don't think a nation-state threat is interested in your insurance prices, but regardless, what would an ally exploit that a non-ally wouldn't?

Re: US says it can prove Huawei has backdoor access to mobile-phone networks

#32

Post by gruez »

AdmiralAsshat wrote: post #23

> Telecom-equipment makers who sell products to carriers "are required by law to build into their hardware ways for authorities to access the networks for lawful purposes," but they "are also required to build equipment in such a way that the manufacturer can't get access without the consent of the network operator," the Journal wrote. I love this quote. The US is essentially complaining that Huawei has access to the…

>The US is essentially complaining that Huawei has access to the backdoor channels that only the US government was supposed to have.

How is surprising? The defining characteristic of a nation state is that it has a monopoly on violence within its borders. Having a monopoly on intercepting telecom traffic is a logical consequence of that. For other countries though, yeah I'd prefer if neither China nor US have backdoor access.

Re: US says it can prove Huawei has backdoor access to mobile-phone networks

#33

Post by count »

gruez wrote: post #26
aliceryhl wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean, now you're just talking about intent, and thus have to trust that the intent is as claimed. Crypto doesn't discriminate on whether you have a warrant or not.

>Crypto doesn't discriminate on whether you have a warrant or not. Okay, let's say the telecom equipment doesn't have a backdoor for lawful intercept. What happens if the telecom is served with a warrant? Are you expecting that the telecoms will refuse to cooperate with the authorities?

No, if there's no lawful intercept, they can cooperate fully, but it won't matter because there's nothing to get.

Re: US says it can prove Huawei has backdoor access to mobile-phone networks

#34

Post by owenmarshall »

kube-system wrote: post #15
mech1234 wrote: post #10

A question to Europeans reading this- If you had to assume that U.S. 5G equipment manufacturers would provide backdoors to U.S. officials, and Chinese 5G equipment manufacturers would provide backdoors to Chinese officials, and Europeans had to use one or the other, which would you choose?

The answer is you choose the one which is the closer ally. Which, given the lack of US 5G manufacturers, is exactly the choice the US has already made.

The closer ally is likely to have SIGINT sharing agreements with your government.

FVEY exists so that the UK or Canada can legally spy on my communications and turn that data over to my government - which couldn’t otherwise get it without warrants and other pesky civil rights protections.

I think I’d rather take my chances with an adversarial government. I know they’d be spying but their ability to act on it is far more limited.

Re: US says it can prove Huawei has backdoor access to mobile-phone networks

#35

Post by wyldfire »

kube-system wrote: post #15
mech1234 wrote: post #10

A question to Europeans reading this- If you had to assume that U.S. 5G equipment manufacturers would provide backdoors to U.S. officials, and Chinese 5G equipment manufacturers would provide backdoors to Chinese officials, and Europeans had to use one or the other, which would you choose?

The answer is you choose the one which is the closer ally. Which, given the lack of US 5G manufacturers, is exactly the choice the US has already made.

At one time, Motorola, Ericsson and Nokia all made GSM/UMTS cellular infrastructure. Are any of them still? Other than Huawei, what other manufacturers are there?

Re: US says it can prove Huawei has backdoor access to mobile-phone networks

#36

Post by ASalazarMX »

wlkr wrote: post #25
kube-system wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The answer is you choose the one which is the closer ally. Which, given the lack of US 5G manufacturers, is exactly the choice the US has already made.

I don't have an answer for this question but just to play devil's advocate, is this universally true or just sometimes true for governments and certain corporations? For example, as a citizen, is my data really better off with an ally, who can use it to exploit me instantly and personally? E.g. searches for medical information increasing insurance costs.

As regular nobodies, our data is probably distributed in the hands of both allies and non-allies. As long as there's such a strong push, both commercially and institutionally, for tracking and data mining, our only recourse is going offline.

No one wants our specific dental bills, mortgages or tax returns, but governments and corporations love mass statistics.

Re: US says it can prove Huawei has backdoor access to mobile-phone networks

#37

Post by aliceryhl »

gruez wrote: post #26
aliceryhl wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean, now you're just talking about intent, and thus have to trust that the intent is as claimed. Crypto doesn't discriminate on whether you have a warrant or not.

>Crypto doesn't discriminate on whether you have a warrant or not. Okay, let's say the telecom equipment doesn't have a backdoor for lawful intercept. What happens if the telecom is served with a warrant? Are you expecting that the telecoms will refuse to cooperate with the authorities?

I'm not really making a statement about that. All I'm saying is that if you have a backdoor that can do the former, it must necessarily also be a backdoor that can do the latter.

Re: US says it can prove Huawei has backdoor access to mobile-phone networks

#38

Post by crmrc114 »

NSA: Yeah, their spyware install totally broke our spyware install!!1!

Joking, but I honestly wonder- If the software is compiled in California... and the hardware is made in China. You could have two implants in the same gear. Now that's Thinking Green! Twice the government implants in one product.

Re: US says it can prove Huawei has backdoor access to mobile-phone networks

#39

Post by ApolloFortyNine »

ASalazarMX wrote: post #28
ChrisSD wrote: post #7

Reminder: US intelligence lies. They are not unique in this but it's worth repeating. They might be right about Huawei or they might not, either way saying "we totally have proof!" without providing proof is effectively meaningless.

If they had proof they would have showed it already. Nothing would help their rhetoric more than cold hard facts. If they haven't done it, it means: a) there isn't any backdoor, or b) exposing their backdoors would expose their own backdoors. I'm betting on b.

c. They have sources saying as such but have not discovered the backdoor itself.

d. Admitting how they found the backdoor would reveal other issues (a source in the pipeline, or their own backdoor in something Huawei made use of).

And probably e-z too.

Re: US says it can prove Huawei has backdoor access to mobile-phone networks

#40

Post by pc86 »

adventured wrote: post #19
mech1234 wrote: post #10

A question to Europeans reading this- If you had to assume that U.S. 5G equipment manufacturers would provide backdoors to U.S. officials, and Chinese 5G equipment manufacturers would provide backdoors to Chinese officials, and Europeans had to use one or the other, which would you choose?

How about a more realistic scenario instead. As an American, I choose European / EU 5G equipment in all scenarios over Chinese 5G equipment. I don't care what the cost is. Europe, broadly (other than Russia primarily), is aligned with the US in all the ways that matter and will continue to be. China is not in almost any regard. The sole things the US and China have in common is trade and that the next century will be…

For most Americans "I don't care what the cost is" immediately makes it an unrealistic scenario. And if history is any indication, for the vast majority of Americans choosing a privacy-focused solution is usually an accident. Price is the determining factor almost always.
Post reply on HN