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

101–110 of 296 posts

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

#101

Post by trevyn »

gruez wrote: post #32
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 backdoo…

>The defining characteristic of a nation state is that it has a monopoly on violence within its borders.

Pedantry FYI, that’s just a state. The term “nation” has more to do with distinct communities and culture. And so a “nation state” is when those overlap.

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

#102

Post by Enginerrrd »

syshum wrote: post #81
gruez wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>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 backdoo…

as a US Resident, China has no authority to murder me or put me in a cage like the US Government does. So if I had to choose I would prefer china over the NSA, Of course neither is the best option but ..... if I lived in China the inverse would be true

This is dangerously naieve and short-sighted. Look at how readily China already uses our own corporations against us. ESPN showed a map of china with the nine-dash-line. Hollywood won't dare to offend the Chinese government. Our tech companies are willingly censoring themselves. Our corporations influence our politicians, and China is exerting influence on our corporations.

If they have access to an enormous volume of potential blackmail or datamining, you think they won't use that against us for political gains? They could blackmail a programmer to insert a subtle vulnerability into a piece of code by threatening to expose his extramarital affair, or threatening to tell his employer/family/friends what kind of porn he watches. Or they could easily datamine and target those with monetary issues to see who is vulnerable to a bribe. Or they could threaten to frame you for child porn using their backdoor access.

This is from a government that isn't afraid to 'disappear' political dissidents, send people to "re-education" camps, harvest organs from their own people. You think they're going to be friendlier to American citizens?

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

#103

Post by BrendanD »

syshum wrote: post #81
gruez wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>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 backdoo…

as a US Resident, China has no authority to murder me or put me in a cage like the US Government does. So if I had to choose I would prefer china over the NSA, Of course neither is the best option but ..... if I lived in China the inverse would be true

In western countries you can, in general, publicly mock your leaders on the front steps of your legislature. Try dancing in a Winnie-the-Pooh costume in front of the Great Hall of the People and see what happens...

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

#104

Post by mamon »

ancorevard wrote: post #47
gruez wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>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 backdoo…

"I'd prefer if neither China nor US have backdoor access." So would I, but having lived in both countries, one of the two governments is decidedly more evil than the other.

U.S. government just has much better PR, thanks to Hollywood, but it isn’t that much better than Chinese one.

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

#105

Post by panarky »

trevyn wrote: post #101
gruez wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>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 backdoo…

> The defining characteristic of a nation state is that it has a monopoly on violence within its borders. Pedantry FYI, that’s just a state. The term “nation” has more to do with distinct communities and culture. And so a “nation state” is when those overlap.

Pedantry squared FYI, but because the United States calls their provinces "states", it's helpful to disambiguate by adding the word "nation".

Furthermore, since a nation is a group of people bound together by shared culture, values, religion, language, etc., while a state is a piece of land with a defined border, then nations and states are not necessarily the same thing.

A "nation-state" is the intersection of the two, where cultural boundaries align with political and geographical boundaries, and not a redundant synonym of "state".

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

#106

Post by gdy »

T-A wrote: post #97
gdy wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How so? For one thing, Swedes are less and less excited by the stream of Middle Eastern migrants caused by American adventures there.

https://thediplomat.com/2019/12/china-tries-to-put-sweden-on...

Fascinating

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

#108

Post by Barracoon »

owenmarshall wrote: post #34
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.

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 m…

Are you American? If so, that is a false statement. DODI 5240.1-R says "[DoD components] Will not participate in or request any person or entity to undertake any activities that are forbidden by E.O. 12333 or this issuance." [1] The NSA, which has the SIGINT authority from EO 12333 [2], is a component of the DoD. A non-DoD entity, such as FBI, Treasury, etc, would (a) not have a foreign intelligence mission and would therefore go through normal court procedures to obtain warrants to collect your communications or (b) would need to coordinate through the executive agency (NSA in the case of SIGINT) to request support for foreign communications, which brings us back to the referenced DOD instruction requiring FISA approval.

1: https://dodsioo.defense.gov/Portals/46/DoDM%20%205240.01.pdf...

2: https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/codification/execu...

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

#109

Post by agoodthrowaway »

sam_lowry_ wrote: post #89
ancorevard wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"I'd prefer if neither China nor US have backdoor access." So would I, but having lived in both countries, one of the two governments is decidedly more evil than the other.

Judging by the number of wars it started in the last century... it's definitely the American.

I don’t really understand comments like this. US has lots of problems but we do have the semblance of rule of law. We do have the notion of transparency and you do not get sent to a labor camp if you have political views antithetical to the state.

The Chinese can and do simply disappear people without the semblance of due process. Their history also is one of ethnic cleansing as the Han people have pushed out or marginalized most other ethnic groups.

The history of: The Great Leap Forward, The Cultural Revolution, and Tianammen Square is pretty awful.

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

#110

Post by SAI_Peregrinus »

archi42 wrote: post #79
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. Actually, backdoors could be implemented to require a cryptographically signed warrant. Think e.g. lawful intercept on mobile network routers, US (or any other nation's) law could just add this as a requirement. You could even develop a complicated scheme to apply this to E2E crypto. But of course skewing the RNG to be predictable, or implanting some…

Then it just needs a valid signing key. Every government (local, state, national) in the world has the right to a valid signing key.
Post reply on HN