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

221–230 of 296 posts

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

#221

Post by alexilliamson »

smitop wrote: post #212
dustfinger wrote: post #100

Note: The following might be considered off-topic. On the otherhand, there might be something nefarious in the SMS network. I found something strange that affects SMS in Canada. You can send the lower case text "secure communication", but it will never be recieved by the recipient. I am not sure if this behavior is reproducible outside of Canada. It might be a software defect, or perhaps there is something capturing…

On a related note, if you start an SMS with "!", then the leading exclamation point will be stripped, and a delivery confirmation SMS will automatically be sent (not sure if it's from the mobile network or the receiving phone). This makes it possible to send zero-character SMSes.

Ha! I respond to texts with a single "?" a lot of times, so it's funny to know that they're getting a blank text

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

#222

Post by Mulpze15 »

AsyncAwait wrote: post #211
frequentnapper wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Even if China is more evil in its domestic affairs a western civilian has much more to fear from the US. Can you support this assertion?

Kim Dotcom, Julian Assange, Iraq, Iran etc.?

FIFA executives. Even though I found it awesome.

https://www.justice.gov/usao-edny/pr/nine-fifa-officials-and...

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

#223

Post by zmmmmm »

> required by law to build into their hardware ways for authorities to access the networks for lawful purposes

A bit of a tangent but ...

How I hate this term "lawful purposes". It's a non-sequitor / dark pattern deployed to confuse consumers into not understanding that they mean "spy on you". "Lawful" just means compliant with the law. In other words, they are are NOT saying "necessary to enforce the law" which is what they want you to think. They are only saying, hey, we won't break the law when we use this feature, aren't we great? Like breaking the law would ever be OK and as if this disclaimer somehow adds any sort of reassurance. The implied logic is "normally we would just break the law to access your data but in this special case we'll follow it.

/tangent

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

#224

Post by jessaustin »

slimed wrote: post #218
jessaustin wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think USA is "special" in any sense. I mentioned it only in response to the direct comparison you made between China and USA.

You're beating around the bush. If you agree that hegemonic states engaging in imperialism isn't "special", why are you so resistant to the idea that China will behave that way once it has the opportunity? If you ask those in Tibet and Xinjiang they would argue that they already are.

You have a lively imagination with respect to what I hypothetically might intend to say. In fact, I only intended to record the oddity of your objection to thread parent [0]. Apparently we agree that large militarized states are a plague upon humanity. China is too large to see justice in governance, as USA is. However, it will have to change a great deal in twenty years in order to menace the world in the way that USA does. China might be our equal in terms of news and social media totally committed to fear and mistrust of other nations, but they fall far short in terms of a vast rent-seeking self-dealing industrial armaments sector. I'm not even sure that such a sector can arise in the sort of polity they have...

[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22311947

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

#225

Post by sumedh »

donclark wrote: post #3
CameronNemo wrote: post #2

But can they prove it without revealing their own backdoors?

Or explaining why they allow those backdoors exist in the first place?

> why they allow those backdoors exist in the first place?

To catch bad guys and protect the children.

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

#226

Post by alfiedotwtf »

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…

Australia called, and wants its irony back.

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

#227

Post by kube-system »

owenmarshall wrote: post #196
kube-system wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're only thinking about it in the context of your own personal information, though. There will also be effects on your peers, neighbors, and society around you. There are nation-state actors currently using stolen data for blackmail, extortion, and propaganda campaigns, to influence the economic and political stability of other nations. Whether or not you are a direct target, you will be affected in some way. Whil…

Even if I believed you - which I absolutely don’t - it’s completely irrelevant. The intent of my government or of a foreign government has almost zero bearing on my life, for the life of any other average American – someone who does not have a secret clearance, is not committing major felonies, etc. What matters is material condition, and the ability of that government to project force and change a person’s material…

Sure, if you're not important, the data will not be used against you directly.

I'm sure you can concede that it will, however, be used against organizations, institutions, and people who are important.

Some of those will directly impact your life. This isn't a new idea, the power of both espionage and propaganda are well studied and long established to be effective.

For example:

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/russian-documents-reveal-...

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

#228

Post by owenmarshall »

Barracoon wrote: post #108
owenmarshall wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Funny you mention that!

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-dea-sod/exclusive-u-s-dir...

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

#229

Post by kube-system »

jessaustin wrote: post #217
kube-system wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Private information can absolutely be used to coerce/blackmail/extort/compromise/propagandize from abroad. It happens many thousands of times every day.

I wouldn't be surprised if the Chinese state did this and much worse. Governments are evil, film at eleven. However, if this intercontinental extortion were so common, I suspect we would have heard of a single case by now.

Extortion specifically? How about the Bezos extortion case?

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jan/21/revealed-the-s...

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

#230

Post by washadjeffmad »

agoodthrowaway wrote: post #109
sam_lowry_ wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 marg…

The US allows suspension of the law when and where it suits the people who are tasked with serving and protecting it.

Our problem is often of federation. We can't just tell every state to do a thing and expect it to happen - the whole powers enumerated thing in the Constitution made sure of that. We'd have to get every district involved, replace the DAs, vote out governor's, appoint all new officials to get people who won't just uphold the status quo. Change happens from the bottom up.

We also have our own domestic and state sponsored massacres. We have mass shootings and healthcare crises and blacksites and a troubled history with eugenics and ethnic cleansing and medical and military experiments on the unassuming public.

We have labor camps for prisoners in the form of contracted call centers and menial work that pays inmates cents per hour (and "sentenced to hard labor" wasn't that long ago), and a private prison system that colludes with courts and police to keep cells full by any means, no matter the harm to it's occupants. Cash for Kids was an American Enterprise.

You might say these are lesser or more distant wrongs in the face of fresher "foreign evils", but they are no less blemishes for where or when they are perpetuated. Not fighting against them here because there's worse happening there is pretty un-American to me. Setting the example you want upheld is a pretty simple way to live.

Post reply on HN