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

Pentagon official: FCC decision on 5G threatens GPS, national security

thehill.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 224 posts

Re: Pentagon official: FCC decision on 5G threatens GPS, national security

#61

Post by 3pt14159 »

pbhjpbhj wrote: post #49
MR4D wrote: post #12

An interesting threat vector arises here for Huawei... Ignore all the stuff about backdoors and such for a minute. I wonder if the administration fears that Huawai could simply attenuate their cell tower signals at a high wattage to disrupt all sorts of things. I never thought of that before - "5G as a weapon". Definitely a weird world. I need to start reading Judge Dredd again to start getting caught up on the futur…

IIRC: In the late-2019 BBC Click interview with GCHQ on the subject of Huawei, 5G, and security the spokesperson said information security wasn't an issue as we have end-to-end to handle that, the greatest risk was remote shutdown of the network. I assumed they're alluding to "in a time of war", falling back to non-5G wouldn't seem to be a big problem ... but then lots of our comms send to run on Huawei hardware alre…

Colour me skeptical. I've seen enough to know that MITM gives you enough information or threat vectors.

That said, I agree with you about Huawei and non-5G. We shouldn't be talking about banning them on 5G, we should be talking about banning them (and anyone outside of the western alliance, really) from selling gear in our countries period. National security takes precedent. China doesn't even let reporters from the NYT in their country ffs.

But whatever. Politicians are reactive and don't understand cybersecurity and the few that do don't have the sway or incentives to really push for this. Though I will say one thing, in a cyberwar we'd brick China just as badly as they would brick us, so at least we have MAD working for us.

Re: Pentagon official: FCC decision on 5G threatens GPS, national security

#62

Post by brenden2 »

rumanator wrote: post #60
brenden2 wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You could think about it that way, but you should also know that Himmler created the SS which swore allegiance to Hitler. The SS also existed before Hitler became the chancellor of Germany. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waffen-SS#Origins_(1929%E2%80%...

> you should also know that Himmler created the SS I don't understand what point you are trying to make. The SS was an organization within the nazi party, not Germany's armed forces. Your example refutes your previous assertion that "having a military take over like Nazi Germany" because your quote clearly points out that nothing of the sort happened ever.

I don't think the distinction matters. The SS was an armed military force, with 900,000 soldiers.

Re: Pentagon official: FCC decision on 5G threatens GPS, national security

#65

Post by kube-system »

brenden2 wrote: post #55
kube-system wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Deterrence is hard to measure, but US military superiority correlates with a period of relatively low global conflict.

Maybe so, but the evidence is weak at best. Some wars (like Iraq, Korea, Vietnam) were a sham. I'd feel more comfortable knowing nobody had nuclear weapons.

You'd feel more comfortable, but is that the same as actually being safer?

Re: Pentagon official: FCC decision on 5G threatens GPS, national security

#66

Post by novaRom »

_bxg1 wrote: post #59
sl1ck731 wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean, I'm sure a lot of people want it if it improves their mobile experience. It isn't really something that the average person is going to celebrate on Facebook.

Except: - It's shorter-range, so coverage will be spotty for a long time - It doesn't go through buildings , so even the urban centers most likely to get the first towers will have spotty coverage - It will require buying a new device, which OEMs love but the average person won't - That device will take a hit in battery life And all of this for ludicrously-fast new speeds on mobile devices that we'll use for... what…

> It will require buying a new device

all new modern phone models have 5g, what's the problem? Huawei, Xiaomi

I have great experience with 5g, it's way more faster than LTE

Re: Pentagon official: FCC decision on 5G threatens GPS, national security

#67

Post by _bxg1 »

_ea1k wrote: post #64
_bxg1 wrote: post #45

I have yet to hear anyone who's not a telecom CEO or a politician say they actually want 5G

What benefit do you see to the telecom that doesn't stem from customer demand?

I think they're hoping it will inspire (strongarm?) people into buying new phones, which will juice a slowing smartphone market for both OEMs and the carriers that take a cut of sales.

Re: Pentagon official: FCC decision on 5G threatens GPS, national security

#68

Post by apcragg »

_bxg1 wrote: post #59
sl1ck731 wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean, I'm sure a lot of people want it if it improves their mobile experience. It isn't really something that the average person is going to celebrate on Facebook.

Except: - It's shorter-range, so coverage will be spotty for a long time - It doesn't go through buildings , so even the urban centers most likely to get the first towers will have spotty coverage - It will require buying a new device, which OEMs love but the average person won't - That device will take a hit in battery life And all of this for ludicrously-fast new speeds on mobile devices that we'll use for... what…

Your first 3 points are all based on a complete misconception of what 5G NR is. You are talking about mmWave which is an accessory component of the 5G NR standard. Low and mid-band 5G use ~ the same bands (or n71 which is the old TV band in the case of T-mobile) as LTE. Some Network Providers have been doing mmWave first because it is easier to deploy but their networks will also be mid and low band when they finish build-out.

Maybe don't make blanket statements about a standard you clearly aren't familiar with.

Re: Pentagon official: FCC decision on 5G threatens GPS, national security

#69

Post by brenden2 »

kube-system wrote: post #65
brenden2 wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe so, but the evidence is weak at best. Some wars (like Iraq, Korea, Vietnam) were a sham. I'd feel more comfortable knowing nobody had nuclear weapons.

You'd feel more comfortable, but is that the same as actually being safer?

You could ask someone who was living in Japan in 1945.

Re: Pentagon official: FCC decision on 5G threatens GPS, national security

#70

Post by _bxg1 »

novaRom wrote: post #66
_bxg1 wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except: - It's shorter-range, so coverage will be spotty for a long time - It doesn't go through buildings , so even the urban centers most likely to get the first towers will have spotty coverage - It will require buying a new device, which OEMs love but the average person won't - That device will take a hit in battery life And all of this for ludicrously-fast new speeds on mobile devices that we'll use for... what…

> It will require buying a new device all new modern phone models have 5g, what's the problem? Huawei, Xiaomi I have great experience with 5g, it's way more faster than LTE

Only Samsung's very latest flagship release has a 5G antenna, and Apple hasn't even announced a 5G phone yet. Even if it had, the average person keeps their phone for several years, so almost nobody has a 5G device in their pocket right now.
Post reply on HN