Live data from Hacker News

The Clean Network – United States Department of State

state.gov

51–60 of 412 posts

Re: The Clean Network – United States Department of State

#51
post #5

It looks like we are breaking the internet up along the lines of political boundaries. The US will have one internet, the EU another, China yet another... Hopefully the pendulum will swing back in the other direction soon...

Hopefully, none of this will be implemented and we can all forget Mike Pompeo exists in 6 months.

how will Chinese internet "swing back" if Pompeo stops existing. Chinese invented their great firewall for trump, that your logic?

Re: The Clean Network – United States Department of State

#52
Are there any cybersecurity professionals on here who want to comment about the pros and cons of the network? I don't have the necessary expertise to ascertain the merits of it (actual threat vs. mitigated threat) but I don't like the "clean" verbiage. Nor do I like China's own longstanding protectionism and Great Firewall.

Re: The Clean Network – United States Department of State

#53
post #16

Has anyone published the evidence of Huawei being an "arm of the PRC surveillance state"? I've seen a lot of claims and a lot of out-of-court-settled lawsuits, but nothing really showing that they're using their devices or software infrastructure for surveillance.

There’s such a long list of this stuff from various companies. It’s not hard to research this at all. In terms of an anecdotal evidence... My father used to work for molex, one of his biggest complaints were fixing the molds after they were sent to Chinese factories. They would try to deconstruct them and couldn’t put them back together (this was the 90’s, early 2000’s). So they would be shipped back to the US operat…

This has been known for decades, companies knew, and the way they dealt with this was to only give China obsolete tech or tech about to get out of date, so they didn't care. That's no longer the case as China is catching up fast and really threatening the competitive advantage of truly innovative companies all around the world.

Re: The Clean Network – United States Department of State

#54

The intention of cutting out bad actors seems to be in the right place, but using "Clean" for the terminology is really unnecessarily inflammatory.

There's no good intention here. Its clearly a political document. It even calls out hiding covid research from China as if that helps humanity in any way.

Re: The Clean Network – United States Department of State

#55
post #31

Isn't it ridiculously easy to set up attacks from within a "clean" network? It probably does increase costs marginally (you have to fly people to "clean" countries, set up ISP access with third parties, etc) but are there any public estimates how much it does that vs the increased costs to run this network? I would think it's marginal. Seeing the partner list this seems like more of a ploy by telecoms to attack tech…

There's a bunch of different measures discussed, but they all seem to remove some attack surface that we have seen exploited. Securing the routers and network cables removes the means for man in the middle attacks (or at least makes them preventable with router security). Not connecting to telecos does the same (because of bgp highjacking and the like). Removing chinese apps and not storing data on Chinese servers ma…

> This doesn't fix all security problems, but it removes some of China's current advantages in cyberwarfare.

How? It makes attacks slightly more expensive (because you need to use infrastructure in a "clean" country), but it doesn't stop anyone that's dedicated and has money to spend.

Want your spy-app on the app store? Don't register your company in China, just do it in the US. Voila, you're "clean."

Re: The Clean Network – United States Department of State

#56
post #16

Has anyone published the evidence of Huawei being an "arm of the PRC surveillance state"? I've seen a lot of claims and a lot of out-of-court-settled lawsuits, but nothing really showing that they're using their devices or software infrastructure for surveillance.

There’s such a long list of this stuff from various companies. It’s not hard to research this at all. In terms of an anecdotal evidence... My father used to work for molex, one of his biggest complaints were fixing the molds after they were sent to Chinese factories. They would try to deconstruct them and couldn’t put them back together (this was the 90’s, early 2000’s). So they would be shipped back to the US operat…

This seems irrelevant.

Re: The Clean Network – United States Department of State

#57
post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Many municipalities have no-justification-needed absentee voting (vote-by-mail by any other name) which can be dropped off often weeks before in-person voting occurs. Likewise many places have early in-person voting. 1. Check your voter registration. 2. Register to vote if you need to and it's still open for registration in your state. 3. VOTE as soon as you can. If you're voting absentee then drop off your ballot ea…

The key this year is to _personally drop off your ballot_ at an official drop point rather than mailing it in. USPS can and will deprioritize mail in ballots for the fall elections.

This is an unsupported assertion. We have no specific data to suggest that this would happen.

Re: The Clean Network – United States Department of State

#58

It looks like we are breaking the internet up along the lines of political boundaries. The US will have one internet, the EU another, China yet another... Hopefully the pendulum will swing back in the other direction soon...

China already has their own internet.

The whole point is for the US to be a leader, not a follower. If China wants their own internet, let them suffer.

Re: The Clean Network – United States Department of State

#60

The intention of cutting out bad actors seems to be in the right place, but using "Clean" for the terminology is really unnecessarily inflammatory.

I'd add that the collection of telecom companies at the bottom of the page is grossly misleading. It makes them appear as signatories or as if they're following America's lead.

Probably true. At the same time, they may have no choice. This sort of thing is not elective.

There are a lot of people around me taking that as a list of companies not to do business with. As if this will save them from the global surveillance dragnet. But here's the thing, you either submit to american surveillance and tracking, or you submit to some other nation's surveillance and tracking. You will not be able to choose companies that don't partner with their national governments for surveillance and tracking. So people taking this as a list of cooperating companies, and asking how to avoid this system, are being a little naive. Thinking that somehow, not being on our network will save them from surveillance. It won't. Best case, it saves them from surveillance by us.

It is a sad future. I'll concede you that.

Post reply on HN