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

U.S. bans equipment from Huawei and ZTE, citing national security concerns

barrons.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 257 posts

Re: U.S. bans equipment from Huawei and ZTE, citing national security concerns

#221

Post by skorpeon87 »

zokar wrote: post #99
skorpeon87 wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A lot of Americans are American because their European ancestors got sick of European affairs and wanted a clean break from it. Nonetheless, a lot of the anti-interventionist rhetoric seen on the net today feels very astroturfed. Anybody accusing NATO of warmongering is safe to write off as a Russian-aligned troll, considering Russia is the one who actually invaded a foreign country. NATO's "war mongering" amounts to…

In other words, one is not allowed to speculate about a different outcome if NATO hadn't pushed forward so aggressively. The realism school of Mearsheimer is forbidden. Freedom of thought is one of the first casualties of the war.

No post body was provided.

Re: U.S. bans equipment from Huawei and ZTE, citing national security concerns

#222

Post by dilyevsky »

MichaelZuo wrote: post #216
dilyevsky wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I participated in technical due diligence for a purchase order of huawei tech back in 2011 (was lte back then). Their tech was good but there is no way in hell there isn’t some kind of trick how cheap they were compared to the europeans (there were no americans at that point since motorola was kaput). Like it was basically free. There needs to be some kind of regulation when techniques like that are being played whet…

Isn't it obvious why it's so much cheaper? Their pricing for market share and cutting costs wherever they can in terms of labour conditions. I don't see how spending many billions on R&D to develop the most intricately hidden backdoors in human history (that no one has been able to offer proof for) and eating that cost to deploy them when it will all become worthless the moment the first one is detected, makes any se…

I’ve been to their headquarters in Shenzhen it certainly didn’t look like much was being saved on r&d… I’d say much likely explanation is either aggressive government subsidy to price out competition with maybe some mix of wielding political blackmail later on (a la what US is doing with its chip restrictions rn)

Re: U.S. bans equipment from Huawei and ZTE, citing national security concerns

#223

Post by huijzer »

rightbyte wrote: post #167
blurbleblurble wrote: post #144

Why are the stakes so high? Well, research "integrated communications and sensing" to find out. IEEE is pushing this paradigm shift. The radio hardware isn't just being used for communications between active devices anymore. It'll be useable for passive and biometric sensing applications, including but not limited to passive localization and identification of people without phones. Next generation wireless standards…

> It'll be useable for passive and biometric sensing applications, including but not limited to passive localization and identification of people without phones. What? How? Why are all these tinfoil hat conspiracies turning into reality ... like your TV or alarm clock spying on you.

There are already production systems like the WiZ lights which use wifi for person detection (https://www.signify.com/global/our-company/news/press-releas...).

Re: U.S. bans equipment from Huawei and ZTE, citing national security concerns

#224

Post by MichaelZuo »

dilyevsky wrote: post #222
MichaelZuo wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't it obvious why it's so much cheaper? Their pricing for market share and cutting costs wherever they can in terms of labour conditions. I don't see how spending many billions on R&D to develop the most intricately hidden backdoors in human history (that no one has been able to offer proof for) and eating that cost to deploy them when it will all become worthless the moment the first one is detected, makes any se…

I’ve been to their headquarters in Shenzhen it certainly didn’t look like much was being saved on r&d… I’d say much likely explanation is either aggressive government subsidy to price out competition with maybe some mix of wielding political blackmail later on (a la what US is doing with its chip restrictions rn)

I don't see what they could possibly gain, all it would take is for one genuine case of a backdoor to be confirmed and then all that investment would be nearly worthless.

Re: U.S. bans equipment from Huawei and ZTE, citing national security concerns

#225

Post by qeternity »

Kukumber wrote: post #14
qeternity wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "we can do it, you can't" Yes, exactly. The US knows full well how powerful that sort of control and access is, and other countries are (apparently) ok with that. The implicit social contract in the West is that the US maintains global peace anyway. Obviously the US (and other countries) do not have similar levels of trust and cooperation with China, hence these sort of responses.

> Obviously the US (and other countries) do not have similar levels of trust and cooperation with China, hence these sort of responses. So now the US gets to decide who is worthy of becoming your friend? What's next?

This is an article about the US deciding who the US is friends with. So I’m not really sure where your apparent outrage is originating.

Re: U.S. bans equipment from Huawei and ZTE, citing national security concerns

#226

Post by QuantumSeed »

bogomipz wrote: post #166
blurbleblurble wrote: post #144

Why are the stakes so high? Well, research "integrated communications and sensing" to find out. IEEE is pushing this paradigm shift. The radio hardware isn't just being used for communications between active devices anymore. It'll be useable for passive and biometric sensing applications, including but not limited to passive localization and identification of people without phones. Next generation wireless standards…

Could you elaborate on what exactly "integrated communications and sensing" is and why it's so important here. I tried to do some quick reading but I failed to find any good high level overview of what it is. Most of what I was able to find seemed like academic research papers around beam-forming.

This paradigm shift appears to be driven in part by the increasing congestion of the sub-6 GHz frequency bands. Integrated communications and sensing devices should be able to share spectrum.

Re: U.S. bans equipment from Huawei and ZTE, citing national security concerns

#227

Post by rocqua »

rightbyte wrote: post #167
blurbleblurble wrote: post #144

Why are the stakes so high? Well, research "integrated communications and sensing" to find out. IEEE is pushing this paradigm shift. The radio hardware isn't just being used for communications between active devices anymore. It'll be useable for passive and biometric sensing applications, including but not limited to passive localization and identification of people without phones. Next generation wireless standards…

> It'll be useable for passive and biometric sensing applications, including but not limited to passive localization and identification of people without phones. What? How? Why are all these tinfoil hat conspiracies turning into reality ... like your TV or alarm clock spying on you.

In short, your body affects the signal. And through MIMO there are multiple simultaneous signals being sent between different antennas on wifi-devices. With just one signal, wifi sensing doesn't tell you much. You sort-off have to look at signal loss and guess if it is lower because the signal is passing through you.

With multiple signals, not only do you get multiple data points on signal loss, you also get a phase difference between the signals (i.e. a signal that passed through you is delayed a bit compared to signal that didn't pass through you). By integrating that knowledge from various signals (or rather 'channels') and probably doing a whole lot of other smart stuff, potentially some training / fingerprinting (i.e. if they are at position X, then the signals do Y, for many different positions), you can get location data.

Re: U.S. bans equipment from Huawei and ZTE, citing national security concerns

#228

Post by amelius »

huntertwo wrote: post #51
rgbrenner wrote: post #28

Reminder of how this started... when Huawei and ZTE decided that because they weren't American companies, they didnt need to answer questions from Congress, and even outright lied about the structure of their companies to conceal CPC/government involvement: https://stacks.stanford.edu/file/druid:rm226yb7473/Huawei-ZT...

Doesn’t everybody have the right to not answer questions? Americans don’t have to do this either

Zuck had to answer questions.

Re: U.S. bans equipment from Huawei and ZTE, citing national security concerns

#229

Post by ABeeSea »

throwaway4good wrote: post #201
ABeeSea wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That was only half the premise, the other half was > unfettered access to the teleco networks of the countries that they themselves say are their greatest enemies? Regardless of how they got their tech, that premise is the reason for blocking them.

As for the "unfettered access" stuff; a telco, or at least the one I worked at, doesn't really work like that. We buy products and engineering services from our suppliers but we run our own network, and if we did outsource operations, those engineers would sit on premise and the whole thing would be under our control.

Your argument doesn’t make any sense from a risk containment standpoint.

Re: U.S. bans equipment from Huawei and ZTE, citing national security concerns

#230

Post by scottcodie »

zenapollo wrote: post #190
throwaway4good wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is just appalling protectionism; is it really something that we tech people should cheer on?

This is silly pearl clutching, do you have any refutation of the arguments? I believe there is very credible reporting on ccp-sponsored hacking of industrial, military, government dbs, etc. Even if we don’t have hard evidence of this type of hardware compromise, it seems to be wise to believe there are serious risks, and to take action until such risks are investigated. Despite all the expertise on HN, i would guess…

Trade restrictions are not good for our economy. Huawei and ZTE's main competitors are mostly US based companies so they will see protection from competition with this policy. While you may see the national security threat as credible, many others do not.
Post reply on HN