Live data from Hacker News

FCC Bans Authorizations for Devices That Pose National Security Threat

fcc.gov

101–110 of 242 posts

Re: FCC Bans Authorizations for Devices That Pose National Security Threat

#101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does it though? Are you a SWE?

Given the number of times that a hard-coded password has been distributed on Cisco gear, yeah, I think it points to a cultural failure.

That happened 15 years ago dude, on Linksys gear. The first CVE on that list is probably older than a few of the commenters on this thread.

Re: FCC Bans Authorizations for Devices That Pose National Security Threat

#102
post #79
post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would the FCC ok the entire wallet or just the Bluetooth chip it's using?

Entire wallet, even if you change the plastic cover you need to go through FCC again.

That's incorrect. You can buy pre-approved modem setups, eg the esp32.

Re: FCC Bans Authorizations for Devices That Pose National Security Threat

#103
post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> We need open and verifiable firmware, at the very least, to be able to trust anything. How? Even ignoring ASICs, I just don't see how it's possible. Even if you had no binary blobs anywhere (we are already in the wonderland), with process for turning source to binary, you need to trust compiler, cpu, flashing hardware and software and the whole lot of other things. And that's all ignoring the fact that hiding bad s…

> I don't think we have even a theoretical plan for fixing computer security. I think we do, but the implications of it are terrifying, overwhelming and just make people shrug and say "That'll never happen". How I see it there are two sides. Those who want a functioning technological society with all the benefits we believe in as hackers - transport, medicine, communications, planning... For that we'll have no choice…

I would be much more worried about the future if not for bitcoin.

It’s the “distributed remainder” you are taking about, and what we are betting one is for the governments of the world to print so much money that everyone loses faith in them. That will act as a check on their power and they’ll need to start earning trust and support rather than taking it for granted.

Re: FCC Bans Authorizations for Devices That Pose National Security Threat

#104

While I have no doubt than basically anything from China is probably backdoored (and to the fault of western countries outsourcing manufacturing for cheap labour), what exactly has Huawei done? How do we know that the Cisco equipment also isn't backdoored and if I send a few malformed TCP packets it opens up its control plane on the receiving port? Compared to the last few decades, it seems like a strong hand banning…

There’s a long history of telecom equipment being backdoored by the manufacturer or their national gov. You may recall everyone losing their shit on HN about the AT&T room in NYC where the fiber trunks were mirrored to a secret NSA room.

Regardless of the whataboutism argument in Internet forums, it’s not in the national interest to give a hostile foreign power the ability to do something like that.

Re: FCC Bans Authorizations for Devices That Pose National Security Threat

#105

While I have no doubt than basically anything from China is probably backdoored (and to the fault of western countries outsourcing manufacturing for cheap labour), what exactly has Huawei done? How do we know that the Cisco equipment also isn't backdoored and if I send a few malformed TCP packets it opens up its control plane on the receiving port? Compared to the last few decades, it seems like a strong hand banning…

Huawei singlehandedly destroyed Canada's Nortel Networks through espionage and sabotage. The CIA did an analysis and discovered that Huawei was dumping wireless equipment to small wireless providers in areas around US military basis at a loss. At the very least, the ability to disrupt communication of those military bases were easily achievable.

Do you have a source for this? A fascinating claim, I'd love to know more

Re: FCC Bans Authorizations for Devices That Pose National Security Threat

#106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your argument sounds like deflection and elementary school logic. If Cisco has problems, that should also be dealt with. But because Cisco has problems doesn't mean that Huawei shouldn't be dealt with. In Western cultures, we have the notion of "Two wrongs don't make a right." This is a classic Chinese government talking point. "Don't look at what we're doing. Look over there, instead!" For decades it's been using th…

> Your argument sounds like deflection and elementary school logic. A pessimistic and frankly rude reading of my comment. Cisco also has it's equipment manufactured outside of the united states, making them susceptible to similar backdooring without x-raying every board produced. > But because Cisco has problems doesn't mean that Huawei shouldn't be dealt with. Cisco is not getting banned by the FCC - so the comparis…

Cisco is also a US company while Huawei at the minimum colludes (and probably is controlled by) with an adversarial nation.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Huawei#Collusion_with_Chinese_...

Re: FCC Bans Authorizations for Devices That Pose National Security Threat

#107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Huawei singlehandedly destroyed Canada's Nortel Networks through espionage and sabotage. The CIA did an analysis and discovered that Huawei was dumping wireless equipment to small wireless providers in areas around US military basis at a loss. At the very least, the ability to disrupt communication of those military bases were easily achievable.

Nortel networks haven't been around for nearly a decade. I've seen lots of news about 5G/Huaewi and 'core networks' only in the recent years in western countries (UK/US mainly). However, I haven't seen anything published that really reflects new risks/major backdoored products. I wouldn't 100% trust anything built in China, but there must be some reason people are only taking action now? Unless it's just "better late…

Assuming you are male, if someone walked up to you, kicked you in the nuts, took your work and used it to get you run out of business, would you be ok hiring that person a decade later to perform a critical function?

Re: FCC Bans Authorizations for Devices That Pose National Security Threat

#108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Huawei singlehandedly destroyed Canada's Nortel Networks through espionage and sabotage. The CIA did an analysis and discovered that Huawei was dumping wireless equipment to small wireless providers in areas around US military basis at a loss. At the very least, the ability to disrupt communication of those military bases were easily achievable.

Nortel networks haven't been around for nearly a decade. I've seen lots of news about 5G/Huaewi and 'core networks' only in the recent years in western countries (UK/US mainly). However, I haven't seen anything published that really reflects new risks/major backdoored products. I wouldn't 100% trust anything built in China, but there must be some reason people are only taking action now? Unless it's just "better late…

People are taking action now because the West spent decades underestimating China, probably for xenophobic reasons. I'm willing to bet a lot of people assumed they weren't as capable as westerners and now it can't be denied.

IMO, it was a classic mistake of underestimating a potential rival while stroking our own egos about how smart, capable and powerful we are in comparison. Reality finally trumped hubris.

Re: FCC Bans Authorizations for Devices That Pose National Security Threat

#109

While I have no doubt than basically anything from China is probably backdoored (and to the fault of western countries outsourcing manufacturing for cheap labour), what exactly has Huawei done? How do we know that the Cisco equipment also isn't backdoored and if I send a few malformed TCP packets it opens up its control plane on the receiving port? Compared to the last few decades, it seems like a strong hand banning…

Your argument sounds like deflection and elementary school logic. If Cisco has problems, that should also be dealt with. But because Cisco has problems doesn't mean that Huawei shouldn't be dealt with. In Western cultures, we have the notion of "Two wrongs don't make a right." This is a classic Chinese government talking point. "Don't look at what we're doing. Look over there, instead!" For decades it's been using th…

Cisco and Huawei can be subject to same set of regulations aginst having backdoors etc. But instead of general regulations and measures, what is promulgated is merely action against 2 particular firms, that is a targeted/particular regulation.

Weather such targetted/discriminatory regulation as opposed to universal regulation is a legal action is a valid question.

This particular law seems to give grant too much discretionary powers to the Executive, which never is a good idea.

Re: FCC Bans Authorizations for Devices That Pose National Security Threat

#110

While I have no doubt than basically anything from China is probably backdoored (and to the fault of western countries outsourcing manufacturing for cheap labour), what exactly has Huawei done? How do we know that the Cisco equipment also isn't backdoored and if I send a few malformed TCP packets it opens up its control plane on the receiving port? Compared to the last few decades, it seems like a strong hand banning…

Huawei singlehandedly destroyed Canada's Nortel Networks through espionage and sabotage. The CIA did an analysis and discovered that Huawei was dumping wireless equipment to small wireless providers in areas around US military basis at a loss. At the very least, the ability to disrupt communication of those military bases were easily achievable.

Look up the FuFeng project where a Chinese company is trying to purchase land in North Dakota for an agriculture project near a US Air Force base. The city of Grand Forks even approved it but people are still trying to fight it because of national security risk.
Post reply on HN