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

FCC Bans Authorizations for Devices That Pose National Security Threat

fcc.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 242 posts

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

#141

Post by fbdab103 »

Spooky23 wrote: post #101
fbdab103 wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

A cursory internet search reveals several that popped up within the past decade on Cisco's gear. Hard-coded passwords are table stakes, if that slips through, what else is lurking beneath the surface?

Network hardware is to operate in the adversarial landscape which is the open internet. It requires an extreme, exhaustive workflow to ensure bugs do not slip through. That we repeatedly see these failures does not raise confidence.

- 2016-01 https://tools.cisco.com/security/center/content/CiscoSecurit...

- 2018-03 https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/support/docs/csa/cisco-sa-2018...

- 2018-10 https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/support/docs/csa/cisco-sa-2018...

- 2019-07 https://tools.cisco.com/security/center/content/CiscoSecurit...

Edit: formatting

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

#142

Post by rgbrenner »

chrischen wrote: post #140
rgbrenner wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No. There are definitely rules.. like equal access to markets, limits on tariffs, etc.

Forcing equal access to markets is a limit on sovereignty (freedom). That's why the TPP got shut down. Equal access to markets in many cases just means total economic subjugation of weaker nations by commercial interests like the whole India colonial period.

Yeah sure… the worlds largest economy is too weak to import roughly 300b a year in goods to balance us/China trade. 300b/yr is enough to subjugate a 27 trillion/yr (gdp ppp) economy. rofl

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

#143

Post by phpisthebest »

scottcodie wrote: post #82
phpisthebest wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>lobbyists at ring, nest, and amazon getting an early christmas gift This has no impact on sales to the consumer market for Video, the covered list [1] limits the ban to "the extent it is used for the purpose of public safety, security of government facilities" Ring, Nest etc are used for personal home and small business not likely covered under that ban, and the people buying Hikvision as an example most likely are…

"The action we take today covers base station equipment that goes into our networks. It covers phones, cameras, and WiFi routers that go into our homes. And it covers rebranded or ‘white label’ equipment that is developed for the marketplace. In other words, this approach is comprehensive," said Jessica Rosenworcel, chair of the FCC.

I would would say the "Jessica Rosenworcel, chair of the FCC." need to read the law and regulations they are enforcing, as well as their own published documentations.

Like with most government officials I care less what they say in Press Conferences, that has ZERO regulatory weight, or validation and is often hyperbolic or out right false

I care about the actual regulation, and rules as implemented and enforced.

Also even if they are expanding the devices, this would only apply to camera's with WiFi, Most commercial camera's are POE ethernet not wifi. Using WiFi security camera's is just asking for trouble since it is easy for criminals to take out wifi remotely

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

#144

Post by ScoobleDoodle »

flumpcakes wrote: post #81

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…

Do you think Lenovo laptops are back door’s too?

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

#145

Post by screamingninja »

vasac wrote: post #130
maxfurman wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

Yeah, it's fascinating. Also it's not true. Some people that worked at Nortel at that time already spoke on HN what happened - hint: it was internal Nortel's issues. Something similar happened to Nokia, better products appeared and company wasn't able to compete.

Source?

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

#146

Post by charcircuit »

vorpalhex wrote: post #102
umbcorp wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Nope, he is right. If you use that chip you have to get it certified because the traces on the PCB can cause EM interference. Changing the housing of the product can also chance the EM interference so you have to get it recertified before you can sell it.

The FCC is a massive regulatory moat against hobbyist electronics. You have to make something expensive enough or with enough scale to make enough profit to be able to pay for the expensive testing. If you fail the test and aren't able to fix it on site all of that money will be a waste and that will have been a waste of money.

Also in order to use Bluetooth you will have to pay a few thousand dollars in SIG fees to properly license it without infringing their IP.

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

#147

Post by phpisthebest »

onlyrealcuzzo wrote: post #75
phpisthebest wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would rather Amazon focus on elimination of Counterfeits and Fraud, not enforcement of FCC protectionism

I'd rather live in a society where businesses follow the law - and if the laws don't make sense - we change them.

So you reject the idea of civil disobedience, and in reality reject the idea of case law and the entire legal system as most laws are written and challenged based on violations of the law.

Laws that everyone follows, 100% of the time NEVER get changed. For example Marijuana is only becoming legalized because of MASSIVE violations of the law and the public rejecting the idea that society should be punishing people for a plant, nor that tax payers should pay the costs to lock someone in a cage because they had a plant that was not approved by the government.

Further laws and regulations are only fleshed out, solidified, or invalidated via violations of the law. Rarely would have person even have standing to challenge a law unless they first violated... This is why you often see the government drop charges if they think the person will fight a law or regulation on constitutional grounds because they would rather take the single loss, then have their regulation ruled unconstitutional

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

#149

Post by phpisthebest »

toss1 wrote: post #69
phpisthebest wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would rather Amazon focus on elimination of Counterfeits and Fraud, not enforcement of FCC protectionism

It IS a fraud and a counterfeit to illegally sell a device without a proper FCC license. They are either selling the device with a license ID for a different device (Counterfeit) or selling it without any license (Fraud). Either way, it certainly has not gone through the required tests for not producing unacceptable levels of interference, and so could at the very least create problems in your environment and other d…

If would only be "fraud and a counterfeit" if they were to affix an FCC label on the device with out having it approved by the FCC.

However if they are simply selling a device that is not approved and registered with the FCC, they are violating FCC regulations but it is not "fraud and a counterfeit"

>so could at the very least create problems in your environment and other devices.

First that assumes facts not in evidence, there is nothing proving FCC provides any actual value to society in the realm of testing. Other standards bodies or even an international approval outside of the FCC can more than fill that void. Look at electrical safety, there is no governmental body that approves devices for electrical safety that is 2(?) private organizations the most famous being UL, but there are others

Second outside of regulatory requirements one would have to assume a consumer even cares if a device is "FCC Approved" I suspect most do not care at all.

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

#150

Post by chrischen »

rgbrenner wrote: post #142
chrischen wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Forcing equal access to markets is a limit on sovereignty (freedom). That's why the TPP got shut down. Equal access to markets in many cases just means total economic subjugation of weaker nations by commercial interests like the whole India colonial period.

Yeah sure… the worlds largest economy is too weak to import roughly 300b a year in goods to balance us/China trade. 300b/yr is enough to subjugate a 27 trillion/yr (gdp ppp) economy. rofl

My point is rather than deciding which economy is large enough to decide for itself how to tariff, you let everyone decide for themselves. And in fact this is how the world works by default, and even the US chooses selective tariffs… so what does it mean to selectively cry “fair trade” only when it benefits your local corporate interests?

Think about the opposite of what you are suggesting… should China now start subsidizing US businesses by buying made in USA when they don’t have to? If we make good products, they have no choice but to buy it because their citizens will demand it.

Post reply on HN