Live data from Hacker News

FCC Bans Authorizations for Devices That Pose National Security Threat

fcc.gov

161–170 of 242 posts

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

#161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 sub…

They agreed to wto rules when they joined.

And your last sentence is wrong— Chinese are not free to buy us made goods if they think they are better. China places heavy tariffs and other protections on imports.

Since you seem to be unaware.. that’s what you’re arguing for: the right of China to place heavy tariffs on foreign goods, while using wto rules to prevent other nations from doing the same to Chinese goods.

Counties agree to wto rules so they can export more.. those rules apply in both directions. If China doesn’t like wto rules, they can withdraw and do as you say: everyone applies whatever tariffs they want on Chinese goods; and China does the same.

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

#162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

I would say the whole Arm situation in China is a much more clear-cut example of this. I haven't seen the west do anything about it.

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

#163

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?

I am typing on one now, but I wouldn't trust them to be used in any national security situation. Unfortunately we are beholden to autocratic countries as we have chosen cheap labour over everything else.

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

#164

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.

My (admittedly US-centric) understanding of the TPP's demise was that it simply found itself politically untenable in an time where globalization was very unpopular, and concerns about the influence of China were not top of mind. Both 2016 US major-party presidential candidates came out against it (though you could reasonably argue about whether Clinton really meant it).

Ironically, speaking of freedom, the Libertarian candidate was the only one to support it officially.

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

#165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A rival for hegemony in the Asia-Pacific (APAC) region. The current hegemon in this region is the US. It is the strongest APAC power by far due to its numerous military bases as well as its network of strong allies (Australia, New Zealand, Japan, South Korea). China seeks to displace the US as the hegemon in APAC. Naturally, the current hegemon doesn't take too kindly to that. So they view China as a rival.

China—so powerful that they believe they can rival the US… but also so weak that they should qualify for WTO protections for developing markets. At a certain point you have to question whether they believe in free trade at all.. or just paying lip service to it to make themselves rich.

> they believe in free trade at all

More than US seeing how PRC has significantly less disputes (normalized for acession time), both as initiator and target per WTO stats and generally abides by WTO disputes ruled against her favour. Even PRC's accession protocol was made extra onerous via US objections who still got outplayed - it isn't/wasn't PRC paying lip service while blocking WTO dispute resolution system. PRC believes in free trade more than US because she's learned to play the game better vs US flipping over the gameboard. Which is fine, globalism no longer in US interest, but lets not pretend US isn't systematically the worst exploiter of free trade even while being the most influential rule writer, and increasinly worse when as those priveleges erode.

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

#166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the video surveillance bans all seem to target billion dollar companies, so its safe to say this is just your friendly lobbyists at ring, nest, and amazon getting an early christmas gift How does that logically follow? Can billion dollar companies not be security threats? > the usual suspect, huawei, has been on americas shitlist ever since they beat US telcos to market with 5g. their cellphones all meet or exceed…

Well he is right in that Huawei source code has been reviwed by Uk gov, and they found nothing. The accusations do appear to be based on nothing at this time. I would like tonsee rigorous benchmarks for vode quality and trustworthyness, not arbitrary and whinsical political decision-making

Just because UK found nothing doesn't mean others also found nothing.

> "We have evidence that Huawei has the capability secretly to access sensitive and personal information in systems it maintains and sells around the world," Robert O'Brien, national security adviser, reportedly said.

https://www.cnet.com/tech/mobile/us-finds-huawei-has-backdoo...

https://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-officials-say-huawei-can-co...

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

#167
post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It has nothing to do with xenophobia. The Chinese government doesn't play fair, and the West has been letting them get away with it for decades. They take full advantage of open markets available in the rest of the world, but close their markets to outsiders; at best, outsiders can get a piece of the action, but only through the oversight and partial ownership of a local company. The idea that China is still a "devel…

The parent comment isn't saying anti-China actions and suspicions by the government are xenophobic. It's instead saying more or less the opposite: that the delay in these kinds of actions is possibly down to policymakers seeing China as lesser and not worth concern.

That also sounds like the opposite of xenophobia.

And the US befriended China for important strategic reasons starting with Nixon. If they underestimated anything it was the ability of an authoritarian regime to retain power through such a period of economic growth. Middle classes tend to want western products and media. But the economic growth itself was a deliberate goal of US policy.

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

#168

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…

A few things to read:

https://www.engadget.com/huawei-contractor-pakistan-backdoor...

https://www.notebookcheck.net/Huawei-caught-red-handed-The-c...

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-04-30/vodafone-...

Knowing the absolute mess this would cause diplomatically, they still said there was a back door: https://apnews.com/article/a0031b16e3a511e431b1e0a5f20edbf9

https://www.scmagazine.com/news/apt/microsoft-defender-advan...

Etc.

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

#169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

China—so powerful that they believe they can rival the US… but also so weak that they should qualify for WTO protections for developing markets. At a certain point you have to question whether they believe in free trade at all.. or just paying lip service to it to make themselves rich.

> they believe in free trade at all More than US seeing how PRC has significantly less disputes (normalized for acession time), both as initiator and target per WTO stats and generally abides by WTO disputes ruled against her favour. Even PRC's accession protocol was made extra onerous via US objections who still got outplayed - it isn't/wasn't PRC paying lip service while blocking WTO dispute resolution system. PRC…

You’re talking about the China who recently put trade sanctions on Korea for installing missile defenses (who has a now-nuclear neighbor) and Australia for dare mentioning that COVID originated in China?

>If Beijing keeps breaking free-trade rules to make its foreign-policy points against rival nations, it will hurt domestic markets and lose international stature

https://www.scmp.com/week-asia/opinion/article/2083166/opini...

> Beijing’s attempt to bully Canberra has been a spectacular failure.

https://foreignpolicy.com/2021/11/09/australia-china-decoupl...

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

#170

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.

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.

Every time I see stories like this I can't help but feel a twisted sense of respect for China, because they know how to read the rulebooks and take advantage of it all for everything we're worth.

Defeating the biggest military and geopolitical superpower known to mankind is trivial if you understand you can just ignore all that and instead buy it all up, and it becomes even more trivial if your enemy straight up gives you the monies for it. Literally free real estate.

So kudos to China, they know how to play to win and they're playing to win at all costs while we keep hoisting our own petards.

Post reply on HN