Live data from Hacker News

FCC Bans Authorizations for Devices That Pose National Security Threat

fcc.gov

201–210 of 242 posts

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

#201

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.

My father worked for what was basically a bootstrapped startup at the bleeding edge of computing in the late 80's. Eventually his company, through a series of exchanges was part of Nortel Networks.

He'll tell you a different story. When you mention the "espionage / sabotage" he doesn't laugh or shake his head, it actually just outright infuriates him. Such a naive narrative only angers him because it seems to absolve the people who managed the company of outright incompetence and corruption, which is how it should be remembered.

For example: one story I vividly recall because I could never fully fathom it involved a specific female executive who was traveling for business - first class overseas. She never made her intended engagement because she was immediately arrested upon disembarking the plane. She had got drunk and (although married) decided to perform overt sexual acts with the gentleman sitting adjacent to her. On the plane. In her seat.[1]

At some point the culture of the executive at Nortel, for whatever reason, became completely incompetent and outright immoral. Rather than Huawei underhandedly perpetrating the perfect crime, it was simply the people at the head of the organization that solicited the crime to pursue their own benefit above all else.

[1] https://www.theregister.com/2000/04/06/former_nortel_exec_fi...

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

#202

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…

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.

It wasn't xenophobia, the West has been gradually waking up to the realization that their idea of converting countries into more ideal partners by building strong trade is not really working as the countries they're trying to influence will just take the benefits and not reciprocate.

It has become especially clear over the past few years, first with COVID highlighting the fragility of supply chains dependent on such one-sided relations and now with the invasion of Ukraine showing that such relations may also not be as strong of a deterrent against war as previously hoped.

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

#203

This whole things looks more and more embarrassing. From the outside it just looks like the US is struggling to compete and so they create extrajudicial barriers based on "secret evidence" to block competitors. The hypocrisy is that this is the exact anti-competitive behavior the US has been criticizing China for years. It's possible these companies are doing nefarious things. In which case create a country-agnostic…

[deleted]

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

#204

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…

[deleted]

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

#205
post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I feel like I don't really have any moral problem with US passing laws to protect US interests, as long as the laws aren't super unreasonable or evil. They're, like, unfair to some people, but not.. really... morally wrong? The moral complaint about China isn't that they have anti-competitive laws, it's the Orwellian thought-suppression psy-ops stuff.

"it's the Orwellian thought-suppression psy-ops stuff." I mean that's like a "bigger" issue. I think it's a completely fair to decide you should just not conduct business with companies under authoritarian regimes (see N.Korea Iran Myanmar etc.). If you wanna blacklist the whole country then okay.. but here it's some indefensible middle ground where you continue to do business with them, until it's inconvenient and s…

I don't see why the middle ground is indefensible. We'll buy your widgets, but not if they're sophisticated enough to be backdoored and cause a national security issue? That seems okay to me.

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

#207
post #194

This whole things looks more and more embarrassing. From the outside it just looks like the US is struggling to compete and so they create extrajudicial barriers based on "secret evidence" to block competitors. The hypocrisy is that this is the exact anti-competitive behavior the US has been criticizing China for years. It's possible these companies are doing nefarious things. In which case create a country-agnostic…

> It's possible these companies are doing nefarious things. In which case create a country-agnostic legal framework and take them to court and prove your case. If it's all super-secret-spy-stuff then just do the damn parallel construction and show all these secret backdoors you claim to have found. Are OTA software updates considered a “backdoor”? Because they essentially are one, even if the company is not doing any…

Yeah I saw Minority Report. I know about future crime :) Now I'm imagining clones in vats at CIA headquarters telling them which companies will turn evil.

I dunno man, in the US you don't just ban people and companies for stuff they haven't yet done. Sure potential attack surfaces are important and you should think about stuff like that. But that's kinda my point.. you should make laws about that and regulate critical infrastructure. (maybe networking equipment shouldn't get OTA updates at all? Maybe that's too simplistic..)

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

#208

[dead]

> Map that port to 192.168.1.252 What's that supposed to do?

From the link they posted, the guide says to forward the port to any unused IP address, like 192.168.1.252. I think this effectively causes an attacker's traffic to get dropped.

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

#209

[dead]

> Map that port to 192.168.1.252 What's that supposed to do?

> If your NAT router/gateway keeps this port open and you are sure you want to filter it (potential interference with ISPs pushing firmware updates), try the following. Navigate to your router's admin interface and disable TR-069. If that does not work, look under "port forwarding", or "virtual servers", and forward the port to an unused local IP address, like (192.168.1.252)

From the source that was linked. So the original author doesn't recommend 192.168.1.252 but just uses it as an example

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

#210
post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

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…

If you go through my comment history, you'll see that I am critical of the CCP for many of the reasons you've listed.

However, my argument is that the West, in general, underestimated China because of beliefs of cultural, economic, political, intellectual, ethnic, moral, etc superiority. Those beliefs were ultimately weaknesses.

Post reply on HN