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

US says it can prove Huawei has backdoor access to mobile-phone networks

arstechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 296 posts

Re: US says it can prove Huawei has backdoor access to mobile-phone networks

#121

Post by smush »

crankylinuxuser wrote: post #56
ngngngng wrote: post #48

While we're on the subject, is Signal still the best way for me to communicate privately? I've got all the people I communicate with daily using it now, and I feel relatively confident that the communications are private. Are they?

Given their demand to your phone number, along with social graph (phone list and communication targets) I do not trust it to be secure and private. It's probably secure against phone company snooping. But I wouldn't trust it much past that.

OWS is working on foundations to allow people to use usernames and link them with FCM / push notifications without the central signal server being any wiser than currently with just phone numbers.

My hope is to be able to add ephemeral user ids so to my work folks I'm JustMe but family folks I'm FamilyMe and internet blog readers I'm MyProfessionalMe

Re: US says it can prove Huawei has backdoor access to mobile-phone networks

#122

Post by 99_00 »

China's intelligence law requires people or companies to spy when asked.

>“request relevant organs, organisations, and citizens provide necessary support, assistance, and cooperation”. According to Article 16, intelligence officials “may enter relevant restricted areas and venues; may learn from and question relevant institutions, organisations, and individuals; and may read or collect relevant files, materials or items”

https://www.canada.ca/en/security-intelligence-service/corpo...

Re: US says it can prove Huawei has backdoor access to mobile-phone networks

#123

Post by n_o_u »

dustfinger wrote: post #117
dwild wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I just tried that in Quebec from Virgin Mobile (Bell) to Vidéotron using a Samsung S10 and a Samsung A8, it's working fine for me. I can't verify it is send over SMS or MMS though. In theory there's no reason for my cellphone to send it over MMS. The exact word used: secure communication

Turn off your data and disconnect from wifi, then try again. I believe that will force it to send via SMS. You might need to go through your client's app settings. The Google Android client is nice because it displays what protocol it is sending over. It is important to confirm that it is sent over SMS. Also, it is important that the words "secure communication" are sent in all lower case which I see that you did. Th…

Just tested via twilio to canadian cell phone and had no issues receiving it.

Re: US says it can prove Huawei has backdoor access to mobile-phone networks

#124

Post by thereare5lights »

ancorevard wrote: post #47
gruez wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The US is essentially complaining that Huawei has access to the backdoor channels that only the US government was supposed to have. How is surprising? The defining characteristic of a nation state is that it has a monopoly on violence within its borders. Having a monopoly on intercepting telecom traffic is a logical consequence of that. For other countries though, yeah I'd prefer if neither China nor US have backdoo…

"I'd prefer if neither China nor US have backdoor access." So would I, but having lived in both countries, one of the two governments is decidedly more evil than the other.

The answer is obvious for citizens of either country, but the the answer is different for citizens of neither country.

China has historically not engaged in violence far from its borders. America frequently does.

Re: US says it can prove Huawei has backdoor access to mobile-phone networks

#125

Post by eternalny1 »

bloak wrote: post #41
mech1234 wrote: post #10

A question to Europeans reading this- If you had to assume that U.S. 5G equipment manufacturers would provide backdoors to U.S. officials, and Chinese 5G equipment manufacturers would provide backdoors to Chinese officials, and Europeans had to use one or the other, which would you choose?

The question is insufficiently precise. Some European agencies want the US government to spy on European citizens because it is illegal for them to do it themselves but it's not illegal for them to obtain information about European citizens from US spies. Whether the European citizens want to be spied on is another matter. If you're a European citizen or company you might well prefer to be spied on by the Chinese bec…

> Some European agencies want the US government to spy on European citizens because it is illegal for them to do it themselves but it's not illegal for them to obtain information about European citizens from US spies.

Bingo, data sharing agreements between intelligence services.

NSA can't spy on US citizens but GCHQ can, and GCHQ can't spy ok UK citizens but NSA can.

Then just come up with a sharing agreement, and you're "golden".

It's all ridiculous.

Re: US says it can prove Huawei has backdoor access to mobile-phone networks

#126

Post by eternalny1 »

Barracoon wrote: post #108
owenmarshall wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The closer ally is likely to have SIGINT sharing agreements with your government. FVEY exists so that the UK or Canada can legally spy on my communications and turn that data over to my government - which couldn’t otherwise get it without warrants and other pesky civil rights protections. I think I’d rather take my chances with an adversarial government. I know they’d be spying but their ability to act on it is far m…

Are you American? If so, that is a false statement. DODI 5240.1-R says "[DoD components] Will not participate in or request any person or entity to undertake any activities that are forbidden by E.O. 12333 or this issuance." [1] The NSA, which has the SIGINT authority from EO 12333 [2], is a component of the DoD. A non-DoD entity, such as FBI, Treasury, etc, would (a) not have a foreign intelligence mission and would…

Snowden showed they were sharing nudes of ex-girlfriend in TAO.

How well do you think the FISA warrant process is going in reality?

Re: US says it can prove Huawei has backdoor access to mobile-phone networks

#127

Post by dustfinger »

n_o_u wrote: post #123
dustfinger wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Turn off your data and disconnect from wifi, then try again. I believe that will force it to send via SMS. You might need to go through your client's app settings. The Google Android client is nice because it displays what protocol it is sending over. It is important to confirm that it is sent over SMS. Also, it is important that the words "secure communication" are sent in all lower case which I see that you did. Th…

Just tested via twilio to canadian cell phone and had no issues receiving it.

What client region was the twilio data center? What was the exact text sent? Are you comfortable to disclose the make / model of the receiving cell phone as well as its carrier service?

Re: US says it can prove Huawei has backdoor access to mobile-phone networks

#128

Post by dependenttypes »

99_00 wrote: post #122

China's intelligence law requires people or companies to spy when asked. >“request relevant organs, organisations, and citizens provide necessary support, assistance, and cooperation”. According to Article 16, intelligence officials “may enter relevant restricted areas and venues; may learn from and question relevant institutions, organisations, and individuals; and may read or collect relevant files, materials or it…

Isn't this also pretty much the case with American companies? The only difference is that they need a warrant (which should be pretty easy to get).

Anyway, there is a new bill trying to kill e2ee in America https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22202110

Re: US says it can prove Huawei has backdoor access to mobile-phone networks

#129

Post by SAI_Peregrinus »

blattimwind wrote: post #96
SAI_Peregrinus wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"US says it can prove Huawei has lawful intercept access to mobile-phone networks" would be a better headline.

Because Huawei is a global law-enforcement agency and hence can claim lawful interception on all equipment it sells? Doesn't make any sense.

Why does it make sense for Cisco then? China is certainly a law enforcement agency, with just as much right to require it as the US does under CALEA (local US law).
Post reply on HN