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

Norway reviews cybersecurity after remote-access feature found in Chinese buses

scandasia.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 235 posts

Re: Norway reviews cybersecurity after remote-access feature found in Chinese buses

#131

Post by kelnos »

maxglute wrote: post #127
avereveard wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Glad you asked 1929 – Sino-Soviet Conflict (Chinese Eastern Railway) — ROC authorities moved to seize the CER in Manchuria; the USSR responded militarily. (Initiation: ROC seizure.) 1954–1955 – First Taiwan Strait Crisis — PRC began large-scale shelling of Kinmen/Matsu and amphibious operations (e.g., Yijiangshan). (Initiation: PRC artillery/offensives.) 1958 – Second Taiwan Strait Crisis — PRC opened intense bombard…

Glad you listed, because that data shows apart from Sino Vietnamese almost half a century ago, PRC launched basically no wars of aggression, i.e. everything including SCS was territorial defense, i.e just. And if it was in chart form, the peace disease lull in last 30 years relative to PRC growth makes modern PRC rise the most unprescedently peaceful in modern history, borderline on absurdly serenity. Truly somehting…

Way to move the goalposts. GGP asked for wars within the last century, and GP provided such a list.

Regardless, not sure why any of this matters. I'm not one of those "China bad!" hand-wringers, but if you don't believe the Chinese government is a threat to western countries' sovereignty and economies, I've got a bridge I'd like to sell you.

Re: Norway reviews cybersecurity after remote-access feature found in Chinese buses

#132

Post by gunalx »

izacus wrote: post #121
buellerbueller wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The things you see in EU public tenders Can you give examples of what you (obviously, since you're commenting) have seen, and how typical it is?

So the major, common and probably most destructive, theme is the ecosystem of specialised tender companies. I mostly know this from the software side, but if you start working on such projects, you'll quicky find out that there's a persistent ecosystem of companies which specialize for these tender signups. People employed there optimize for winning them (at any cost - quid-pro-quo agreements aren't rare in my experi…

The system as bad as it is can be good as well. Let some consultants find out how to get the bids, and others how to do it well, and can be a outsourced third party. It gives differentiation without everyone needing to be large enough to actually bid on the contracts.

Re: Norway reviews cybersecurity after remote-access feature found in Chinese buses

#133

Post by buellerbueller »

izacus wrote: post #121
buellerbueller wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The things you see in EU public tenders Can you give examples of what you (obviously, since you're commenting) have seen, and how typical it is?

So the major, common and probably most destructive, theme is the ecosystem of specialised tender companies. I mostly know this from the software side, but if you start working on such projects, you'll quicky find out that there's a persistent ecosystem of companies which specialize for these tender signups. People employed there optimize for winning them (at any cost - quid-pro-quo agreements aren't rare in my experi…

It sounds like you are describing capitalism.

Re: Norway reviews cybersecurity after remote-access feature found in Chinese buses

#134

Post by eliasson »

MisterTea wrote: post #55

Whats sad is Norway sits right next to the country which manufactures Scania and Volvo Busses, but instead buys busses from thousands of km away. I suppose cost is all that maters these days, even for national infrastructure which must remain in control and secure.

What is even more sad is that not even Swedish regions buy Scania or Volvo busses. Where I live the region just replaced all local busses with BYD.

Re: Norway reviews cybersecurity after remote-access feature found in Chinese buses

#135

Post by gessha »

wafflemaker wrote: post #81
gessha wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ah, but you see, domestic enshittification and anti-consumer actions are different from the foreign influence boogeyman. \s

https://www.aftenposten.no/norge/i/Vz7LA6/forsvarets-kinesis... Here, an article (from June 2025) about Chinese buses full of cameras and other sensors driven regularly inside secret Norwegian army bases. Those buses are to be used during a war or a crisis.

I’m with you.

I’m arguing that crippled antitrust and anti-consumer practices are part of the problem that led to Chinese buses full of cameras being deployed in western countries.

I’ll go a step further and claim DMCA, anti-reverse engineering and other copyright-protection policies have further crippled the ability of the west to detect and prevent such foreign tech influence.

Re: Norway reviews cybersecurity after remote-access feature found in Chinese buses

#136

Post by ponector »

Zigurd wrote: post #68
IAmBroom wrote: post #29

I work in rail safety. Two major non-Chinese train companies attempted to merge a few years ago, explicitly to build a company that could compete with China's national company, and provide safer alternatives to state-sponsored cyberhacking of Western rail. It fell down to an anti-monopoly decision by a single person in the EU ministry, who killed the proposal. Several attempts were made to streamline the merger, but…

About a year ago a Polish rail equipment supplier brought a lawsuit over a locomotive because it was serviced by a third-party, and the service was enabled by jailbreaking software in the locomotive. Surveillance tech in products doesn't necessarily imply grey zone warfare. But that doesn't make it a good thing either.

The jailbreak was necessary because Polish supplier hardcoded location of their service shop and added code which makes train inoperative if serviced elsewhere.

Re: Norway reviews cybersecurity after remote-access feature found in Chinese buses

#138

Post by ponector »

eliasson wrote: post #134
MisterTea wrote: post #55

Whats sad is Norway sits right next to the country which manufactures Scania and Volvo Busses, but instead buys busses from thousands of km away. I suppose cost is all that maters these days, even for national infrastructure which must remain in control and secure.

What is even more sad is that not even Swedish regions buy Scania or Volvo busses. Where I live the region just replaced all local busses with BYD.

Are they making fully electric buses there? Do they have capacity to manufacture thousands of buses annually?

Re: Norway reviews cybersecurity after remote-access feature found in Chinese buses

#139

Post by hgomersall »

It should be required that all software running on vehicles should have its source code submitted to the regulators along with the tooling to create reproducible builds, with the expectation that the regulators can audit it for back doors. This should apply to cars, buses trains and planes.

Re: Norway reviews cybersecurity after remote-access feature found in Chinese buses

#140

Post by maxglute »

kelnos wrote: post #131
maxglute wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Glad you listed, because that data shows apart from Sino Vietnamese almost half a century ago, PRC launched basically no wars of aggression, i.e. everything including SCS was territorial defense, i.e just. And if it was in chart form, the peace disease lull in last 30 years relative to PRC growth makes modern PRC rise the most unprescedently peaceful in modern history, borderline on absurdly serenity. Truly somehting…

Way to move the goalposts. GGP asked for wars within the last century, and GP provided such a list. Regardless, not sure why any of this matters. I'm not one of those "China bad!" hand-wringers, but if you don't believe the Chinese government is a threat to western countries' sovereignty and economies, I've got a bridge I'd like to sell you.

It's explaining / contextualizing the data, aka most of that list is "defensive" and limited in scope, which different vs products from actors who are expeditionary happy. The data shows PRC... having inherited 14 land borders conflicts from ROC, have largely limited use of force to just territorial sovereingty issues, which btw 12/14 have been resolved in last 40 years, essentially all with PRC concessions. Combine with PRC growth and subsequent rise, PRC peace is historic abboration, i.e. the PRC threat to wesern sovereignty is FUD outside customary state activities like espionage. Now if west wants to weaponize PRC threat/FUD to disguise the threat to genuinely competitive PRC products that will stomp their domestic industries, then sure, that's geopolitics 101.
Post reply on HN