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

161–170 of 235 posts

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

#161

Post by avereveard »

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…

ask how serene fishermen in the area are while their country sovereignty on internationally recognized territorial water is infringed upon regularly

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

#162

Post by bsder »

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…

> As much as I want independent EU software ecosystem, I don't think using public funding can breed anything but more corruption.

Well, you described what happens when you outsource everything.

Governments used to ... gasp ... employ people to do tasks so that you didn't have to outsource every single piddly task. And since those employees could do the tasks, there was a floor such that selecting nobody and doing it in house was always an option.

Yes, that has different failure modes. However, you have more levers over those failure modes as opposed to a single lever of "Head to court and try to win a legal case."

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

#163

Post by LtWorf »

M3L0NM4N wrote: post #47
jayde2767 wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did anyone investigate this person to see if she’s being bought by any “Foreign” Gov’t?

Don't attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by ignorance.

Or by competence… Why are we trusting that creating a large and corrupt company would somehow help anyone in EU?

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

#164

Post by LtWorf »

bpt3 wrote: post #143
kmeisthax wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem with "oh, but wait, this merger actually improves competition" is that mergers are a contagion. A large competitor's mere existence creates an economic imperative for more mergers. This happens both horizontally (across multiple firms) and vertically (up and down the supply chain). When you get big, you can start stripping your vendors' and customers' of their profit margin, which means they need to get b…

How do you confirm that a train controller or any other piece of hardware does not contain a backdoor using industry standard software tools? You can write whatever you want into a contract, but if you have no way to validate it, it's meaningless. Also, the state-owned (and subsidized) Chinese company that doesn't have to play by the West's antitrust rules doesn't need to worry about your "contagion" concerns.

> You can write whatever you want into a contract, but if you have no way to validate it, it's meaningless.

3rd party audit like everything else?

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

#165

Post by maxglute »

avereveard wrote: post #161
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…

ask how serene fishermen in the area are while their country sovereignty on internationally recognized territorial water is infringed upon regularly

Except you know, NOT internationally recognized except to manufactured misconception by headline scanning useful idiots. Reminder PH PCA ruling is not actual international law, as in recognized by UN/UNCLOS, ITLOS, ICJ. TBH its demonstrably stupid to even hold the position UNCLOS can rule on sovereignty claims - they fucking can't. To suggest PRC is infringing on others maritime entitlement in SCS is so stupid it's not even wrong because under UNCLOS it's not even legally possible. And also you know, who cares about a few butthurt fisherman, lol, like that's mild as fuck complaints on the spectrum of territorial drama. Every time people bring up muh fisherman they're just highlighting how generous PRC is behaving.

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

#166

Post by xnx »

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…

Is there a strategy where China could remain a supplier of "lobotomized" hardware? Example: China supplies the trains, but all the silicon must be added after import.

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

#167

Post by tw1984 »

cronelius wrote: post #106

This is exactly why BYD is and should continue to be banned in the US. It’s not that they are doing this, but that they have done it and they have the capability

should US products be banned outside the US because NSA has done all those fancy things and have the capability to do it again?

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

#168

Post by bpt3 »

LtWorf wrote: post #164
bpt3 wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do you confirm that a train controller or any other piece of hardware does not contain a backdoor using industry standard software tools? You can write whatever you want into a contract, but if you have no way to validate it, it's meaningless. Also, the state-owned (and subsidized) Chinese company that doesn't have to play by the West's antitrust rules doesn't need to worry about your "contagion" concerns.

> You can write whatever you want into a contract, but if you have no way to validate it, it's meaningless. 3rd party audit like everything else?

Okay, if you want to pass responsibility off to someone else, how does the third party auditor do it?

I'm not talking about checking a compliance box, I'm talking about actually confirming no backdoor exists.

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

#169

Post by maxglute »

bpt3 wrote: post #159
maxglute wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You mean the 12/14 land borders disputee who settled with PRC ceding 50%+ concessions. Probably very happy because again objectively that is magnanimous by historic standards. For SCS where PRc offers to share but retarded democratic countries can't becausen itd political suicide, even now it's really just PH being a cunt. Otherwise unsettled land borders left is India and Bhutan because bhutan border ratification is…

No, that's not what I'm talking about, and you probably should get your information on foreign affairs from somewhere other than China Daily.

I get information from everywhere but reality has a china daily bias. This isn't complicated, you ask about PRC relation with neighbours I point out blind spot to of those with poor foriegn policy literacy, i.e. those who don't read enough china daily, that PRC has a lot of neighbours and most of them are in fact settled with PRC majority concessions and now at peace. If we're going to go even more China daily, essentially 100% of PRC disputes were inherited from ROC not only has PRC not caused any of the disputes, they have been borderline treasonous in unwinding through mostly diplomacy and minimum violence.

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

#170

Post by hollow-moe »

hgomersall wrote: post #139

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.

Should've been made a thing even since Volkswagen's dieselgate
Post reply on HN