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

Open Source Could Be a Casualty of the Trade War

bunniestudios.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 79 posts

Re: Open Source Could Be a Casualty of the Trade War

#61

Post by someguydave »

DennisP wrote: post #27

Considering that two U.S. appeals courts have ruled that source code which was classed as a munition was protected by the First Amendment, I'm not too worried just yet. Of course we have a lot of new judges so who knows.

re: judges - I'm not a lawyer but the recent Supreme Court decisions seem to be a shot across the bow for administrative rulemaking like the BIS ruling that Bunnie is quoting. It's conceivable that Huawai could sue the US and win in the Supreme Court and overturn these regulations - on the basis that Congress needs to pass a specific law to bind them, rather than allowing vague laws to be vaguely interpreted by executive agencies as they see fit.

Re: Open Source Could Be a Casualty of the Trade War

#62

Post by sjwright »

brown9-2 wrote: post #35
baybal2 wrote: post #6

A contact at Foxconn just told me yesterday that Apple is genuinely serious about leaving China completely. Apparently, Mr. Trump summoned Mr. Cook last week, and extended an offer of a tax break and other "relocation packages" on the size "not seen in human history" if Apple moves to USA. Hearing things like that keeps reminding me that Taiwanese engineering fraternity is one of worlds best intelligence agencies :)

Feels like this should be taken with a big grain of salt. Presidents can’t extend tax breaks

Bold Presidents can do a lot more than we assume; so much of their assumed limits on power are moderated by convention, reputation, and the willingness for opponents to use the courts.

If we take no other lesson from the past 2.5 years...

Re: Open Source Could Be a Casualty of the Trade War

#63

Post by i_am_nomad »

DiogenesKynikos wrote: post #60
i_am_nomad wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you not understand the part about Huawei’s rampant, Chinese-style IP theft directly contributing to the poor security of its products?

I haven't ever seen any evidence of "rampant" IP theft by Huawei. Every time, it's the same one Cisco case that got settled 15 years ago, unsubstantiated claims about Nortel two decades ago, and T-Mobile's "Tappy" robot. This for a massive company with over $100 billion in revenue a year. If there were actually something to the characterization, you'd think there'd be more evidence. It's a bit like defining Google so…

Try taking this position with, say, Samsung.

Re: Open Source Could Be a Casualty of the Trade War

#64

Post by DiogenesKynikos »

i_am_nomad wrote: post #63
DiogenesKynikos wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I haven't ever seen any evidence of "rampant" IP theft by Huawei. Every time, it's the same one Cisco case that got settled 15 years ago, unsubstantiated claims about Nortel two decades ago, and T-Mobile's "Tappy" robot. This for a massive company with over $100 billion in revenue a year. If there were actually something to the characterization, you'd think there'd be more evidence. It's a bit like defining Google so…

Try taking this position with, say, Samsung.

I'm not sure I follow.

Samsung was embroiled in a very bitter IP dispute with Apple, in which it was found to have violated Apple's patents, essentially copying the design of the iPhone, and ordered to pay over a half a billion dollars.

Yet American companies aren't banned from doing business with Samsung, nor should they be.

Re: Open Source Could Be a Casualty of the Trade War

#65

Post by trevyn »

chillacy wrote: post #51
analognoise wrote: post #37

[flagged]

If you’re confident that free countries produce better tech why do we have to choke them out? Wouldn’t it be a stronger message to let the freedom do the work?

Taking a stand for human rights; putting our money where our morals are.

Re: Open Source Could Be a Casualty of the Trade War

#66

Post by StudentStuff »

abetusk wrote: post #45
StudentStuff wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bunnie seems to fear this type of IP restriction but with regard to closed source chipset designs and proprietary hardware, which he views as key to continued innovation in China. I have met Bunnie, and he has a bit of a warped view of the world. I think it caused him to gloss over things like https://www.theregister.co.uk/2019/03/28/hcsec_huawei_oversi... where Huawei did not give a single shit about security in the…

This seems like a specific and direct attack at Bunnie. Do you have any evidence to back up your claim? Was your opinion of what you call his 'warped view of other world' shaped from your conversation? What specifically about that conversation led you to that conclusion? I don't know Bunnie and I only follow his blog posts sometimes but he's a strong proponent of open source software and open source hardware [1]. Bun…

I'm not attacking Bunnie, everyone has their own view of the world. Bunnie has repeatedly stated that he views IP as an impediment to R&D, and anything that threatens the quasi-open sourcing of hardware (eg: how data sheets, BSPs and code are passed around by sellers in China, in spite of the legalities) is bad: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SGJ5cZnoodY

Re: Open Source Could Be a Casualty of the Trade War

#68

Post by sjy »

downrightmike wrote: post #21
bilbo0s wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Good luck explaining your commits to that munitions grade crypto used by terror cells in the mideast region as "Free Speech". Hope that works out for you. :-( (I'd wager there'll be a few more Snowden types asking for asylum outside the US before this is all over.)

Already holds up: "The claimed principle was simple: export of munitions—guns, bombs, planes, and software—was (and remains) restricted; but the export of books is protected by the First Amendment. The question was never tested in court with respect to PGP. In cases addressing other encryption software, however, two federal appeals courts have established the rule that cryptographic software source code is speech pro…

It's worth checking that claim against the Ninth Circuit's decision [1], because the court said:

> We emphasize the narrowness of our First Amendment holding. We do not hold that all software is expressive. Much of it surely is not ... We hold merely that because the prepublication licensing regime challenged here applies directly to scientific expression, vests boundless discretion in government officials, and lacks adequate procedural safeguards, it constitutes an impermissible prior restraint on speech.

[1] https://cr.yp.to/export/1999/0506-order.html

Re: Open Source Could Be a Casualty of the Trade War

#69

Post by nickpsecurity »

mr_toad wrote: post #44
nickpsecurity wrote: post #7

“through powers granted via the “EAR” (Export Administration Regulation 15 CFR, subchapter C, parts 730-774), along with a sometimes surprisingly broad definition of what qualifies as export-controlled US technology.” Boom! I told people they might do that back in the crypto discussions. Custom crypto and high-assurance security are still munitions with only a few things re-classified such as mass-market, one-size-fi…

> The best route to that is to intentionally leave in memory safety bugs or a configuration that enables privilege escalation. Hackers find those all the time in all kinds of devices. They say, “Hey, they just made a common mistake.” Maybe it was there on purpose. We won’t know. By that logic everyone from Apple to Xerox could possibly be enabling computer espionage. You’d never be able to prove a bug wasn’t a delibe…

That's exactly why it's the best route. It gives exploitability with max deniability. The deniability also reduces legal risks for anyone paid to add vulnerabilities to their products.

Re: Open Source Could Be a Casualty of the Trade War

#70

Post by bunnie »

xvilka wrote: post #59

Quite the opposite - it makes more and more companies to consider open source. RISC-V is all rage now, people turning their eyes to open source EDAs. I hope with the help of SymbiFlow[1], Chisel[2]/FIRRTL[3], and other similar tools the duopoly of Intel (Altera) and Xilinx will come to its end. There is also an interesting initiative[4] to make ASIC design as affordable (in terms of time, knowledge, and money) as pos…

The issue is not that it reduces interest in open source. In fact the article states there's evidence that open source solutions are getting renewed attention in the Chinese government.

The issue is that the executive order would make it unlawful to share technology with foreign adversaries. So it effectively forces open source projects to hard fork along geopolitical boundaries. For example, if (and these are still if's) Huawei were to be designated a foreign adversary; and, if Huawei were to develop a RISC-V implementation of interest; it would be unlawful for a US person to use that implementation, or otherwise "acquire" said technology from Huawei.

The underlying premise of the executive order, as I understand it, is that technology developed by, or under the influence of, foreign adversaries is potentially tainted. Thus to defend the US national security interest, US persons shall be penalized for using their technology.

Thus the concern is that US-based open source developers and users would be directly at risk by interacting with the very projects you cite, should they fall under the influence of a foreign adversary.

Or to put it more concretely: ARM might be very happy if Huawei were designated a foreign adversary, and Huawei invested heavily in RISC-V. Because then ARM could lobby US lawmakers to rule that RISC-V technology is tainted under the theories contained in the executive order, thus reducing competition from open source alternatives.

(editted to clean up grammar)

Post reply on HN