from the which-phone-has-the-official-okey-dokey? dept.
Intelligence agency heads have warned against using Huawei and ZTE products and services:
The heads of six major US intelligence agencies have warned that American citizens shouldn't use products and services made by Chinese tech giants Huawei and ZTE. According to a report from CNBC, the intelligence chiefs made the recommendation during a Senate Intelligence Committee hearing on Tuesday. The group included the heads of the FBI, the CIA, the NSA, and the director of national intelligence.
During his testimony, FBI Director Chris Wray said the the government was "deeply concerned about the risks of allowing any company or entity that is beholden to foreign governments that don't share our values to gain positions of power inside our telecommunications networks." He added that this would provide "the capacity to maliciously modify or steal information. And it provides the capacity to conduct undetected espionage."
These warnings are nothing new. The US intelligence community has long been wary of Huawei, which was founded by a former engineer in China's People's Liberation Army and has been described by US politicians as "effectively an arm of the Chinese government." This caution led to a ban on Huawei bidding for US government contracts in 2014, and it's now causing problems for the company's push into consumer electronics.
Verizon and AT&T recently cancelled plans to sell Huawei's Mate 10 Pro smartphone.
Don't use a Huawei phone because it's too Chinese. Don't use an Apple phone because strong encryption is not "responsible encryption". Which phone is just right for the FBI?
Previously: U.S. Lawmakers Urge AT&T to Cut Ties With Huawei
Related: FBI Director Christopher Wray Keeps War on Encryption Alive
U.S. Government Reportedly Wants to Build a 5G Network to Thwart Chinese Spying
Related Stories
Submitted via IRC for SoyCow1
Trump's Department of Justice is trying to get a do-over with its campaign to get backdoors onto iPhones and into secure messaging services. The policy rebrand even has its own made-up buzzword. They're calling it "responsible encryption."
After Deputy Attorney General Rod J. Rosenstein introduced the term in his speech to the U.S. Naval Academy, most everyone who read the transcript was doing spit-takes at their computer monitors. From hackers and infosec professionals to attorneys and tech journalists, "responsible encryption" sounded like a marketing plan to sell unsweetened sugar to diabetics.
Government officials -- not just in the U.S. but around the world -- have always been cranky that they can't access communications that use end-to-end encryption, whether that's Signal or the kind of encryption that protects an iPhone. The authorities are vexed, they say, because encryption without a backdoor impedes law-enforcement investigations, such as when terrorist acts occur.
[...] "Look, it's real simple. Encryption is good for our national security; it's good for our economy. We should be strengthening encryption, not weakening it. And it's technically impossible to have strong encryption with any kind of backdoor," said Rep. Will Hurd (R-Texas), when asked about Rosenstein's proposal for responsible encryption at The Atlantic's Cyber Frontier event in Washington, D.C.
Source: Great, now there's 'responsible encryption'
Submitted via IRC for SoyCow1984
"We have an ongoing dialogue with a lot of tech companies in a variety of different areas," he [Rod Rosenstein] told Politico Pro. "There's some areas where they are cooperative with us. But on this particular issue of encryption, the tech companies are moving in the opposite direction. They're moving in favor of more and more warrant-proof encryption."
[...] In the interview, Rosenstein also said he "favors strong encryption."
"I favor strong encryption, because the stronger the encryption, the more secure data is against criminals who are trying to commit fraud," he explained. "And I'm in favor of that, because that means less business for us prosecuting cases of people who have stolen data and hacked into computer networks and done all sorts of damage. So I'm in favor of strong encryption."
[...] He later added that the claim that the "absolutist position" that strong encryption should be by definition, unbreakable, is "unreasonable."
[...] Rosenstein closed his interview by noting that he understands re-engineering encryption to accommodate government may make it weaker.
"And I think that's a legitimate issue that we can debate—how much risk are we willing to take in return for the reward?" he said.
The new FBI Director Christopher Wray has been repeating the broken rhetoric of the Crypto Wars:
In recent testimony before Congress, the director of the FBI has again highlighted what the government sees as the problem of easy-to-use, on-by-default, strong encryption.
In prepared remarks from last Thursday, FBI Director Christopher Wray said that encryption presents a "significant challenge to conducting lawful court-ordered access," he said, again using the longstanding government moniker "Going Dark."
The statement was just one portion of his testimony about the agency's priorities for the coming year.
The FBI and its parent agency, the Department of Justice, have recently stepped up public rhetoric about the so-called dangers of "Going Dark." In recent months, both Wray and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein have given numerous public statements about this issue.
Remember to use encryption irresponsibly, and stay salty, my FBI friends.
Previously: FBI Chief Calls for National Talk Over Encryption vs. Safety
Federal Court Rules That the FBI Does Not Have to Disclose Name of iPhone Hacking Vendor
PureVPN Logs Helped FBI Net Alleged Cyberstalker
FBI Failed to Access 7,000 Encrypted Mobile Devices
Great, Now There's "Responsible Encryption"
FBI Bemoans Phone Encryption After Texas Shooting, but Refuses Apple's Help
DOJ: Strong Encryption That We Don't Have Access to is "Unreasonable"
Exclusive: U.S. lawmakers urge AT&T to cut commercial ties with Huawei - sources
U.S. lawmakers are urging AT&T Inc, the No. 2 wireless carrier, to cut commercial ties to Chinese phone maker Huawei Technologies Co Ltd and oppose plans by telecom operator China Mobile Ltd to enter the U.S. market because of national security concerns, two congressional aides said.
[...] Earlier this month, AT&T was forced to scrap a plan to offer its customers Huawei handsets after some members of Congress lobbied against the idea with federal regulators, sources told Reuters.
The U.S. government has also blocked a string of Chinese acquisitions over national security concerns, including Ant Financial's proposed purchase of U.S. money transfer company MoneyGram International Inc.
The lawmakers are also advising U.S. firms that if they have ties to Huawei or China Mobile, it could hamper their ability to do business with the U.S. government, one aide said, requesting anonymity because they were not authorized to speak publicly.
Related: NSA Spied on Chinese Government and Huawei
Kaspersky Willing to Hand Source Code Over to U.S. Government
Kaspersky Lab has been Working With Russian Intelligence
FBI Reportedly Advising Companies to Ditch Kaspersky Apps
Federal Government, Concerned About Cyberespionage, Bans Use of Kaspersky Labs Products
Trump security team sees building U.S. 5G network as option
President Donald Trump's national security team is looking at options to counter the threat of China spying on U.S. phone calls that include the government building a super-fast 5G wireless network, a senior administration official said on Sunday. The official, confirming the gist of a report from Axios.com, said the option was being debated at a low level in the administration and was six to eight months away from being considered by the president himself.
The 5G network concept is aimed at addressing what officials see as China's threat to U.S. cyber security and economic security. [...] "We want to build a network so the Chinese can't listen to your calls," the senior official told Reuters. "We have to have a secure network that doesn't allow bad actors to get in. We also have to ensure the Chinese don't take over the market and put every non-5G network out of business."
[...] Major wireless carriers have spent billions of dollars buying spectrum to launch 5G networks, and it is unclear if the U.S. government would have enough spectrum to build its own 5G network. [...] Another option includes having a 5G network built by a consortium of wireless carriers, the U.S. official said. "We want to build a secure 5G network and we have to work with industry to figure out the best way to do it," the official said, speaking on condition of anonymity. Axios published documents it said were from a presentation from a National Security Council official. If the government built the network, it would rent access to carriers, Axios said.
Will it include "responsible encryption"?
Related: U.S. Lawmakers Urge AT&T to Cut Ties With Huawei
Verizon is following AT&T's lead and cancelling plans to sell Huawei's Mate 10 Pro smartphone that boasts support for the upcoming super-fast 5G network, according to a Bloomberg report on Tuesday.
Verizon's decision is reportedly based on political pressure from the US government, which is seeing a reinvigorated fear of spying from China as US regulators urged an investigation of Chinese-made telecom equipment in December 2017. It's the same reason AT&T dropped its deal with Huawei to offer the Mate 10 Pro on January 8.
Huawei's Mate 10 Pro with 5G networking capabilities seemingly falls under the category of Chinese-made telecom equipment under investigation, as the company has been accused of having ties with the Chinese government.
Previously: U.S. Lawmakers Urge AT&T to Cut Ties With Huawei
Related: U.S. Government Reportedly Wants to Build a 5G Network to Thwart Chinese Spying
UK reportedly planning to phase out Huawei equipment from its 5G networks
After resisting pressure from the US for months, Prime Minister Boris Johnson is apparently preparing to phase out the use of Huawei equipment from the UK's 5G networks, the Financial Times reported. Citing national security concerns, members of the UK's Conservative party have pushed for Huawei technology to be removed from the UK's 5G infrastructure and the rest of its telecom network by 2023.
[...] Trump reportedly called Johnson earlier this year to discuss the matter, and at least one member of Congress said the US was reconsidering its intelligence partnership with the UK.
Johnson had limited how much Huawei equipment could be used for 5G networks in the UK, banning the use of the company's technology in the most sensitive parts of the network. He said in January that there were not a lot of other options available for the UK's 5G infrastructure, and telecom Vodafone said removing Huawei equipment from its networks would be extremely costly.
See also: Reports: UK to cut Huawei's involvement in 5G network
Boris Johnson forced to reduce Huawei's role in UK's 5G networks
Previously:
U.S. Intelligence Agency Heads Warn Against Using Huawei and ZTE Products
Huawei's Equipment Removed from UK Telecom BT's Network for Emergency Services
EU to Drop Threat of Huawei Ban but Wants 5G Risks Monitored
UK to Toughen Telecoms Security Controls to Shrink 5G Risks
How China Is Building A World-Beating Phone Network
Using Huawei in UK 5G Network 'Madness', Says US
Getting Huawei Out of US Networks Requires Gov't Funding, Senators Say
Huawei Fires Back, Points To US' History Of Spying On Phone Networks
TSMC Dumps Huawei
Huawei is 'open' to selling 5G chips to Apple for iPhones, marking a big shift in strategy
Huawei is "open" to selling high-speed 5G chips and other silicon to rival smartphone maker Apple, marking a significant shift in the Chinese tech giant's thinking toward its own intellectual property.
The world's largest networking equipment maker has been in the consumer market for a relatively short amount of time with its own-brand smartphones, but it has quickly risen to become the third-largest vendor by market share.
Huawei started by selling phones at low prices but in recent years has shifted focus to increase its market share in the high end of the market, battling Apple and Samsung. As part of that move, Huawei has developed its own chips, including a modem to give smartphones 5G connectivity, and a processor to power its devices. 5G is next-generation mobile internet, which delivers data at very high speeds.
So far, those pieces of technology have been used only in Huawei's devices. That could change. In an interview with CNBC that aired Monday, Huawei founder and CEO Ren Zhengfei said the company would consider selling its 5G chips to Apple. "We are open to Apple in this regard," Ren said. The CEO spoke in Mandarin, which was translated into English by an official translator.
Apple products (e.g. new iPhones) are likely to use 5G modems from Intel, although they won't be ready until 2020. Huawei has been shunned by U.S. companies due to warnings and pressure from the U.S. government claiming that Huawei products enable Chinese espionage. There has even been discussion of the U.S. government developing a 5G network free of Chinese influence. Given that there aren't many places in the country where you can get a "5G" connection yet, is there any point to this offer?
Related:
Intel Announces Development of 5G Modems (Due in 2019)
U.S. Intelligence Agency Heads Warn Against Using Huawei and ZTE Products
New Law Bans U.S. Government from Buying Equipment from Chinese Telecom Giants ZTE and Huawei
Australia Bans China's Huawei (and maybe ZTE) from 5G Mobile Network Project
Intel Speeds Up Rollout of 5G Modems
Washington Asks Allies to Drop Huawei
Australian Residents Reject Huawei Small Cell Boxes
Germany and the EU Likely to Embrace Huawei, Rebuff the U.S.
EU to Drop Threat of Huawei Ban but Wants 5G Risks Monitored
Huawei's Equipment Poses 'Significant' Security Risks, UK Says
The Sydney Morning Herald reports that Australia's government on Thursday banned major Chinese telecoms firm Huawei Technologies from supplying equipment for its planned 5G mobile network, citing risks of foreign interference.
The 1000-word statement did not mention China, or the Chinese telecommunications equipment giants Huawei or ZTE. Nor did it plainly state the bombshell decision that they are to be banned from building Australia's new telecommunications network.
The fifth generation mobile telecoms system, or 5G, is a big deal. It's to be the key architecture of an increasingly wired nation, connecting power and water systems, medical and driverless technologies, systems in homes and hospitals, factories and farms, enabling the so-called "internet of things".
If you're getting the impression that the government didn't want to draw attention to the announcement, you're right. After months of careful scrutiny, the cabinet's national security committee had made the decision a week earlier. Then sat on it.
President Trump yesterday signed a defense funding bill that included a sweeping ban on the US government using technology supplied by Chinese telecommunications giants ZTE and Huawei. The bill also includes a narrower ban on using surveillance gear provided by Chinese companies Hytera Communications, Hangzhou Hikvision Digital Technology, or Dahua Technology for national security applications.
The legislation directs federal agencies to stop using the Chinese-made hardware within two years. If that proves impractical, an agency can apply for a waiver to permit a longer phase-out period.
Obviously, being banned from selling to the US government is a significant blow to these companies. But overall the bill actually represents something of a reprieve for ZTE. Back in June, the US Senate passed a version of the bill that would have re-imposed an export ban that would have been a de facto death sentence for ZTE because ZTE is heavily dependent on components like Qualcomm chips and Google's Android operating system.
Previously: Verizon Cancels Plans to Sell Huawei Phone Due to U.S. Government Pressure
U.S. Intelligence Agency Heads Warn Against Using Huawei and ZTE Products
The U.S. Intelligence Community's Demonization of Huawei Remains Highly Hypocritical
Huawei CEO Still Committed to the U.S. Market
Rural Wireless Association Opposes U.S. Government Ban on Huawei and ZTE Equipment
ZTE Suspends Operations Due to U.S. Ban (UPDATED)
Chinese Tech Giant on Brink of Collapse in New U.S. Cold War (archive)
Not Apple. Not Huawei. The first casualty of the high-tech cold war between the United States and China might be the biggest electronics maker you've never heard of.
The Chinese firm ZTE said on Wednesday [PDF] it had ceased "major operating activities" after the Trump administration banned the company last month from using components made in the United States. With manufacturing halted at the ZTE plant in Shenzhen, factory workers have been getting called in for training sessions every other day or so — a snooze, they say. The rest of the time, they loaf around in nearby dorms.
Trading in the company's shares has been suspended for weeks. Staff members have been instructed, in new guidelines reviewed by The New York Times, to reassure anxious clients, while being sure to avoid discussing with them the American technology from which the firm is cut off for the next seven years.
One of China's most internationally successful technology suppliers, with about $17 billion in annual revenue, ZTE is facing a death sentence. The Commerce Department has blocked its access to American-made components until 2025, saying the company failed to punish employees who violated trade controls against Iran and North Korea.
Update: President Trump has vowed to get ZTE "back into business, fast" (archive):
President Xi of China, and I, are working together to give massive Chinese phone company, ZTE, a way to get back into business, fast. Too many jobs in China lost. Commerce Department has been instructed to get it done! — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) May 13, 2018
Also at Fortune, WSJ, USAToday and CNN.
Previously: U.S. Intelligence Agency Heads Warn Against Using Huawei and ZTE Products
Huawei CEO Still Committed to the U.S. Market
Rural Wireless Association Opposes U.S. Government Ban on Huawei and ZTE Equipment
ZTE Responds to U.S. Ban on Sales by American Companies to ZTE
Huawei may have a backup OS in case it has to drop Android
It'd be hard to blame Huawei executives if they're feeling very nervous lately. The US has created havoc for ZTE by renewing an export ban over trade violations, potentially depriving it of its Android license and leaving it without a platform. How would Huawei avoid a similar fate? Simple: it would use its own operating system instead. South China Morning Post sources have claimed that Huawei has been developing its own mobile operating system (there are reportedly tablet and PC equivalents) ever since it and ZTE faced an American investigation in 2012. It's considered an investment for "worst-case scenarios," the insiders said.
The company hasn't released this OS because it isn't up to Android's level of quality and app support, the sources added.
Huawei hasn't confirmed or denied the software's existence, saying only that it "has no plans" to launch an in-house OS in the "foreseeable future" -- if there is one, there's no rush to use it. There was a purported meeting leak in 2012 that referenced a new platform.
See also: ZTE and the Unknown Unknowns
Related: U.S. Intelligence Agency Heads Warn Against Using Huawei and ZTE Products
Huawei CEO Still Committed to the U.S. Market
China's ZTE slams U.S. ban, says company's survival at risk
China's ZTE Corp said on Friday that a U.S. ban on the sale of parts and software to the company was unfair and threatens its survival, and vowed to safeguard its interests through all legal means.
The United States this week imposed a ban on sales by American companies to ZTE for seven years, saying the Chinese company had broken a settlement agreement with repeated false statements - a move that threatens to cut off its supply chain.
"It is unacceptable that BIS insists on unfairly imposing the most severe penalty on ZTE even before the completion of investigation of facts," ZTE said in its first response since the ban was announced, referring to the U.S. Commerce Department's Bureau of Industry and Security. "The Denial Order will not only severely impact the survival and development of ZTE, but will also cause damages to all partners of ZTE including a large number of U.S. companies," ZTE said in a statement.
ZTE said it regards compliance as the cornerstone of its strategy, adding it invested $50 million in export control compliance projects in 2017 and plans to invest more this year. A senior U.S. Commerce Department official told Reuters earlier this week that it is unlikely to lift the ban.
Also at WSJ.
Previously: U.S. Intelligence Agency Heads Warn Against Using Huawei and ZTE Products
The U.S. Intelligence Community's Demonization of Huawei Remains Highly Hypocritical
Huawei CEO Still Committed to the U.S. Market
Rural Wireless Association Opposes U.S. Government Ban on Huawei and ZTE Equipment
Related: ZTE's $99 Zmax Pro Smartphone Packs in Top-Line Features
Banning Chinese network gear is a really bad idea, small ISPs tell FCC
The Federal Communications Commission's proposed ban on Huawei and ZTE gear in government-funded projects will hurt small Internet providers' efforts to deploy broadband, according to a lobby group for rural ISPs.
As previously reported, FCC Chairman Ajit Pai's proposal would prevent Universal Service Fund (USF) money from being used to buy equipment or services from companies that "pos[e] a national security risk." If the FCC approves the proposal, the ban is most likely to prevent the purchase of equipment from Chinese technology vendors Huawei and ZTE. But it could also affect other companies and technology from other countries, depending on how the FCC determines which companies pose national security threats.
ISPs who use federal money to build or expand broadband service would end up with fewer options for buying network gear. This would "irreparably damage broadband networks (and limit future deployment) in many rural and remote areas throughout the country," the Rural Wireless Association (RWA) told the FCC in a filing yesterday.
The RWA represents rural wireless Internet providers that offer home or mobile Internet service and have fewer than 100,000 subscribers. A recent Wall Street Journal report said that small ISPs rely on Huawei gear more than large telcos do.
Previously: U.S. Lawmakers Urge AT&T to Cut Ties With Huawei
U.S. Government Reportedly Wants to Build a 5G Network to Thwart Chinese Spying
U.S. Intelligence Agency Heads Warn Against Using Huawei and ZTE Products
The U.S. Intelligence Community's Demonization of Huawei Remains Highly Hypocritical
Huawei's consumer business group CEO Richard Yu is not giving up on selling smartphones and other devices in the U.S., despite warnings against the company made by U.S. government officials and a lack of support from retailers. The company recently released a new flagship smartphone, the Huawei P20 Pro:
"We are committed to the US market and to earning the trust of US consumers by staying focused on delivering world-class products and innovation," Yu told CNET in an email. "We would never compromise that trust."
The comments mark a defiant response to the vague warnings made by US officials that have effectively crippled Huawei's ability to get its phones in front of consumers. In January, AT&T pulled out of a landmark plan to sell the Mate 10 Pro, an important high-end Huawei phone. Verizon reportedly also scuttled a deal to carry the device based on political pressure. CNET was also first to report that Best Buy, the US' largest electronics retailer, dropped Huawei phones from its roster.
[...] "The security risk concerns are based on groundless suspicions and are quite frankly unfair," Yu said. "We welcome an open and transparent discussion if it is based on facts." [...] "We work with 46 of the 50 global operators," Yu told CNET, "And have maintained a very strong security record because security is one of our top priorities." [...] "Even without the United States market, we'll be No. 1 in the world," Yu said earlier this week.
Huawei reported a 27% jump in profits in 2017, despite its struggle to establish itself in the U.S. market.
See also: Huawei P20 launch highlights the risks of U.S. paranoia over Chinese security
Huawei's P20 Pro is a hugely promising phone that will upset Americans
Previously: U.S. Lawmakers Urge AT&T to Cut Ties With Huawei
Verizon Cancels Plans to Sell Huawei Phone Due to U.S. Government Pressure
The U.S. Intelligence Community's Demonization of Huawei Remains Highly Hypocritical
Best Buy will cut ties with Huawei and stop selling Huawei products over the next few weeks. Huawei's smartphones, such as its new flagship Mate 10 Pro, are sold in the U.S. by retailers, but no U.S. wireless service provider will sell them. Now the largest electronics retailer in the U.S. is calling it quits:
The move, after similar actions from U.S. carriers including AT&T Inc, comes as U.S. scrutiny of Chinese tech firms grows amid simmering tensions over U.S.-China trade and concerns of security.
[...] Earlier this year, AT&T was forced to scrap a plan to offer Huawei handsets after some members of Congress lobbied against the idea with federal regulators, sources told Reuters. Verizon Communications Inc also ended its plans to sell Huawei phones last year, according to media reports.
Last month two Republican Senators introduced legislation that would block the U.S. government from buying or leasing telecommunications equipment from Huawei or Chinese peer ZTE Corp, citing concern the firms would use their access to spy on U.S. officials.
Previously: U.S. Lawmakers Urge AT&T to Cut Ties With Huawei
Verizon Cancels Plans to Sell Huawei Phone Due to U.S. Government Pressure
U.S. Intelligence Agency Heads Warn Against Using Huawei and ZTE Products
The U.S. Intelligence Community's Demonization of Huawei Remains Highly Hypocritical
Submitted via IRC for Runaway1956
The U.S. Intel Community's Demonization of Huawei Remains Highly Hypocritical
We've noted for some time how Chinese hardware vendor Huawei has been consistently accused of spying on American citizens without any substantive, public evidence. You might recall that these accusations flared up several years ago, resulting in numerous investigations that culminated in no hard evidence whatsoever to support the allegations. We're not talking about superficial inquiries, we're talking about eighteen months, in-depth reviews by people with every interest in exposing them. One anonymous insider put it this way in the wake of the last bout of hysteria surrounding the company:
We knew certain parts of government really wanted" evidence of active spying, said one of the people, who requested anonymity. "We would have found it if it were there.
[...] This week, hysteria concerning Huawei again reached a fevered pitch, as U.S. intelligence chiefs, testifying before Congress over Russian hacking and disinformation concerns, again proclaimed that Huawei was spying on American citizens and their products most assuredly should not be used:
At the hearing, FBI Director Chris Wray testified, "We're deeply concerned about the risks of allowing any company or entity that is beholden to foreign governments that don't share our values to gain positions of power inside our telecommunications networks." Purchasing Huawei or ZTE products, Wray added, "provides the capacity to maliciously modify or steal information. And it provides the capacity to conduct undetected espionage.
Which values would those be, exactly? Would it be the values, as leaked Edward Snowden docs revealed, that resulted in the NSA hacking into Huawei, stealing source code, then attempting to plant its own backdoors into Huawei products? Or perhaps it's the values inherent in working closely with companies like AT&T to hoover up every shred of data that touches the AT&T network and share it with the intelligence community? Perhaps it's the values inherent in trying to demonize encryption, by proxy weakening security for everyone?
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 15 2018, @01:09PM (16 children)
I actually read these news in two interpretation modes.
- These vendors produce phones in which we have a hard time getting into.
- These vendors refused to put backdoors for us in their phones.
Either way seems like these phones are the safest ones to use.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Subsentient on Thursday February 15 2018, @02:05PM (15 children)
"It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society." -Jiddu Krishnamurti
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 15 2018, @02:18PM (9 children)
(Score: 4, Insightful) by frojack on Thursday February 15 2018, @04:51PM (4 children)
The allegation was not that they would do anything to the owner.
The TLAs are worried that these companies may be trying to get their gear onto US networks for nefarious reasons
Gee, what could you do with several hundred thousand federated processors hiding on an adversaries network?
Who better to know that than US spy agencies?
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 15 2018, @07:02PM (3 children)
So the yearly complete and utter humiliation of US spying efforts is a bad thing?
Why should anyone care whether they win or lose, when its pretty clear that US intelligence agencies are against everybody, domestic and foreign?
If one can't defend own network against a few hundred thousand cellphones, while consuming a budget that size...
IMO, they should be laughed at, for being INCOMPETENT RETARDS.
(Score: 2) by frojack on Thursday February 15 2018, @07:28PM
Reading comprehension much?
There was a trial balloon floated to have a nationalized 5G network [documentcloud.org] owned and operated by the government.
However, you seem to be the only one that assumes it already exists.
Maybe you want to look into who owns and runs the networks in this country (Clue, its not the government) before you start calling other people INCOMPETENT RETARDS.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 2) by Subsentient on Friday February 16 2018, @04:32AM (1 child)
"It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society." -Jiddu Krishnamurti
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 22 2018, @03:47AM
China is worse? China's record in foreign relations is far from spotless, but I see that the United States's record for meddling in world affairs for its own benefit is still darker, even counting only what they have done since the end of World War II. They have manipulated and encouraged repressive dictatorships throughout Latin America (El Salvador, Guatemala, Chile, etc.), aided and abetted genocide (East Timor, Guatemala), and engaged in multiple unprovoked wars of aggression (Vietnam, Iraq, Grenada, Panama, etc.). China has done some terrible things to other countries too in the same period but nothing on the scale of what the United States has done. Sure, the Chinese annexed Tibet and have propped up North Korea and the Khmer Rouge (bearing a portion of the responsibility for the Cambodian genocide) among other things, but is the scale and scope of their foreign manipulation really greater than that of the US? I think not. But I will agree it is not for lack of trying.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Thursday February 15 2018, @08:54PM (3 children)
The problem is that the US has the same lack of reason. The back door isn't there because they expect to break in to all those phones, it's there because they want the capability.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 15 2018, @10:12PM (2 children)
(Score: 1) by khallow on Friday February 16 2018, @12:28AM (1 child)
The black hat exploiting the backdoor is most likely to be the one with a reason to break into your phone.
(Score: 1) by anubi on Friday February 16 2018, @04:24AM
I would believe ex-spouses or business associates/competitors have the most compelling reasons to hack into your phone.
I believe the government wants the existence of these backdoors because they are preparing for the social unrest that is sure to follow when some of our rather extravagrant banking practices come home to roost. They will need to quickly find out who the leaders are so they can have minimal impact on the general populace, who they need to keep at work so we all can continue to have the goods and services we have become accustomed to.
I believe they also justify their needs for backdoors to assist in tracking and accumulating evidence to nail social miscreants. Like someone goes and shoots up a shopping mall, we want to nail the guy as fast as possible, and find out if any of his associates have plans to do something similar.
I do not believe anyone wants to see us regress back to times like described in the Bible. Why even the homeless today have it better than the Kings did back in those days. Show me a King who could go relax in a burger joint on a really sweltering day back then.... all they seemed to have is slaves waving palm fronds at them - functional equivalent of an electric fan, sans body odor.
But, back to privacy, if backdoors exist at all, they will be abused, as no-one can keep a secret. Look at all the bean-spilling and whistle-blowing that goes on.
If a phone ( or a computer ) has even the existence of being compromised, it will, and most likely, it *won't* be the government doing it. Its gonna be some ex-spouse or anyone else who "has you in their sights", and has retained a technical "hit man" to do a number on you.
People already pay thousands of dollars to give other people a "free helicopter ride". You don't think they can't really make a major problem in your life by finding out certain things about you? For a lot less money and legal risk than helicopter rides. We've all seen the tiniest of things blown up all way out of proportion once some head gets to jabbering about it and won't shut up.
"Prove all things; hold fast that which is good." [KJV: I Thessalonians 5:21]
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 15 2018, @02:56PM (2 children)
When choosing between two unethical entities, one of which is blatant and clear about it, and another one that poses an angel and denies facts even after being caught red handed countless of times and enough to have become a well known meme all around the world, I would chose the former.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by DeathMonkey on Thursday February 15 2018, @07:28PM
Well that's the easy part.
The hard part is telling which one is which.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Friday February 16 2018, @01:27AM
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 15 2018, @04:14PM
Meh. It's just the ruling class getting us ready for World War 3.
They've already decided it's going to happen. We don't have any say in it.
(Score: 2) by Gaaark on Thursday February 15 2018, @09:41PM
"Yes, because the Chinese communist party is so ethical, and chinese corporations have such a great track record for doing the right thing."
Yes, because the American government is so ethical, and American corporations have such a great track record for doing the right thing.
Yes, because the American government is so ethical, and Microsoft has such a great track record for doing the right thing.
Yada yada Fuddle Duddle
--- Please remind me if I haven't been civil to you: I'm channeling MDC. ---Gaaark 2.0 ---
(Score: 2) by LoRdTAW on Thursday February 15 2018, @04:55PM (2 children)
What goes around comes around.
(Score: 2) by frojack on Thursday February 15 2018, @07:31PM (1 child)
Cisco and Dell (eventually) fess up to their vulnerabilities. Sometimes they even fix them.
Maybe the NSA/CIA should just leak what they know to some actual hackers so they can suddenly "find" these worry-some back doors and publish sensational articles about zero day vulnerabilities.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 15 2018, @08:50PM
Yet none of these companies will stop producing proprietary software and locked-down devices. They are all guilty.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by aiwarrior on Thursday February 15 2018, @05:03PM
LOL
I wanted my comment to be just that, but I feel I need to explain further my state of mind.
The American propaganda hypocrisy is in such a high gear that now not even the New York Times can be read without the same tinfoil hat I use for Russia Today. I mean seriously:
* After the whole world got to know that America taps other countries optical fiber links, using American companies to do their bidding;
* After forcing Microsoft to follow American law in Ireland data centers;
* After [insert all Snowden revealed shit]
[Punchline]
*Horatio Caine puts sunglasses*: You know people, Huawei is bad for you.
There is only one immediate threat I feel from Huawei: They are competitor to my employer, that is it.
Bonus off-topic hypocrisy because San Diego just had a huge Hepatitis A outbreak due to the amount of filth of homeless people. Take a look at this cute Chinese girl and how it is worse in China: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/02/15/world/asia/girl-leaving-beijing.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=second-column-region®ion=top-news&WT.nav=top-news [nytimes.com]
I stand by American's team in the world stage but as a nation there are very serious topics that need reflection.
PS: Can we have mod-up disagree?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 15 2018, @05:21PM
OK, so Chinese and US products are all suspect.
What might a secure alternative be? Nokia Asha-based phones perhaps?
Assuming of course Microsoft hasn't gotten their slimy tentacles into Asha yet.
(Score: 1) by mrkaos on Thursday February 15 2018, @11:32PM
Since I'm going to be spied on by someone and it's out of my control, why should I care who it is?
My ism, it's full of beliefs.