SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
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
(Score: 4, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 24 2020, @08:02AM (11 children)
They had a couple of options here
UK is spied on by
>US
>China
UK is spied on by
>US
How much is it worth to be spied on by one country instead of two?
Until the past few weeks (unless you have been watching since January) there was the general assumption of "well China did all they could and we assume they acted in good faith" to "China locked down travel inside China from Wuhan in early January, but allowed international travel to continue". This is a policy of actively seeding the virus in other countries, and is an extremely hostile act. They went from assumed ignorance to known malice. Why would you respond to such malice by giving them the keys to the palace?
(Score: 2, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 24 2020, @08:30AM (5 children)
All these self hating westerners who would rather be a slave in a factory than admit there is something wrong with the Chinese "Communist" Party. Thanks for the troll mod, I'm sure it will help you in your credit score so you don't get cut off from public transportation.
(Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 24 2020, @08:55AM (2 children)
Worse than slave, they need to pay for their keep and heath themselves.
And, by God, they enjoy the freedom of choosing which of the corporates piss on them, both as a consumer and as a workforce provider working on a worse deal than a slave.
And, no, the negation of that is not "be a slave to the Chinese communists", don't try a false dilemma.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Sunday May 24 2020, @06:39PM (1 child)
But given your context, it's the natural false choice, not even a false dilemma. You present a very one-dimensional argument here. In the first sentence, option B is presented as "worse" because some costs are higher for the individual. And then you follow that up with "freedom of choosing which of the corporates piss on them". So you mention slavery and this caricature of freedom. So doesn't even meet the low standards of a false dilemma.
I'll just note that in the developed world "pay for keep" is just not that much. And the same idiots who obsess over health care are globally giving us more expensive health care. As to the "freedom of choosing which of the corporates piss on them", that's a genuine powerful freedom that has made for a lot of happy people throughout the world. It turns out that there are nice employers out there, and you can choose to work for them.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 24 2020, @11:16PM
Teehee, now I get it. The cause for the most expensive heath care in 'murica is because of the rest of the world conspiring to have lower cost of health care.
Welcome to the tautological conspiracy club.
(Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 24 2020, @09:11AM (1 child)
China and the USA can both fuck off.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 24 2020, @03:52PM
And the EU, NI and Scotland!
All of you, bugger off!
(Score: 4, Insightful) by zocalo on Sunday May 24 2020, @10:40AM
Either way, all this is overlooking two rather fundamental concepts in security - defence in depth, and assuming that you will be compromised and considering how you will contain the damage - the whole point of which is that if any link in the chain is compromised then you are still protected by the rest. The trick is to build your chain (design the system architecture) in such as way that even if Vendor A has state enforced backdoors then they are useless because all your other hardware from other vendors will prevent access. A simplistic example of this would be to use two different hardware vendors to provide firewalling capability; one at the outer perimeter of your DMZ and the other at the inner; even if both were backdoored by their respective vendors, the other firewall should still be capable of denying them access to the interior network.
Ultimately though it's a variation of the old procurement dilemma - you can only choose two from cheap, convenient, and secure - which is pretty much the same order that they usually get prioritised in.
UNIX? They're not even circumcised! Savages!
(Score: 3, Funny) by DrkShadow on Sunday May 24 2020, @04:16PM (3 children)
Wait, China left the the Wuhan International Airport open for business?? You could travel to other countries, but you could not travel throughout China?!? wtf?? I never heard about this!!
I heard that reporters couldn't get into China. I heard that Wuhan was so locked down that people were resorting to Tinder to get information from Wuhan. I heard... nothing of what you just claimed! That is astounding, and offensive to the extreme!! How could they do that?!?
That would be like the United States leaving the international border open despite the lead-in-water problem in Flint, MI! Despite the flooding and contamination along the Mississippi in the last couple years!
Or wait -- are you suggesting that for a localized incident with no known effects outside the given area that countries should lock down international borders immediately? and that this applies only to China? I'm confused.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 24 2020, @06:42PM (1 child)
The issue is that the CCP thought the issue serious enough to protect themselves, but not protect others. This thing doubles every three to five days unchecked. This virus followed that pattern since mid november, giving something like 50k cases at a minimum in Wuhan alone when they closed down domestic flights from Wuhan. Important enough for China to close their most important inland transportation route to other Chinese locations, yet not enough for them to worry about international travel.
Flint example would be the same if every person leaving flint would kick off three to five day doubling of lead poisioning anywhere they went, and if the US knew this so they refused to allow people from Flint to travel to NY or Texas but thought it was a-ok if they still traveled to London.
German intelligence said they have evidence China told the WHO in the same timeframe to push that the virus did not have human-to-human transmission, yet other documents they gave to the WHO showed they knew about h2h transmission in December.
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Sunday May 24 2020, @11:23PM
I don't quite get it. Are you saying you'd like to be protected by the CCP?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 25 2020, @05:00PM
Ah yes I too remember the great Leaded Water Warning Agreement (LWWA) in 1985 that required the US to inform signatory countries of situations where communities had too high of concentrations of lead in their water.