FCC Declares Huawei, ZTE 'National Security Threats' (techcrunch.com) 74
The Federal Communication Commission has declared Chinese telecom giants Huawei and ZTE "national security threats," a move that will formally ban U.S. telecom companies from using federal funds to buy and install Huawei and ZTE equipment. From a report: FCC chairman Ajit Pai said that the "weight of evidence" supported the decision to ban the technology giants. Federal agencies and lawmakers have long claimed that the tech giants are subject to Chinese law, which "obligates them to cooperate with the country's intelligence services," Pai said. "We cannot and will not allow the Chinese Communist Party to exploit network vulnerabilities and compromise our critical communications infrastructure," the FCC said in a separate statement. Huawei and ZTE have repeatedly rejected the claims. The order, published by the FCC on Tuesday, said the designation takes immediate effect, but it's not immediately clear how the designation changes the status quo. In November of last year, the FCC announced that companies deemed a national security threat would be ineligible to receive any money from the Universal Service Fund. The $8.5B USF is the FCC's main way of purchasing and subsidizing equipment and services to improve connectivity across the country.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
the foreign agents are very little credible threat though, Washington DC is 99% the threat and the problem, and are hamstringing this country.
Re: way down the list (Score:5, Insightful)
Given my choice between having a western nation spy on me and a brutal murderous dictatorial regime spy on me, I'll take the western spies.
Re: (Score:1)
Would you ? Which set of spooks is more likely to cause you personal harm, ones from your own country or Chinese ones ?
You get a different answer if you ask "which set of spooks is likely to cause my country harm?"
Re: way down the list (Score:1)
Fair point.
For me personally as an individual, western spies are more directly risky to me. However, if my country were to fall, the dystopian nightmare that would come about would be orders of magnitude worse than western spooks looking at my email and slashdot posts. And don't think it can't happen. Every great power has eventually fallen. I just prefer that when the times comes, it comes as far in the future as possible and we resist as much as we can.
So short version: yes, I will sacrifice the tiny
Re: (Score:2)
False dichotomy, and false choice. China and the US will simply trade information on one another's dissidents.
Re: (Score:2)
Given my choice between having a western nation spy on me and a brutal murderous dictatorial regime spy on me, I'll take the western spies.
Since when is the FCC in the role of Domestic and foreign Security investigation, stipulating a conclusion without a hearing, and acting unilaterally. I may be concerned about Huawei, but they have done more to promote ipv6 and more, than domestic carriers. Certainly American companies can go into some partnership relationships where patents are owned, are shared with the American partner.
Re:way down the list (Score:5, Insightful)
How about we declare NSA, DHS and CIA national security threats, they are the ones invading our privacy, kicking in doors, waging shadow wars against those that didn't attack us to create new enemies.
While those are issues, they are attempting to act in the interest of the United States. Conflating their actions with the actions of a foreign government is not constructive at all but then again, you were never interested in doing anything but writing a whiny comment.
Re: (Score:1, Troll)
While those are issues, they are attempting to act in the interest of the United States.
Please don't tell m you actually believe that lie still? The Manning, Wikileaks, and other leaks have proven for a fact that this isn't true. They are acting in the interests of the US Government and multinational corporations. Saying interest of the United States gives the impression that their acting in the interest of the general populace; which they are not. If these disclosures prove anything, it's that the US government sees its own citizens as the enemy.
Re: way down the list (Score:1)
Newsflash - the general populace dont give a flying fuck about that tranny desk jockey solder, wikileaks or St Julian. In fact nor do most people in tech either. Just left wing paranoids like you. And if you think other government security agencies around the world are any different then come over here to view a bridge for sale ---->
Re: (Score:2)
Re: way down the list (Score:2)
Go ask the chinese, Russians Saudis, Venezuelans what real state suppression is then stop whining like a child and grow up.
Re: (Score:2)
They are acting in the interests of the US Government and multinational corporations.
In this regard, our interests are not mutually exclusive.
Please don't tell m you actually believe that lie still? The Manning, Wikileaks, and other leaks have proven for a fact that this isn't true. ...
If these disclosures prove anything, it's that the US government sees its own citizens as the enemy.
I believe it's more likely that cumulatively they see the general populace as sheep that need to be protected from wolves. Considering that abject stupidity I've seen recently from my fellow Americans, I'm not completely convinced that they are wrong. Regardless, they are taking actions, justifying them by as "the ends justify the means" and trying to keep the whole thing away from prying eyes. It doesn't seem implicitly malicious toward the US pop
Re: (Score:2)
How about we declare NSA, DHS and CIA national security threats, they are the ones invading our privacy, kicking in doors, waging shadow wars against those that didn't attack us to create new enemies.
Just throwing this out there: From pandering to Putin to abusing allies and ignoring his own advisers, Trump's phone calls alarm US officials [cnn.com]
One person familiar with almost all the conversations with the leaders of Russia, Turkey, Canada, Australia and western Europe described the calls cumulatively as 'abominations' so grievous to US national security interests that if members of Congress heard from witnesses to the actual conversations or read the texts and contemporaneous notes, even many senior Republican members would no longer be able to retain confidence in the President.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: way down the list (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
i should look it up euh
https://youtu.be/1ylleTbizgU [youtu.be]
maybe no one bothered to ask them , bigger concern is that the "not so free" west (the rest of it) seems to blindly follow once more - wether the concerns are founded or not, i dont think small users would be harmed i
Comment removed (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:dang Ajit whats in that coffee cup? (Score:5, Insightful)
> For a country thats snored through thirty years of warrantless wiretaps and mass surveillance through every major US telecom country
This is about security for the US govt's interests, not a moral stance.
> we sure are concerned about Chinese network equipment despite having not a shred of evidence that any of this clandestine activity takes place
Except for the action that is baked into their own country's infrastructure.Whataboutism for corporate or US govt interests are not compelling arguments, in and of themselves for anything you have posed.
> so occhams razor applies
You posing a false dichotomy that you made up. This is SOP for every country that has the technical and legal means to do so (securing interests politically and technologically) and your "care for the Chinese" is a painfully wrongheaded derail. There is something about the efficacy of policies that serve to inhibit foreign interests, that you have deftly failed to cover.
Your agenda is getting in the way of a high school level of analysis, imo.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
I'd accept that this is a security threat - except that supposedly these companies were originally being sanctioned for evading the boycott of Iran. I think ZTE paid a fine to clear them of that charge, but now they're hit with this. Whenever the administration states a new rationale for something they were doing under a different rationale just a short while ago, I suspect that they're doing what they always wanted to do - and just ginning up a new excuse to replace the old one after it's been discredite
Re: dang Ajit whats in that coffee cup? (Score:1)
Let's assume it's exactly as you imply: ZTE is totally innocent and US telecom CEOs just want an unfair advantage.
Since their Chinese competitors are just appendages of the Chinese police state and mass tech spying on western nations, what is wrong with putting a thumb on the scale to balance thins back?
Fair trade, not free trade.
Blame America! (Score:4, Insightful)
That'd be used by our government, subject to our election-choices.
Of course — giving an adversary this level of access is much worse, false equivalence much?
Reportedly [reuters.com] evidence exists, but is — quite understandably — classified.
Sure, adversaries — and even friendly countries — spy on each other. That's neither new, nor reprehensible.
But you're trying to convince, that — because the US itself is spying on others — it is somehow disagreeable and wrong for us to resist spying attempts by the others.
The "just like us" part — falsely equating China's regime with the US — has destroyed your entire argument (whatever was left of it)...
Re: (Score:2)
That'd be used by our government, subject to our election-choices
That is truly cute. I think if the past few years have shown how little that "election choice" actually protects you. Tell me again who to elect to preserver your privacy, eliminate warrantless wiretapping and secret courts?
But hey I don't care because I'm a good upstanding citizen with a great social score, so I have nothing to fear from my government.
Re: (Score:2)
The message I get from this is that Huawei and ZTE hardware is more secure than Cisco and Dell and Apple and that's why they consider it a national security threat.
Re: (Score:2)
This, and the lack of evidence is a major point. We're supposed to accept secret evidence from secret intelligence, just like Iraq's WMDs. But there is some evidence of absence here: Trump's repeated offers to make all these problems go away if China makes concessions in his stupid-ass trade war. So it still looks like the idea that Huawei or ZTE represent unique security threats is a fiction made up for twisting China's arm.
Re: (Score:2)
Good. (Score:3)
Should have done it ages ago. Shouldn't have opened relations with them to begin with really.
Re: (Score:3)
They probably are security threats, but unless the US government has some solid evidence and are willing to release it, the world is largely going to see this as blatant protectionism.
Re: Good. (Score:1)
I think the original reasoning behind opening relations wasn't a bad idea at the time but we should have changed that policy 20 years ago when it became clear it wasn't working and we were only creating our next enemy.
Tiananmen Square massacre should have been the last day we let them play outside their own borders with the civilized world.
Re: (Score:2)
What does it say about us when the newest toy so easily blinds us to the horrors of its maker?
Whatever disagreement you have with Trump or the NSA does not excuse what China is doing to its own people. China's government is evil and should be treated as such as long as they continue to persecute and kill Ughurs, Falun Gong, Muslims and Christians.
Re: (Score:2)
Should have done it ages ago. Shouldn't have opened relations with them to begin with really.
Neither the government of the USA, nor the people of the USA have the self control to actually fund not doing business which China. "Made in USA" has no intrinsic value and is just a cost to most. The USA worships guns, gasoline, Jesus and the dollar, though not necessarily in that order, and unless you give up on that last part you will eternally be drawn back to China over and over again.
In a nation where life is cheap, so are the means of production, and man do we love cheap.
Just like US companies to the RoW (Score:2)
I wish that Ajit Pai were honest ... (Score:4, Interesting)
all countries have laws like this Chinese one, in the USA it is the Patriot Act & 2018 CLOUD Act, the UK it is the Investigatory Powers Act - and various updating legislation.
The main reason is commercial, a desire to stop Chinese companies from being more successful than their competing USA ones. However under World Trade Organisation rules a country cannot arbitrarily ban companies in other countries. There are a few exceptions, one of which is national security - this is why security is always quoted as the reason.
I am not saying that the security risk from Huawei is zero, but then neither is the risk from CISCO zero.
Chinese is increasingly flexing its muscles and using its influence in ways that I do not like (think: Hong Kong [bbc.co.uk], restrictions on Uighur Muslims [sky.com], etc). China is, in part, empowered by its economic might - so curbing that might be a good thing.
Re: (Score:2)
On the other hand China can easily retaliate in a way that will hurt a lot - they can simply stop buying Boeing aircraft.
Boeing is hurting a lot right and this kind of a boycott might even be its funeral.
Re: I wish that Ajit Pai were honest ... (Score:1)
I could give a shit about Boeing. Not using backdoored telecom equipment from your enemies is more important.
Re: (Score:2)
If you could give a shit about Boeing, why won't you?
I, on the other hand, don't give a shit about Boring because I only fly on Airbus aircraft.
Re: I wish that Ajit Pai were honest ... (Score:1)
Boeing is just some random ass poorly run company with a history of cutting corners to save a buck. If they go under, fuck em.
I haven't had a dramatically different experience on Airbus vs. Boeing. Some other company will buy up Boeing's ashes and maybe they'll do better.
And yes I'm aware Boeing is American and Airbus is French. Doesn't bother me in the least if a French company out performed an American company and put them into the ground by being better run. That's what is supposed to happen to shitt
Re: (Score:2)
Airbus is multinational, not French.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: I wish that Ajit Pai were honest ... (Score:1)
Utterly ridiculous. (Score:2)
Not actually *providing* a shred of evidence is evidence that there is no evidence and this is another childish tantrum by the official joke leadership of the planet. (Sorry, Kim-Yong Un. You never got to Ghaddafi's level of crazy anyway. ;) ;) Maybe Trump should do something about that first...
They are subject to Chinese law? As opposed to what?
NSA law? Or is it because US corporations obey Chinese law too for no reason other than being too greedy not to enter the market?
And I'm not even saying it there is
Re: Utterly ridiculous. (Score:1)
Ban all commerce with China... ok. Let's do it.
That'll be a lot cheaper than the hot war we're headed towards which we'll lose if we give them control of our government communications.
Re: (Score:2)
Given that the EU is so far up in clouds, and Germany reigns in Heaven above that, I don't understand why you would notice or concern yourself with the U.S. or Trump. But I guess if you have time for Slashdot...
It's called projection (Score:2)
USA does all this spying and doesn't get caught so they believe everyone is also doing it and not getting caught.
Re: (Score:2)
Wow, you were brave enough to put yourself in front of that tank but now are more concerned about what the U.S. does? Reprogramming is more effective than I thought.
Re: (Score:2)
You think the USA doesn't get caught? They've been caught repeatedly! the chinese on the other hand have never been caught doing this. Now is it because they aren't doing as much? or because they're better at it than the USA? hard to say.
Either way, I wish my country would chose Chinese telecom equipment rather than American. Not only do they have a better track record in this regard, even if they are spying on me, I'm highly unlikely to ever visit Chinese jurisdiction, but it's difficult to completely avoi
Can we get some solid details to explain this. (Score:1)
Ok I get that Huawei is a Chinese company. China is a Communist country, so Huawei is part of the Chinese Government.
I also get that China has been responsible for a lot of Internet attacks around the world.
Yes putting One and One together you get Two.
However this is an overly simplistic view of the world.
Has there have been evidence in Huawei technology of it calling back to China? if you had a Hauwei phone. You should be able to track what Cell towers it calls, or what routs it takes on the internet to t
Re: Can we get some solid details to explain this. (Score:1)
Let's assume Huawei and ZTE are shipping clean products over seas. This week. What about next week? And why bother with that given their history?
Just not worth it.
Re: (Score:2)
Why do you assume people will only test a product once?
There are other product that are imported around the world which are tested again and again for legal and safety compliance.
Your reasoning doesn't make much sense at all. Because we can apply this to American Companies as well. Ford releases a Truck that passes all the Safety requirements this week. What about next week or later? Ford can save a lot of money by removing the airbags that most people will never see, or use cheaper bolts on the seat-belt
Re: Can we get some solid details to explain this (Score:1)
Why should I bother with Chinese products at all? At least I know my Cisco products are crap and the US gvt has backdoored the shit out of them.
As I said on a different sub-thread on this article: I prefer to be spied on by western democracies than murdering communist dictators in China.
Despite all efforts from the anti-US/pro-China crowd here to make the false equivalence argument, US != China.
Re: (Score:2)
I prefer the reverse. China can spy on me all they want. I'm unlikely to ever find myself under their jurisdiction. The USA on the other hand has a long history of ignoring jurisdiction, and almost every western country has a history of enabling them.
Re: (Score:2)
So being on a government watch list for your own nation who has the rights to arrest you, is less scary than an other nations who will need to go threw many channels to arrest you or even make your life difficult.
I am more worried about my yellow flag waving neighbor finding out that I really hate the effects of the Trump Presidency than China knowing I do no like China Human Rights policies, or how it has such a tight control of its businesses. If I were a Chinese Citizen, I probably would be more weary
Re: (Score:1)
"Fuck the chinks!"
In the wall? Try moving out of your log cabin and buying a fleshlight.
99% of all Cameras sold on Amazon (Score:2)
So what about the millions of Hikvision cameras sold in the US? If they ban Huawei chips, there won't be any cameras on Amazon at all. I hope they do this actually. We need to get back control of our privacy.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
The next step might be banning the import of devices from the blacklisted companies - I hope they do, actually.
Re: (Score:1)
Huh, what? Wait... (Score:1)
Weight of evidence (Score:2)
Companies Are Countries, without sovereign land. (Score:2)
Its going to be interesting to see what all the multinationals do to try to gain/keep favor with every country they do business with.
Especially when you consider that historically, it was the companies that owned the merchant marine fleets.
Companies that get big enough are just countries with no sovereign land. They even generate GDP.
Free market huh (Score:1)
Why is National Security any concern of FCC? (Score:2)
FCC lists as #2 among it's Top 5 Strategic Goals: [fcc.gov]
"Develop policies that promote the public interest by providing consumers with freedom from unwanted and intrusive communications, improving the quality of communications services available to those with disabilities, and protecting public safety."
Since it's utterly failing on preventing landline and mobile junk robocalls perhaps they shouldn't be venturing outside their mandate when it would be relatively easy for FCC to end junk calling.
Carriers, esp the or