US Pressed Chinese Firms To Show One Example of When They Resisted Request For Data From Chinese Government, But They Have Never Done So: WSJ (wsj.com) 70
The latest in the Huawei saga, which is increasing tension between the U.S. and China. WSJ reports about a remarkable event: Confronted with U.S. accusations of cyber espionage, Chinese companies and government officials often accuse Washington of hypocrisy, pointing to allegations in 2013 by former NSA contractor Edward Snowden that the U.S. had been hacking into key Chinese networks for years. Western officials say systems of checks and balances in their countries allow for companies to challenge those demands, unlike in China.
To further highlight that difference, U.S. officials have repeatedly pressed Chinese companies to demonstrate to them one example of a time they resisted a request for data from the Chinese government, but they have never done so, according to a person familiar with those conversations. U.S. intelligence officials have suggested at times that their views on Huawei are informed by definitive examples of malfeasance, though they have so far refused to share such evidence publicly. When the House Intelligence Committee in 2012 published an unclassified report naming Huawei as a security risk, it spoke generally about a lack of trust lawmakers placed in China but steered clear of providing concrete examples of the company being caught engaging in nefarious activity.
To further highlight that difference, U.S. officials have repeatedly pressed Chinese companies to demonstrate to them one example of a time they resisted a request for data from the Chinese government, but they have never done so, according to a person familiar with those conversations. U.S. intelligence officials have suggested at times that their views on Huawei are informed by definitive examples of malfeasance, though they have so far refused to share such evidence publicly. When the House Intelligence Committee in 2012 published an unclassified report naming Huawei as a security risk, it spoke generally about a lack of trust lawmakers placed in China but steered clear of providing concrete examples of the company being caught engaging in nefarious activity.
Well, there was that one time (Score:3)
But those execs are in the Human Plastic Show right now.
Re:Well, there was that one time (Score:5, Insightful)
wow China should totally implement the rubber stamp FISA system, heck just back date some warrants and call it good. Justice is served.
Re:Well, there was that one time (Score:5, Interesting)
TFA is just a long Whataboutism [wikipedia.org] rant. The fact that Chinese firms acquiesce to demands from the Chinese government, in no way whatsoever excuses the misbehavior of the American government.
The Chinese judicial system is not comparable to the American system. They do not have an independent judiciary, so expecting a company to "challenge" an order doesn't make much sense. They also do not have an adversarial system, with a defense attorney and prosecutor trying to "win" regardless of the merits of the case, with an impartial judge as arbitrator. In China, the judge is often actively involved in the investigation, and will directly question witnesses. Their justice system works completely differently, in both good ways and bad.
Re:Well, there was that one time (Score:5, Insightful)
"in no way whatsoever excuses the misbehavior of the American government"
This story isn't about alleged misbehavior on the part of the American government. If Chinese companies do not fight government requests then what is to stop the government from gaining access to American trade secrets those companies become privy to including their own trade secrets where the companies are branches of US companies operating in China?
Re: (Score:1)
If Chinese companies do not fight government requests then what is to stop the government from gaining access to American trade secrets
Same thing that stops the US government getting access to Chinese trade secrets through American companies: nothing.
If they haven't been hacked by the NSA yet they can just issue a National Security Letter or some other bullshit.
What about hypocrisy?! (Score:2)
You can criticize "whataboutism" if "whatabout'ed" fault is not committed by yourself (or your own country in this context.) However, if yourself commits the same fault that you use to criticize your opponent, or even worse launching a war on the same accusation, that shows your immoral characteristic -- it's outright evil.
Re: (Score:3)
When did you stop beating your wife? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:1)
The logical implication of your comment is that you believe the Chinese government has never requested such data from these companies.
That indeed hasn't been proven.
Re: When did you stop beating your wife? (Score:2, Interesting)
The journalist Alistair Cook pointed this out in the 1970's. It's a linguistic thing. In Mandarin, China is not a geographical space in which the government, people and corporations are separate and distinct actors. China is the government, and the people and corporations are permitted to be extensions of that.
So what? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Option 2: Feds don't have technical know-how to crack a brand new, designed in Cupertino/made in China phone.
I'm on pretty firm ground assuming stupidity. I'm on less firm ground assuming hyper-competence.
Re: (Score:2)
I think an ex-CEO of Qwest told the FBI or someone to go fuck themselves once. IIRC, a year later he was doing time for some "completely unrelated" trumped up insider trading charge or something. Pretty much set the example for everyone else to play ball.
US directly spied on China. China uses companies. (Score:5, Insightful)
Resist everyone but us (Score:2)
Please resist your government, but Apple is teh evil for resisting the good ol' US of A
Re: (Score:2)
Bizzare expections (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3)
Moreover they do have the right to resist, as rights are inherent in you as a person, and therefore cannot be granted by other, angry people with guns. They can, however, step all over your rights.
I'm sure there will be kibitzers who disagree, but why would you grant other people the philosophical power to grant you rights on their whim? What a subservient loser they must be.
Gov buying power (Score:2)
USA to large tech: hey company with whom we have a large contract - we'd like to see details on X. If you can't show us, that's cool, but don't forget we're a big fan of your services...today anyway
Re: (Score:2)
Trump said to dump iPhones for Samsungs. He did, for a couple of months, but has since switched back. This was after the FBI-Apple lawsuits and data requests.
And unless everyone is lying, not all warranted data requests were fulfilled, either. The companies are even pushing back asking to reveal even more detaile
An insightful perspective. (Score:1)
--
Conversations usually go like this:
"Why don't my dumplings look as good as yours, can you help me?"
-Them
"If you pinch the edges of the dumpling too hard, the contents will leak out because you're overly thinning out the dough sk
Why would they admit to a crime? (Score:3)
Working against the government in China is a crime (or at the very least gets you on a bad side of the dictatorial government). Why would any company admit to doing it, even if they did?
Re: (Score:2)
China is far from a free country. China also has way less freedom than even the shittiest western countries. You can end up being reeducated for even asking a serious question to the local party officials. The icing on the cake is it's a terrible place for the average worker too. The workers have zilch rights even worse than at the crappiest U.S. companies. The pollution problems in China make super-fund sites in the U.S. look like nature preserves.
The worst part is the party doesn't even have any competition. It's the same old story, power corrupts, and in a one party state, that's a hell of a lot of power.
This is all relative. Make a few changes and...
The USA is far from a free country. It also has way less freedom than even the shittiest EU countries. You can end up being bankrupted for even asking a serious question of a corporation. The icing on the cake is it's a terrible place for the average worker too. The workers have zilch rights even worse than at the crappiest EU companies.
and so on.
Yes, I suspect that China is an order of magnitude worse than the US. It just isn't so perfect that its suppor
Good checks and balnce (Score:1)
In the same TFA,
Western officials say systems of checks and balances in their countries allow for companies to challenge those demands, unlike in China.
and
U.S. intelligence officials have suggested at times that their views on Huawei are informed by definitive examples of malfeasance, though they have so far refused to share such evidence publicly.
In the other news, they will also refuse to share real evidence of Iraq WMDs with the public.
Re: (Score:1)
In the other news, they will also refuse to share real evidence of Iraq WMDs with the public.
After the break, we will also pretend that there is evidence of russian meddling.
Re: (Score:2)
There actually *IS* evidence of Russian meddling in US elections. I haven't heard of much evidence WRT it being extensive or successful, but it might have been.
P.S.: There's also evidence of the US meddling in various foreign elections and other policies. Surprise!
Governments will spy (Score:2)
In the USA PRISM got the crypto.
The EU makes the same demands on what publishing can be on social media.
Should a Western brand invest and make its products in China understand what the Communist party will demand.
Of the US brand.
From all workers who are good Communists.
Try a nation with the rule of law and who will support US freedoms.
FISA Gag orders (Score:1)