UK To Let Huawei Firm Help Build 5G Network (bbc.co.uk) 64
AmiMoJo writes: The UK government has given Chinese telecoms giant Huawei the go-ahead to supply equipment for the UK 5G data network. The company will help build some "non-core" parts such as antennas. But the plans have concerned the home, defense and foreign secretaries. The U.S. also wants its allies in the "Five Eyes" intelligence grouping -- the UK, Canada, Australia and New Zealand -- to exclude Huawei. Huawei said it was "pleased that the UK is continuing to take an evidence-based approach to its work," adding it would continue to work cooperatively with the government and the industry.
Yes, crying wolf is a mistake. (Score:1)
Especially when you've been the wolf. That link is just an opinion piece with someone saying "The USA is telling us Huwei is bad, and they've arrested a CEO for it! PROOF they're bad!!!!". Evidence, not claims, please.
Re: (Score:3)
They never should no matter who made the equipment. Sensitive communication should always be secured above the transport.
Huh? Crypto!!! (Score:5, Informative)
They will NEVER be able to trust their communication system again unless they rip it all out and start afresh.
Lolwut?
You CAN NEVER trust ANY communication system, unless you encrypt end-to-end.
If you're relying on the individual components to respect your data, you're hosed.
No matter what the underlying infrastructure is, it's HTTPS, IMAPS, SSH, etc. when talking to the server, and PGP/GPG, OTR, Axolotl, etc. when exchanging messages with other people (needs to be encrypted all the way to their end, not only to the server). Period.
Throw in TOR (and I explicitly named a distributed system like TOR, not some centralized VPN where you need to trust the single VPN provider) for when you need the added routing anonymisation.
Anything less than that and you have to trust that every single component on the way will not do anything weird. Not only that Huawei tower, but also that other Cisco router, etc.
Then, only then, if your data is correctly secured using modern peer-reviewed cryptography, then you can send sensitive stuff.
And if you did your securing job correctly, you can actually send the data even if you relied on a courier service entirely staffed by people from the NSA and the KGB^H^H^H FSB.
Re: (Score:2)
You forget a few things:
1. China is a nation-state actor, they have the resources to buy million dollar vulnerabilities if they want to.
Those kind of vulnerabilities give access to devices, it's not the math that fails, it's the programs that run the math that fail. If you own the network you can't only send spoofed traffic but also target people more easily. And have pretty accurate information about where people are.
2. the design of a phone is not like a PC with a modem. Every phone has a baseband process
Threat model. (Score:2)
You forget a few things:
You forget a couple on your own.
1. China is a nation-state actor, they have the resources to buy million dollar vulnerabilities if they want to.
China isn't the only nation-state actor.
If it's not them, it will be the NSA or the FSB(as I mentioned above), or it could be the Mossad. Or it could be UK's own MI5 (to tie back with the article).
The list of potential threat is long. And even if they don't target *you specifically* they are almost all engaging into mass surveillance, where you'd be caught up with the rest semi-automatically, and then you'd have to hope that these actors' systems never leaks (or any importan
Re: (Score:2)
The article was about why the UK or US might not want Huewei to be the vendor they buy from.
So I wrote it from the perspective of the nation and it's allies (they don't want China in their back yard) and the dumb users they need to protect like politicians and office workers, etc. and maybe some military people when they are not on duty, etc.
Purism isn't the first to do this, I know some other similar niche products.
All good points from your side of course, but I was aware of them.
What Could Go Wrong? (Score:1)
Re:What Could Go Wrong? (Score:5, Interesting)
Well, who else is gonna step up? Cisco? Intel? Qualcomm? There seems to be a lack of ethical companies with proven security records in the networking hardware business these days.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3)
Everybody knows why you left out Nokia and Ericsson; you're not merely wrong, you're trolling.
Both those companies make 5G equipment.
Re: (Score:1)
I didn't know that actually. I thought Nokia was bought my Microsoft and then shuttered, and Ericsson bought by Sony, then shuttered.
Re: (Score:2)
Why was this one down voted ?
It's the perfect answer.
Re: (Score:2)
Nokia split up in 2, the phones part became part of Microsoft.
Re: (Score:3)
convicted industrial espionage company
Convicted? When? Of what?
Re: (Score:2)
the African Union fiasco
So far, Google reports nothing of charges or a conviction.
Re: (Score:3)
Convicted? When? Of what?
No convictions. But several accusations, including espionage and violating sanctions on Iran.
At least with the espionage, there has (so far) been zero evidence to back up the accusations. The American government has said they can't present the evidence because of national security, which is, of course, complete bullcrap, since the Chinese would already be aware of anything that they disclose.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Or Google, Facebook, etc.
Re: (Score:1)
You mean Cisco, Facebook, Xerox, etc etc etc ???
Re: What Could Go Wrong? (Score:1)
You mean the USA?
Re: (Score:3)
I know. That's why we don't let the USA near our gear. We don't want to also be spied on like our other allies were.
Just Firm? (Score:1)
Post Brexit Trade Deal (Score:5, Insightful)
Much harder to get a good trade deal with one of the world's largest economies if you've recently blocked them and accused them of technological espionage.
Re: (Score:2)
Highly unlikely. According to many Muricans, those people can't even spell flavor, color, or neighborhood properly and need to learn real English first.
Re: (Score:2)
I doubt most Muricans even knew Puerto Rico is part of the US.
Doesn’t matter (Score:3)
I don’t get why this matters. People buy Huawei phones by the millions, because they are now better than iPhones and Galaxies and much cheaper. So Huawei and thus the Chinese government will get the data about us they want no matter what.
Re: (Score:1)
Nobody cares about the phones. Duh. That's like... OK dude. Are you a complete idiot, or did you just make it to the surface?
This has been in the news for a year and you thought it was about telephones the whole time?
I'm not saying you should click the link, but jeeze, find a reputable news source and read at least one article about the fucking subject. That's just world class ignorance and idiocy.
Re: (Score:2)
You don't get it do you? The phones can be made to send EVERYTHING you do to the Chinese mothership. That's just as good as the other equipment, only a bit more complicated.
Calling people names earns you a foe by the way you fucking idiot.
Re: (Score:2)
Because networks control phones all the phones on the network: https://slashdot.org/comments.... [slashdot.org]
If a government official can buy from an other vendor and be safer then at least they have that option. But almost all of the phones are produced in China or South Korea, so it's not like a lot of choice exist.
Easy talking by the US (Score:3)
More importantly, they control any back doors in Cisco equipment which does not make it any more palatable for the EU.
Any option were maybe Nokia.
Re: (Score:2)
Nobody is recommending Cisco gear for 5G, including the US government.
100% of the recommended suppliers are European.
Europeans are idiots who won't even support their regional economy when their allies are trying to force them to!
And yes, if you actually listen to the US, you'll be buying Nokia maybe, unless you choose Ericsson.
Even the US companies who claim to be doing 5G are mostly just partnering with smaller European companies actually making the equipment.
Four Eyes (Score:3)
New Team Name: Four Eyes
Tories have no principles (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
better to pay a bit more taxes, seems pretty clear to me.
(from someone living in a high tax country, very high on the list of happiness because we have good healthcare and press freedom, etc, etc. etc.)