It's worth looking at the UK government oversight report: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/790270/HCSEC_OversightBoardReport-2019.pdf Not clear that Huawei is worse than other 5g vendors, if our experience with other embedded system vendors is any clue. Certainly I was unimpressed by ALU's software engineering practices when I was at Bell Labs. The ownership structure of Huawei is "interesting", to say the least. My solution is more radical: all the vendors should be held to much higher standards, including reproducible builds (something that the UK government has been trying to get them to do for years, and failed). - Jim On Thu, Mar 28, 2019 at 2:32 PM David P. Reed wrote: > Look, the existence of security flaws in software isn't news. Real news > would be if there were systems discovered to have no flaws at all... > > > > So what does this article really say? > > > > It says that Britain and the US intelligence officials are now going after > Huawei in a new way, because the idea that Huawei just steals intellectual > property no longer flies - they actually have great technology that the > non-Chinese never had. > > > > And there is a massive Trade War currently aimed between Trump and China. > > > > And recently, the UK, including GCHQ, said it was NOT going to stop plans > to deploy Huawei telecom gear, because it saw no particular flaws worth > worrying about if UK operators wanted to use Huawei "5G" gear because it > was better and cheaper. > > > > You can see, of course, that the US diplomatic efforts under Pompeo might > go into high gear to get some kind of supportive public response from > somewhere in the UK, even if the UK government itself wasn't going to > support the US. > > > > Hence, the PR guys figured out how to get a story into the NYTimes and > other papers that appears to contradict the UK decision. > > > > This is how the game is played. > > > > This is how Trade Wars are conducted (we haven't seen them for decades, so > we aren't used to them, but we had the big fearmongering about Japan back > in the '80's that was similar, and the Japanese "lead" with its "Fifth > Generation Computing" effort required major tax dollars to protect the US > from becoming a third world country) > > > > Humans don't think. They react emotionally, and tribally. > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: "Dave Taht" > Sent: Thursday, March 28, 2019 2:16pm > To: "David P. Reed" > Cc: "cerowrt-devel" , "bloat" < > bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net> > Subject: Re: [Cerowrt-devel] plenty of huawei in the news today > > Well, it's a widely placed story in every newspaper. > > On Thu, Mar 28, 2019 at 11:16 AM David P. Reed > wrote: > > > > The NYTimes has become a mouthpiece for those who want to see China as > the new evil empire. Recent pieces by David Sanger have hyped the idea that > the US has a "5G Gap" and that China (Huawei) will threaten to conquer the > world with 5G superiority, so we should be vigilantly opposing Huawei. > > > > > > > > Worth noting that Cisco, ALU, ... are not any better than Huawei appears > to be in these matters. But they aren't getting headlines in the NYTimes. > > > > > > > > Remember, Judith Miller wrote NYTimes headlines based on "leaks from > senior intelligence officials" that Saddam Hussein was on the verge of > deploying dirty bombs, nuclear missiles and biowarfare agents. > > > > > > > > Recently, Bloomberg got scammed by "leaks from senior intelligence > officials" that Supermicro (Chinese) had built and sold server motherboards > that had special chips soldered into them that didn't belong there [the > stories were completely debunked by the companies supposedly targeted]. > > > > > > > > Personally, I think the cynical fearmongering here does the legitimate > security engineering community no good at all. It's just more "wag the dog" > psyops, designed to let all the pseudo-security-experts take over the story > and get their 15 minutes in the headlines. > > > > > > > > The Qualcomms and Ciscos of the US are happy to get the USG to help > scare countries off of Chinese brandnames. But the open secret is that > Qualcomm and Cisco's systems are designed and made in China, too. There's > no US manufacturing of switches, and precious few entirely American > hardware design centers, either. > > > > > > > > So be a little skeptical. Check the story behind the story. Don't > believe stories based on "intelligence agency" leaks. > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: "Dave Taht" > > Sent: Thursday, March 28, 2019 1:55pm > > To: "cerowrt-devel" , "bloat" < > bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net> > > Subject: [Cerowrt-devel] plenty of huawei in the news today > > > > > https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/28/technology/huawei-security-british-report.html > > > > -- > > > > Dave Täht > > CTO, TekLibre, LLC > > http://www.teklibre.com > > Tel: 1-831-205-9740 > > _______________________________________________ > > Cerowrt-devel mailing list > > Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net > > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel > > > > -- > > Dave Täht > CTO, TekLibre, LLC > http://www.teklibre.com > Tel: 1-831-205-9740 > _______________________________________________ > Bloat mailing list > Bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat >