White House Review Finds No Evidence of Huawei Spying

Whatever

Actually now that we have said they are not spying next year this time they will start.

Why the big BBR push FOR Huawei?

America bashing is in vogue as DSLR.

The question isn't are they spying NOW it's their ties to the Chinese military and their refusal to be transparent to US regulators. If AT&T will bend over in 10 seconds to the NSA, you don't think Huawei wouldn't to the PLA?

Let's see what some real reporters have to say...

»www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=7424702n

reply to Linklist

An excerpt from the above article: A few years after Mr. Saragoza started his job, his bosses explained how the California plant stacked up against overseas factories: the cost, excluding the materials, of building a $1,500 computer in Elk Grove was $22 a machine. In Singapore, it was $6. In Taiwan, $4.85. Wages weren’t the major reason for the disparities. Rather it was costs like inventory and how long it took workers to finish a task.

I knew it..

reply to whiteyonenh

Re: Why the big BBR push FOR Huawei?

reply to Linklist
If American companies offer a superior product, then what is the problem?

Guess the campaign contribution check cleared

reply to FBGuy

Re: Why the big BBR push FOR Huawei?

if this is true, how are they allowed to import their products?

reply to FBGuy
They settled with Cisco early last decade (including fixing the typos they had copied) but the theft didn't stop. Despite Cisco seeing Huawei still stealing as recently as 2005, legal counsel at Cisco determined the benefits of a lawsuit were outweighed by the potential fallout on Cisco's Chinese business dealings.

»www.scoop.co.nz/stories/WL1002/S01773.htm

said by Embassy Cable released by Wikileaks :

---

8. (SBU) Tao Taodi of Cisco Systems offered a differing view,
claiming Cisco was a textbook case of how litigation in China
can backfire and hurt a company's long-term interests. She
noted Cisco now had regrets over having sued state-owned
telecommunications giant Huawei in 2003 because, during the
suit, Cisco was portrayed by the Chinese media as a bullying
multi-national corporation trying to crush a local competitor.
Ultimately, Tao argued, the damage to Cisco's reputation in
China outweighed any benefit achieved through the lawsuit.

---

reply to skeechan
Did you even read my full post? You still haven't responded to the fact that every single thing, regardless of manufacture, is made in china. And if I were the Chinese government, I wouldn't be openly supportive of a company that I was going to use to spy/attack America, in fact, I would modify factory firmware images in various other companies products, during the manufacturing process. This includes the products of American companies, because again, everything is made in china.

If America is so worried about Telecommunications infrastructure, then maybe we should offer a subsidy to any company that is willing to fully design/manufacture that equipment in USA. Make the USA-made equipment better/cheaper than the competition, and maybe US companies/industry will purchase it again.

Or we can just argue/whine that some foreign entity may use our own infrastructure to spy on us, and not do anything to actually fix/resolve anything. But hey, government as usual, regardless of if Democrats/Republicans are in power.

reply to skeechan
Bull. Utter nonsense. You obviously know nothing about Huawei or it's equipment or the founder who just happened to be brighter than anyone we could currently offer as competition. If you haven't used the equipment then I suggest you refrain from making asinine posts.

It's good it works. It's not copied.

If America had something to offer as viable competition don't you think if the price was competitive we would be using it?

reply to skeechan

Re: Guess the campaign contribution check cleared

reply to whiteyonenh

Re: Why the big BBR push FOR Huawei?

It's not really the firmware that's the concern here... hardware itself can be fabricated with VERY subtle modifications... quite impossible to detect in any userspace or low-level code. Such modifications could enable all sorts of VERY strange behavior that are next to impossible to detect with any normal software tools (hence the reason that at universities such as mine, there are entire cybersecurity challenges where the focus is to detect HARDWARE bugs and potentially malicious modifications in various embedded systems.) The issue at hand is that countries like China and India do happen to manufacture the bulk of our HARDWARE. Even if the firmware is developed and flashed in high-security government facilities over here in the U.S, chances are that any hardware not for missile control systems or other ultra-critical projects is probably still made in China. That means the PLC's that wind up in our power plants, and the regular desktop PC's that are used even in the Pentagon to store critical blueprints and other restricted documents. Additionally, pretty much ALL telecom equipment (baseband chips, trusted platform chips on PC motherboards, WiFi radios, Cellular base station equipment and the like) is built in China and lapped up over here by our corporations and consumers who are perpetually chasing the almighty dollar. It comes back to a single major point: we, being the very country that CREATED packet switching and so many of the modern telecommunications protocols now fails to manufacture even a fraction of the world's supply of computer hardware...
--
Physics: Will you break the laws of physics, or will the laws of physics break you?
If physicists stand on each other's shoulders, computer scientists stand on each other's toes, and computer programmers dig each other's graves.

reply to Linklist
I think they are newsworthy, BroadbandReports is a news site. With editorials, forums , and bandwidth testing

reply to Simba7

Re: I knew it..