America Pushes Allies to Fight Huawei in New Arms Race with China
nytimes.com
nytimes.com
The most reputable papers I'm aware of are
> Frequency and Irradiation Time-dependant Antiproliferative Effect of Low-power Millimeter Waves on RPMI 7932 Human Melanoma Cell Line (2005)
> Effects of Millimeter Wave Exposure on Termite Behavior (2011)
When the biggest intelligence agency on the planet, the one who got caught bugging its allies, starts acting as as salesman for a very specific brand of networking equipment you really do have to ask why.
1) I believe we don't have to be cynical about the U.S. pushing say, Cisco, it makes perfect sense; I don't think that agenda is actually hidden. 2) It makes perfect sense to choose gear for critical infra based on which supplier states you believe will do you the least harm.
British Telecom bars Huawei's 5G kit from core of network https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18616459
Or this article from 5 months ago https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17824757
Or this article from 1 year ago https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16378846
All these articles cover the same story, while not giving any "smoking gun" evidence of huawei wrongdoing, slowly destroying their public image.
>In an age when the most powerful weapons, short of nuclear arms, are cyber-controlled, whichever country dominates 5G will gain an economic, intelligence and military edge for much of this century.
It's no surprise NATO allies would not want to cede their comms infrastructure to a power which continually has engaged in cyberespionage/warfare against industrial and geopolitical rivals.
I mean, if they go with Huawei for HW they might as well go with Kaspersky for Cybersecurity and cede a 1-2.
It's long been rumored that the US does this in spades (and is quite ahead of everyone else in doing so).
It's less about ceding power, and instead ceding power to the devil you know vs the devil you don't.
But how would you prove that huawei (the corporation) was spying? I'd imagine that you would need proof that it was officially sanctioned within the organization, at multiple levels. Since spying is illegal, you'd expect that if they were spying, that they'd be doing it in a way that generates plausible deniability for the higher ups. So it's not surprising at all that all the criminal charges so far are for employees acting on their own accord (or at least appear to be).
Should we apply some different criteria of guilt based on origin?
edit(charged->found gulty)
Why would they? It's Iran. Not anymore the song "We're all living in Amerika" is true.
And, yet, I still agree with the US position. I think a lot of people misunderstand the relationship between Chinese businesses and the the Chinese government. There is essentially zero legal recourse to resist government requests in China. None. Even assuming Huawei has no history of wrongdoing, any data running through their telecon equipment is only secure so far as the CCP chooses to allow it. And the CCP is historically brutally aggressive with whatever they think they can get away with as far as foreign policy goes.
It really sort of sucks for Huawei if they truly haven't been irresponsible actors, but that doesn't change the realities of the situation.
Call me pessimistic, but anytime a government tells me something is a national security threat, my b.s. detector starts to go off.
Not to go completely on a tangent, but the goals of the US republic are to protect its elite. Everything else is just a distraction, IMO.
They are already #1 in telecommunication equipment and for consumer electronics like smart phones, they are killing other competitors in markets like China and Europe. Their phones were just like another cheap knock-off a few year back and what impressed me most is how they innovated through hard core R&D in the last 3 years.
I'm now typing on a Huawei Matebook 13 and carrying a Huawei Mate 10 phone. Those things have amazing quality and it's a real pity customers can't have them in the States.
https://blogs.cisco.com/news/huawei-and-ciscos-source-code-c...