> We build base stations in the harshest environments, like the Arctic Circle, the Sahara, rainforests in South America, and even on Mount Everest. In the wake of disasters like the tsunami in Indonesia, the nuclear disaster in Japan, and the massive earthquake in Chile, our employees were some of the first on the ground, working tirelessly to restore communications networks and support disaster relief.<p>Then, after your employees have done all that hard work, you just fire them and call them "mediocre"[0].<p>Hehe, this is the very reason of why I as a Chinese IT worker, refuse to pay my own money for any of their product.<p>[0] <a href="https://bgr.com/2019/01/21/huawei-layoffs-ceo-mediocre-employees/" rel="nofollow">https://bgr.com/2019/01/21/huawei-layoffs-ceo-mediocre-emplo...</a>
Translation: Journalists, please arrange private visits to our campuses where we can wine and dine you and offer you compelling incentives to work with us for mutual benefit. We won't necessarily openly bribe you but we are keeping a list and you will get a hidden "journalist credit score" which will be considered in such matters as applying for visas, etc. Your score may also influence the credit scores of others who associate with you.
In these cases I'm always reminded of an Obama speech he made shortly after the beginning of the Edward Snowden disclosures, where he guaranteed in national television that the US did not spy on national citizens.<p>Imagine that, not being a national citizen, but from an allied country, and being told point blank that you are a-okay for spying without any kind of shame.<p>AFAIK China does not intercept all of my country's communications, which the US has been doing for decades.<p>Sigh, it's just a bad choice between sleazy US or dictatorial China. At least there are some other 5G choices available.
Huawei was created as a front organization for China's intelligence service. This has been known for years; long before the Iran deal. We know it and they deny it. That's how the game has always been played with respect to Huawei. Other Chinese companies like Lenovo have exhibited tendencies to spy, but AFAIK only Huawei originated as essentially an arm of the Chinese CIA. That's what makes Huawei different.
I'm not sure which is more dangerous with regard to Huawei - their utter disrespect for intellectual property, or their subservience to a totalitarian government that is in continual digital warfare with the United States. Platitudes directed at the US are exactly that, and should be ignored.
Please believe us, not multiple security researchers and governments, they know not what they speak. China is good for you, we love you and your money. Come to us, let us feast on your data. What BGP hijacking...these are not the routes you are looking for
Here is an article [0] which may define the background to some serious concerns about Huawei. It was almost like Microsoft's purported 'embrace, extend, extinquish' philosophy.<p>"Many Canadians believe that Huawei stole the core technologies and business strategies from Nortel and used that knowledge to drive Nortel out of world markets and into bankruptcy. "<p>[0] <a href="https://www.assemblymag.com/blogs/14-assembly-blog/post/90631-did-outsourcing-and-corporate-espionage-kill-nortel" rel="nofollow">https://www.assemblymag.com/blogs/14-assembly-blog/post/9063...</a>
<a href="https://www.digitaltrends.com/mobile/huawei-threat-to-the-us/" rel="nofollow">https://www.digitaltrends.com/mobile/huawei-threat-to-the-us...</a><p><i>But Huawei is incredibly opaque – at least by Western standards. Ren’s still there (now about 70 years old) and still has veto power, but rarely makes public statements. He attributes Huawei’s success to collective leadership. That leadership? Huawei won’t say.</i><p><i>National champions aren’t state-owned businesses, but they typically get market protection, financial support — sometimes as direct funding, but more often tax breaks, subsidies, low-interest loans, and government contracts — and even diplomatic help. That means the Chinese government could have a significant influence on Huawei, since so many purse-strings lead back to Beijing. And the company has a reputation for playing fast-and-loose with intellectual property: in 2003 Cisco accused Huawei of copying its source code and documentation – all the way down to typos.</i><p><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ren_Zhengfei#Communist_Party_and_military_ties" rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ren_Zhengfei#Communist_Party_a...</a>
Americans complaining about spying by other governments, even if true, would be the top of hypochresy.<p>It is so blatantly clear that the motivations to fight Huawei are mainly because of losing the technology race, that it is not even funny.<p>That the US pretends to dictate to free countries what they should buy or sanction (Iran) is not cool.<p>That the US complains about state intervention when its whole technology lead was built on state investment is funny.<p>That the US complains about technology stealing when it built its industrial base by stealing European technology is insufferable.<p>You know what? Just let the world be.
The fact of the matter is that the United States considers strong industries in strategic technology fields in adversary nations a national security threat. This is why NSA seeks to modify US standards for export across the world. It's why US lawmakers have worked with US telecommunication firms to gain access to international communications. It's why the US has gone after Kaspersky AntiVirus. It's why the US has gone after Huawei, and intelligence officials have supported debunked stories about (e.g. SuperMicro). It's why the Trump Administration has stripped the regulations on 5G development (to speed it up so that American companies and technology can dominate the standard).<p>This isn't a uniquely American thing. Russia and China are doing the same things (heard of the Great Firewall?)<p>Opening doors to journalists is a good and appropriate step. It won't fix the underlying issues, though, as they stem from National Security competition - not wrote press misunderstanding.
I'm so torn with how to see Huawei. The dealings with Iran seem pretty cut and dry, and the laws in China are impossible for Huawei to ignore. On the other hand, their consumer products are very different from the commercial routing and telecommunication branches. Yet, the high level US government folks are being forced not to use the consumer products. Why aren't they being prohibited from using other Chinese consumer electronics, like Lenovo, Xiaomi, etc?
I'm surprised how few free/open market advocates have come rushing to Huawei's defense. It seems everyone's caught the protectionism bug these days.<p>Fact of the matter is they're being singled out not because of the their Iran dealings (Numerous US corporations have done this in the past and paid only modest fines), but at the behest of corporate lobbying efforts on the part of Huawei's competitors whose high margin business models are under assault.
Not sure. Core network to me is always very dangerous. China for their own security show not use US products and vice visa. For product, they should prohibit (both sides) not to use the others desktop, laptop and handheld devices. Apply for Russia, the 3 main hacking communities.<p>For the case, Huawei is unusual. It seems to have a few case (down to even the glass cover!) Hence the company ... But more important imagine if IBM ship to Iran their products via a faked HK company and lie to HSBC about it so money can be transferred (based on the limited amount we heard), the case is there but the difference is USA threaten Canada for doing what the treaty is bounded. Or would USA pool resources to do it in court instead in diploma channel.<p>Now this action on country level (as seems in the news also in other European countries) not using just company resources but diplomatic resources.<p>Is Huawei a firm represent the country? Is it a department of communist China?<p>Back to the device part, the government and core network shall be on its own whatever the countries are. It is just dangerous for Russia/China/USA to use other hacking country.
I don't think we should buy anything important from China because of their abysmal human rights abuses, surveillance state machinations, hacking and IP theft, down to the way they treat their neighbors (Taiwan, building BS "islands" to claim fishing territory, etc."<p>I think we should isolate and contain them as much as possible, free market BS be damned, we should grow a spine and do without them by working as closely with the neighbors they've stepped on for years and who are much more open to ideals we agree with. We should actively work against them and I'm glad we're finally doing something.<p>As much as I hate Trump, the one thing he's done I agree with is putting the screws to China. It's actually a popular stance with both parties, and it looks like it will continue after he's likely impeached. Good.
There is a lot of finger pointing at China and wild claims by people who don't care about these things. After Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria, Yemen, threatening Iran and now with open meddling and orchestrating coups in Venezuela its utterly absurd to pretend to care about human rights or democracy.<p>Apparently you can do the same thing every time and cause catastrophic devastation, kill millions and put millions of families in disarray and continue to claim 'innocence'. And some here talk about Tienanmen in 1989 as if none of the above happened, while colluding with regressive regimes like Saudi Arabia as we speak to bomb Yemen.<p>In the same way some care about surveillance, but only in China. The NSA revelations, secret courts, secret orders, Snowden and Assange being hounded and not a single person held accountable has nothing to do with surveillance, rule of law or democracy. Google, Facebook and others making billions spying on the world and building invasive profiles is not surveillance. US law enforcement demanding to go through your phones and laptops at airports like the stasi is not a police state. Credit scores and social credit are somehow different. This is a culture of smug finger pointing based on dissonance.<p>This is an orchestrated sabotage of a company perceived to be a threat by some interests with zero evidence or due process in collusion with a global media that is apparently not too reliant on evidence or investigation. This will be lesson for many on capitalism, free trade and the 'natural constraints' of our global system.
I don't think Huawei understands it, or they do but trying not to show. The West dont have problem with Huawei, the west have problems with CCP. And there isn't a single International Chinese company that doesn't have some form of Guanxi with CCP.