Britain seeks to find alternative 5G suppliers to Huawei

[TempestCatto]

Quote

Even though the U.S. warned its allies last year not to use Huawei networking equipment for their 5G networks, Britain was one of the countries that did not heed the warning. After struggling to make a decision, at the beginning of this year Prime Minister Boris Johnson felt that he had no alternative and decided to allow Huawei's equipment to be used in the country's 5G networks. Seeking to be careful, however, Johnson said that the equipment would not be allowed to make up more than 35% of Britain's 5G infrastructure and would not be allowed near "sensitive functions such as military or nuclear sites.

Because no one trusts them with the important things.

 

Quote

Johnson might have felt that he had no alternative because Huawei is considered to be as much as a year and a half ahead technology-wise than its closest rivals. And Huawei also offers generous financing terms. But recently it would seem that the Prime Minister has had a change of heart and is looking to put together a group comprised of 10 democracies that would unite to find alternate suppliers of 5G gear and other technologies instead of relying on China.

Did he finally realize China now has all his search history?

 

Quote

According to the Times (via Reuters), the British government has brought a plan to the U.S. that would create a "D10" consisting of 10 Democratic countries. The alliance would be made up of G7 members including the U.S., the U.K., Canada, France, Germany, Italy and Japan, along with Australia, South Korea and India. This group would look for other suppliers outside of China to provide networking gear for the D10's 5G networks.

Is it really that hard to find a company, or companies, willing to take a big check? (I'm ignorant here, so what I said was probably stupid.)

 

Quote

Prime Minister Johnson has said that he wants China to have nothing to do with Britain's telecom networks, including its 5G networks, by 2023. Huawei is considered to be a national security threat in the U.S. because of its perceived ties to the communist Chinese government.

Yet the company will be fine, because China still could use them for their own networks.

 

Dijon Mustard: https://www.phonearena.com/news/new-5g-equipment-suppliers-for-britain_id125007?fbclid=IwAR0JMSC8rrfO4nqSYf7TvJdGB0uY5--UZJnHGqHHlfFTs-wa_hRMDBS8_PM

 

 

This news post is brought to you by the LTT store. Check out the new line of merch, get hydrated, and stay cabled managed with LTTstore.com!

[williamcll]

Has cisco ever thought of lowering their prices? In a free market investors always think money first over other issues. 

 

Also funfact: if you go through Huawei's privacy policy it shows that their data is first passed to the Irish for analytics. 

[Arika]

Given that the US is doing everything they can to try and destory huawei, it's less of a "want" to find alternatives and more of a "might HAVE to" find an alternative

[LAwLz]

1 hour ago, Arika S said:

Given that the US is doing everything they can to try and destory huawei, it's less of a "want" to find alternatives and more of a "might HAVE to" find an alternative

Here is a thready reminder than the ban on Huawei is NOT about "we need to protect ourselves from Chinese spying". Right now there is 0 evidence of Huawei networking equipment being backdoored. 

The real reason for the Huawei bans can be found in this news article. 

https://www.smh.com.au/world/europe/it-would-be-an-issue-malcolm-turnbull-intervenes-in-uk-s-huawei-debate-20200114-p53ric.html

 

Quote

Speaking on BBC Radio 4's The World at One program, Mr Turnbull said the main risk the Australian security agencies had identified was not through potential Chinese interception of intelligence but by denial of access to the network.

 

Yes that is correct. Australia is not banning Huawei because they are scared of Chinese spying. They are banning Huawei because they are deemed too secure and it would prevent national intelligence agencies from doing wiretapping. 

 

 

The UK were also threatened to be kicked out of 5 eyes if they went with Huawei. 

Quote

I think the fact that the other Eyes - the other parties to that Five Eyes relationship - are taking a different approach indicates it would become an issue

 

 

The reason for Huawei bans aren't that they are a Chinese company and would allow China to spy on other counties. It's the exact opposite in fact. If countries start using Chinese equipment it will become harder for agencies like the NSA and other 5 eyes countries to spy and xolle t data on each others' citizens. 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five_Eyes

 

 

Don't buy into the xenophobic anti-china bullshit that is being spread by counties which have time and time again shown that their primary goals are to collect as much data on their own citizens as possible. These Huawei bans are coming from the same agencies that were literally caught hijacking transports of networking equipment to solder on additional chips which allowed wiretapping inside switches and routers. Cisco even started sending packages to deserted addresses in an attempt to try and not have their transports intercepted by US state agencies. 

 

https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2014/05/photos-of-an-nsa-upgrade-factory-show-cisco-router-getting-implant/

 

https://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/03/18/want_to_dodge_nsa_supply_chain_taps_ask_cisco_for_a_dead_drop/

[Bombastinator]

11 hours ago, TempestCatto said:

Because no one trusts them with the important things.

 

Did he finally realize China now has all his search history?

 

Is it really that hard to find a company, or companies, willing to take a big check? (I'm ignorant here, so what I said was probably stupid.)

 

Yet the company will be fine, because China still could use them for their own networks.

 

Dijon Mustard: https://www.phonearena.com/news/new-5g-equipment-suppliers-for-britain_id125007?fbclid=IwAR0JMSC8rrfO4nqSYf7TvJdGB0uY5--UZJnHGqHHlfFTs-wa_hRMDBS8_PM

 

 

This news post is brought to you by the LTT store. Check out the new line of merch, get hydrated, and stay cabled managed with LTTstore.com!

The chinese government isn’t communist any more.  They may be willing to to force implantation of spyware or malware into hardware for use by their CIA equivalents though.  This implies the CIA has actually done that.

[leadeater]

12 hours ago, TempestCatto said:

Is it really that hard to find a company, or companies, willing to take a big check? (I'm ignorant here, so what I said was probably stupid.)

I think it's more that other companies don't cover everything end to end in all aspects like Huawei does so the deployment is more complex and involves more companies which inevitably increases costs.

 

Here is a list of 5G carrier equipment suppliers though:

Quote

Nine companies sell 5G radio hardware and 5G systems for carriers: Altiostar, Cisco Systems, Datang Telecom/Fiberhome, Ericsson, Huawei, Nokia, Qualcomm, Samsung, and ZTE

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/5G#Deployment

[Sauron]

As though a US or UK based company could be considered any more trustworthy when it comes to data harvesting... as @LAwLz said, it's just that the UK and US governments want it to be easier for their own agencies to spy on people.

[Delicieuxz]

5 hours ago, LAwLz said:

Here is a thready reminder than the ban on Huawei is NOT about "we need to protect ourselves from Chinese spying". Right now there is 0 evidence of Huawei networking equipment being backdoored. 

The real reason for the Huawei bans can be found in this news article. 

https://www.smh.com.au/world/europe/it-would-be-an-issue-malcolm-turnbull-intervenes-in-uk-s-huawei-debate-20200114-p53ric.html

 

 

Yes that is correct. Australia is not banning Huawei because they are scared of Chinese spying. They are banning Huawei because they are deemed too secure and it would prevent national intelligence agencies from doing wiretapping. 

 

 

The UK were also threatened to be kicked out of 5 eyes if they went with Huawei. 

 

 

The reason for Huawei bans aren't that they are a Chinese company and would allow China to spy on other counties. It's the exact opposite in fact. If countries start using Chinese equipment it will become harder for agencies like the NSA and other 5 eyes countries to spy and xolle t data on each others' citizens. 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five_Eyes

 

 

Don't buy into the xenophobic anti-china bullshit that is being spread by counties which have time and time again shown that their primary goals are to collect as much data on their own citizens as possible. These Huawei bans are coming from the same agencies that were literally caught hijacking transports of networking equipment to solder on additional chips which allowed wiretapping inside switches and routers. Cisco even started sending packages to deserted addresses in an attempt to try and not have their transports intercepted by US state agencies. 

 

https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2014/05/photos-of-an-nsa-upgrade-factory-show-cisco-router-getting-implant/

 

https://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/03/18/want_to_dodge_nsa_supply_chain_taps_ask_cisco_for_a_dead_drop/

Another significant part of the reason is to ostracize and stigmatize China, to undercut its revenue, reputation, and influence. It's a political war and propaganda manoeuver, and not at all about the concerns of security which the US and their partners are pushing it as.

 

And it would be a lot more difficult for China to interpret and use our information against us than it would the US. So, if people don't want to be spied on and exploited, they probably should be supporting Huawei's participation in 5G networks.

 

 

On 2/5/2020 at 5:26 PM, Delicieuxz said:

And so, when I hear the US decrying countries for considering or approving Huawei 5G, I can't but see it as self-serving hypocrisy considering that, according to leaked CIA documents branded by WikiLeaks as the Vault 7 documents, and also according to the information released in various public scandals, and the public statements by NSA whistleblower Snowden over the previous few years, the US state has hacked, backdoored, or infected:

 

- most-all software
- most-all cellphones
- most-all routers
- the government offices of many of its closest allies (for example, the NSA was eavesdropping on Germany's Chancellor for decades - and maybe still is)
- a large number of the biggest harddrive manufacturers: Russian researchers expose breakthrough U.S. spying program

 

And considering that the US state is responsible for Total Information Awareness, PRISM, XKeyscore, DARPA's Lifelog (AKA Facebook), and funds the NATO propaganda branch called Atlantic Council that oversees Facebook's content regulation, and that thousands of US tech companies swap data with the US state, while all US (and I think Canadian) internet traffic passes through NSA surveillance hubs that are spread across the US state. I also think of the fact that the US state intercepts and bugs server shipments before they reach their destinations, and that  the US state pays tech companies to put backdoors into their hardware and software for the US state to exploit.

 

And then there's Snowden comment NSA workers intercept and share people's sexts messages around the NSA offices.

 

Edit: And now this:

 

So, when I hear US complaints about other countries approving Huawei 5G, I can't help but strongly suspect it's because the US doesn't want a potential competitor to its own spying and that the US is resenting not being able to set up more of its own covert spying technology in other countries.

[Bombastinator]

2 hours ago, Sauron said:

As though a US or UK based company could be considered any more trustworthy when it comes to data harvesting... as @LAwLz said, it's just that the UK and US governments want it to be easier for their own agencies to spy on people.

I wouldn’t say they are.  The whole thing implies that a US manufactured system should not be used anywhere but the US.  Same would go for a non EU system being used in the EU.  For a very long time military equipment was always manufactured inside the country of origin for exactly these sorts of reasons.  The design didn’t have to be local, only the manufacturing.  
 

It’s looking like networking equipment is having the same issues.

If huwai equipment designs are actually better it would be reasonable solution to simply do local manufacturing.   It sounds like that is in its early stages in the US. All the EU would have to do is build a huwai plant in the EU where the masks that are used to create the chips can be vetted and controlled locally.   Huwai can be a true multinational and everything works.  
 

 

[StDragon]

13 hours ago, williamcll said:

Has cisco ever thought of lowering their prices? In a free market investors always think money first over other issues. 

Oh hell no! Cisco will never lower its prices. Why should they? IMHO, only a fool buys Cisco for the SMB (Small Medium Business) market. Fortune 500 and ISP market is another thing.

 

It's not that Cisco equipment is bad, quite the contrary. But it is way over valued for what it is. No, what you're paying for with Cisco is the knowledge and support levels they offer. If that's what you want, then perhaps it works out. But the fact Cisco is successful is because such a market exist.

 

And yes, there are other alternatives. Palo Alto Networks, Fortinet, Juniper Networks, etc. The market for Next Generation Firewalls and other networking equipment is pretty extensive.

[LAwLz]

2 hours ago, Bombastinator said:

I wouldn’t say they are.  The whole thing implies that a US manufactured system should not be used anywhere but the US.  Same would go for a non EU system being used in the EU.  For a very long time military equipment was always manufactured inside the country of origin for exactly these sorts of reasons.  The design didn’t have to be local, only the manufacturing.  
 

It’s looking like networking equipment is having the same issues.

If huwai equipment designs are actually better it would be reasonable solution to simply do local manufacturing.   It sounds like that is in its early stages in the US. All the EU would have to do is build a huwai plant in the EU where the masks that are used to create the chips can be vetted and controlled locally.   Huwai can be a true multinational and everything works.

I think it's way too hard to vet these advanced controllers and equipment even if you got a bunch of knowledgeable people on site overseeing the manufacturing.

So I don't think manufacturing the equipment in a country is enough. They have to be designed there too in order for it to have any meaningful effect.

Or we can just realize that we are doomed whichever country we get this stuff from. Any of the 5 eyes countries is clearly not to be trusted (so no Australia, Canada, New Zealand, UK or US), China can be ruled out, and what do we have left?

 

 

Altiostar - UK so parts of 5 EYES.

Cisco Systems - US so part of 5 EYES.

Datang Telecom/Fiberhome - Chinese so that's a no go.

Ericsson - Swedish so that's good I guess.

Huawei - Chinese

Nokia - Finnish so that's good I guess.

Qualcomm - US so part of 5 EYES.

Samsung - South Korea so that's good I guess.

ZTE - Chinese so that's a no go.

 

All of a sudden you're down from 9 companies to 3. Not that much competition, and they have significant drawbacks like being more expensive and slower than what for example Huawei offers.

 

 

 

 

8 minutes ago, StDragon said:

Oh hell no! Cisco will never lower its prices. Why should they? IMHO, only a fool buys Cisco for the SMB (Small Medium Business) market. Fortune 500 and ISP market is another thing.

 

It's not that Cisco equipment is bad, quite the contrary. But it is way over valued for what it is. No, what you're paying for with Cisco is the knowledge and support levels they offer. If that's what you want, then perhaps it works out. But the fact Cisco is successful is because such a market exist.

 

And yes, there are other alternatives. Palo Alto Networks, Fortinet, Juniper Networks, etc. The market for Next Generation Firewalls and other networking equipment is pretty extensive.

We're talking about 5G deployment here, so almost nothing of what you said applies.

And Cisco is fine for SMB. It depends on what discounts you get (yes, Cisco do offer heavy discounts depending on what and how you order, it's not uncommon for us to get 70-80% discounts, and sometimes even more) and what you need.

[Bombastinator]

2 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

I think it's way too hard to vet these advanced controllers and equipment even if you got a bunch of knowledgeable people on site overseeing the manufacturing.

So I don't think manufacturing the equipment in a country is enough. They have to be designed there too in order for it to have any meaningful effect.

Or we can just realize that we are doomed whichever country we get this stuff from. Any of the 5 eyes countries is clearly not to be trusted (so no Australia, Canada, New Zealand, UK or US), China can be ruled out, and what do we have left?

 

 

Altiostar - UK so parts of 5 EYES.

Cisco Systems - US so part of 5 EYES.

Datang Telecom/Fiberhome - Chinese so that's a no go.

Ericsson - Swedish so that's good I guess.

Huawei - Chinese

Nokia - Finnish so that's good I guess.

Qualcomm - US so part of 5 EYES.

Samsung - South Korea so that's good I guess.

ZTE - Chinese so that's a no go.

 

All of a sudden you're down from 9 companies to 3. Not that much competition, and they have significant drawbacks like being more expensive and slower than what for example Huawei offers.

 

 

 

 

We're talking about 5G deployment here, so almost nothing of what you said applies.

And Cisco is fine for SMB. It depends on what discounts you get (yes, Cisco do offer heavy discounts depending on what and how you order, it's not uncommon for us to get 70-80% discounts, and sometimes even more) and what you need.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five_Eyes

if one is in a five eyes country, one would assume it’s all the same.  So USA, britian Australia, New Zealand, etc..  might as well just use stuff manufactured in a five eyes country.  It’s the non five eyes countries that might be interested in Samsung or Ericsson.  This is starting to sound like a job for Switzerland.  That kind of thing occasionally happens.   

[LAwLz]

3 minutes ago, Bombastinator said:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five_Eyes

if one is in a five eyes country, one would assume it’s all the same.  So USA, britian Australia, New Zealand, etc..  might as well just use stuff manufactured in a five eyes country.  It’s the non five eyes countries that might be interested in Samsung or Ericsson.  This is starting to sound like a job for Switzerland.  That kind of thing occasionally happens.   

Well I was mostly thinking about this from the POV of a citizen of Sweden, which is not part of 5 eyes.

I guess the 5 eyes countries can buy stuff from the US if they want. But then they still have the problem of having to spend more money on inferior hardware.

[Blade of Grass]

35 minutes ago, Bombastinator said:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five_Eyes

if one is in a five eyes country, one would assume it’s all the same.  So USA, britian Australia, New Zealand, etc..  might as well just use stuff manufactured in a five eyes country.  It’s the non five eyes countries that might be interested in Samsung or Ericsson.  This is starting to sound like a job for Switzerland.  That kind of thing occasionally happens.   

Even Swiss companies are suseptible https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2020/world/national-security/cia-crypto-encryption-machines-espionage/

[Blade of Grass]

I've removed all off-topic political posts, please keep the discussion on topic.