back to article July? British government could decide to boot Chinese giant Huawei from the UK's networks by this month

After months of dilly dallying, the UK government has said it will finally decide this month whether Huawei should be booted out of Blighty’s nascent 5G network, according to Culture Secretary Oliver Dowden. Speaking on London talk radio station LBC Radio this morning, Dowden raised the possibility that crippling US sanctions …

  1. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Trade Deal

    Remember all that talk about bright, shiny new trade deals with all the major global players?

    Watch this ... !!!

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Trade Deal

      China is not interested in opening up its markets to others, so a trade deal with the country was never really on the cards, anyway.

      1. AMBxx Silver badge

        Re: Trade Deal

        Yes it was - we send our jobs there, they send their badly made junk to us.

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Trade Deal

        "China is not interested in opening up its markets to others, so a trade deal with the country was never really on the cards, anyway."

        And yet, (utterly clueless) Theresa May agreed to Hinkley Point C Nuclear Reactor, a joint investment by EDF of France and state-owned CGN of China, pretty much on that basis, and only that.

        As a value for money proposition, that was clearly long gone before the Chinese deal. It was all about greasing palms regards future Chinese deals. Hinkley Point C will prove a very bad decision, given the rise of renewables/energy storage by the time it goes online (if ever).

        1. I ain't Spartacus Gold badge

          Re: Trade Deal

          Hinkley Point C will prove a very bad decision, given the rise of renewables/energy storage by the time it goes online (if ever).

          How do you know? I mean, you might be right. But if you're not, then it could be back to burning coal - given the vaguaries of the current international gas market. So you might criticise May's decision - but the fact is she'd been left in the lurch by all the previous governments who hadn't had the courage to commission more nuclear power stations that this country knew how to build - thus meaning that we were going to struggle to natively build new ones at any reasonable cost. Hence the steady decline of the percentage of our energy generated from nuclear over the last 20 years.

          Now our governments have been committing to all those shiny climate goals over that period (and a bit longer), but we've achieved most of our progress so far by moving from coal to gas fired plants. That move has now been made - but until we can solve the problem of renewables not being very good at covering base load requirements, we're going to need something else. And that's either keep burning gas, go back to coal (or worse oil) or nuclear. I understand that we've got most of the hydro that we could reasonably get, and tidal power is reliable but also expensive, needs very high maintenance and has many of its own environmental problems. Similar is true of wave power.

          Also there is a security difference too. If you let a foreign state help you build a power plant in your country that you have physical control of, then the worst they might be able to do is shut it off. At which point you sieze it, stop paying them back for building it and get it working again.

          If they've got control of your communications networks, they might be able to just listen in forever. Those are different risks, and require different responses.

          I thought GCHQ had got their hooks into Huwawei from that research place they built in Oxfordshire - basically to prove that they weren't dodgy. And that's why they'd been approved originally. So I don't know if this has changed, or the governemnt is responding to political pressure, in major part from its own backbenchers who were pretty unhappy about the original decision.

          However a lot of the problem with Huwawei is that they're receiving subsidies from the Chinese governemtn which allow them to outcomptete everyone else. Surely the answer to that is to beef up competition law to cope with this model that the Chinese have employed so much recently. Not that it's unknown everywhere else (Airbus & Boeing for example) - but China have operated this at scale, as an economic model.

          1. This post has been deleted by its author

            1. batfink

              Re: Trade Deal

              Only if they secretly leave the containment shell out of the build. Nobody would notice...

            2. I ain't Spartacus Gold badge

              Re: Trade Deal

              twellys,

              Nuclear reactors are actually quite hard to break. Especially modern ones. They have a large number of back-up systems, and although some of them are going to be in software nowadays, most of them are still going to be hardware.

              For example, Chernobyl happened because their control rods had to be driven back into the reactor by a motor - so they couldn't just hit one button and scram the reactor. Also, as I understand it, there wasn't one motor per rod - so there was a delay. Also management had turned off the safety systems in order to do a test with a number of control rods way below the safe minimum - and they didn't even have time to get back to safe minimum numbers inserted before the accident - let alone get them all in.

              Western ones held their rods out of the pile with electro-magnets, so any failure of that system (or the power) would automatically drop them all into the pile. So even if you could break that system in software - a quick knife to the power or control line, the system goes dead, the control rods drop.

              Plus the massive concrete containment built around the whole thing in case everything else fails.

              The risk with Huawei telecoms kit is that it's going to be continuously updated. So even if there's no backdoor built into it now, there could be one introduced in future. In the end it's really a matter of trust. Because obviously we could make sure that the updates are checked and that we've got all the source code available to our own spooks.

              But we know the Chinese government are already using hackers to spy on us, both in the normal sense of governments trying to read each others' mail and check up on dissidents and opponents - but also in terms of industrial espionage. And so this access to the networking kit opens a much more obvious and extra attack surface that needs defending against. It's not like everybody doesn't do this to some extent, but the Chinese government are less trusted because they appear to be doing more of it, and more aggressively at the moment.

              And imposing costs on the Chinese economy for their government acting in ways that we find problematic is a way to get them to at least consider being more agreeable. Given that economic growth and access to our markets and technology is important to them. And the Chinese Communist Party has the example of Russia to consider. Sure Xi Jinping is concerned about not being Gorbachev, the guy who was in charge when the dictatorship collapsed, but he might also consider the current political and economic status of Russia, as a lesson in what happens if nobody trusts you at all.

              The Chinese have been having to prop up the Yuan for a few years now. Not because their economy is in trouble, it's continued to do well and export lots. But because even the Chinese people and companies don't trus t their own government - and would like to get their cash into the Western economies, were returns are lower, but rule of law means they're less likely to have their stuff taken off them. In the medium to long term, this is much more of a threat to stability in China than any foreign government - and is one of the things that's hollowed out the Russian economy over the years.

        2. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Trade Deal

          Chinese funding of Hinkley Point C was purely on the understanding that the UK would approve China General Nuclear Power Group and China National Nuclear Corporation's Hualong One PWR for installation at Bradwell B.

          The Hualong One is a copy of a 900MW French reactor design with slightly higher power output and largely Chinese components replacing those licensed from France. Approval is expected next year unless politics intervenes.

  2. alain williams Silver badge

    Huawei should not be the last ...

    The Chinese ambassador has been saying that we must not interfere with internal Chinese affairs, but how can we ignore human abuses in other countries ? Should we let Primark ignore working conditions in Bangladesh from where it buys its clothes or slave labour in Chinese prisons ? No: public opinion is making them change.

    Likewise: we must not ignore what China is doing to fellow humans.

    I have met Uighur Muslims, I know people from Hong Kong - but even if I did not how could I ignore oppression of people even if they are 10,000 miles away ?

    We must send a message to Xi Jinping that we do not like the bully that he has become. He is emboldened by their burgeoning economy - so we can express our disapproval by buying less of their goods and services.

    Other nations should do likewise: a school ground bully will just dominate/terrorrise one child who stands up to him but if many do he will be defeated.

    I recognize that some of the UK's history is not good, but that does not mean that we should turn a blind eye.

    China is not the only rogue nation but is, I believe, the most dangerous.

    1. UCAP Silver badge

      Re: Huawei should not be the last ...

      China does not care about public opinion.

      Inside China, "public opinion" is set by the Communist Party; anyone whose opinion is different and dares to go public is clearly insane/a criminal/a terrorist/a threat to the Party and therefore must be jailed/disappeared/executed.

      Outside China, any adverse public opinion is clearly the work of warmongering capitalists and therefore can be ignored, although threats to any governments that do not do what China wants is also a option (as is full-scale military action if they are close enough - after all the "public opinion" must really be in support of China, so an invasion is doing them a favour).

      1. very angry man
        Mushroom

        Re: Huawei should not be the last ...

        Equally true

        murcia does not care about public opinion.

        Inside murcia, "public opinion" is set by the Zuck and co; anyone whose opinion is different and dares to go public is clearly insane/a criminal/a terrorist/a threat to the Party and therefore must be jailed/disappeared/executed.

        Outside mucia (many locals don't understand this concept), any adverse public opinion is clearly the work of warmongering capitalists and therefore can be ignored, although threats to any governments that do not do what Orange ape/ zuck and co wants is also a option (as is full-scale military action - after all the "public opinion" must really be in support of murcia, so an invasion is doing them a favour).

    2. You aint sin me, roit

      Re: Huawei should not be the last ... Apple should be on the list...

      In fact any company reliant on Chinese manufacturing... and any western citizen who buys products made in China.

      All of a sudden it's not so easy, and capitalist corporations soon turn a blind eye and instead look to the profits. While consumers carry on buying cheap tat.

      1. I ain't Spartacus Gold badge

        Re: Huawei should not be the last ... Apple should be on the list...

        All of a sudden it's not so easy, and capitalist corporations soon turn a blind eye and instead look to the profits.

        That's why we have governments. We then get to decide democratically what we absolutely won't put up with and ban it, and then companies will follow the law. Otherwise the ones with the tighter ethical standards will get outcompeted on price, and it's pretty clear that most ordinary people aren't interested in taking part in boycots - I still remember my Student Union voting to boycot Nestle - but saying they wouldn't remove KitKats from the Union shop because it was their biggest selling item.

        Governments are there to set the rules and level the playing field. That's how you stop pollution, you make people pay a fair price for causing it, and then they have a financial incentive to clean up. Give people a financial incentive to do bad, and someone will do it. This can equally work with fincial incentives to do good things.

    3. Yes Me Silver badge

      Re: Huawei should not be the last ...

      So it's OK to discriminate against China to the benefit of the US?

      Are you sure that no citizens of the US feel themselves to be trampled on by the authorities?

      It's OK to sell weapons to Saudi Arabia, but not to buy telephone equipment from China?

      Are you sure that citizens of Yemen would agree to that?

      The world is a dirty place. It's very, very hard to have clean hands.

    4. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Huawei should not be the last ...

      There are companies which product UK made clothing with materials ethically sourced, consumers do not want to pay 3x as much for them as the slave made chinese goods.

      Oddly enough I use to design factories for a major sports manufacturer in my 20s and worker comfort was never discussed, in fact I don't remember ever including staff rooms etc in the Bangladesh factories as we were told that worker accommodation was done by nearby buildings.. UK factories always had staff rooms, locker rooms and lots of WCs.

  3. HarryBl

    What about all the Huawei street cabinets that Openreach have? Do they not pose a threat too?

    1. cyberdemon Silver badge
      Go

      Of course! But they're not a 5G threat, so that's fine. 5G will be powering the Internet of dodgy-things revolution, don'tcha know.. Can't have that being snooped on by the reds.

      We'll be buying 5G routers from Weihua in future.

  4. Nifty Silver badge

    Apparently we can run a satellite internet service on our own so how hard can 5G be?

  5. JDPower Bronze badge

    It's funny how political fall outs make policy suddenly happen quickly. Whilst I accept the human rights issues in China are terrible, let's remember the Huawei decision is supposed to be based on security concerns, not used as a Trumpian style punishment of the companies country of origin. Huawei is just a convenient stick to beat them with, and this just makes it even more obvious the original reasoning is largely a fiction.

    1. I ain't Spartacus Gold badge

      JDPower,

      I don't think this is directly related to recent events in Hong Kong at all. Trump didn't care about it, according to Bolton, he's interested in winning some trade wars and looking like he at least knows something about his supposed area of expertise in business and deal-making. As opposed to being an ineducable know-nothing when it comes to politics and foreign policy.

      A year ago the UK security establishment all seemed pretty relaxed about Huwawei. Though there were some voices of dissent, particularly from retired people. It was much more the MPs that were concerned, and the Conservative back benchers were particularly unhappy with the decision. And I suspect Johnson would like to do some things to make them happy, where he can. Given he's doing plenty that the right of his party don't like.

      Now there are hints from the security peeps that they're not so sure. That could just be lots of well-placed leaks and a good PR machine in action. But this country hasn't had a well-oiled 10 Downing Street controlled PR machine in working order since before 2005 - because that needs a highly disciplined, united and PR-focused governing party and them to be in broad alignment with the civil service. And none of those factors have lined up since.

  6. amanfromMars 1 Silver badge

    The First Great Cyber Wars are All Hearts and Minds Operations Suffering Neither Fool nor Folly

    Speaking on London talk radio station LBC Radio this morning, Dowden raised the possibility that crippling US sanctions have undermined its reliability as a vendor.

    Are those sanctions a legitimate appropriate response to what exactly ? The East's Mighty Rise is not a Daemon to be Vanquished when a Delight to be Highly Valued and Much Sought After.

    If such is your Daemon that Sees Not the Future with Affluence for Anything Owned by Everyone Everywhere, do you do Battle Primarily with Yourself and Fail/Win against Phantom Ghosts and Fearsome Fake Enemies ..... Rotten Confections of the Crazed Imagination.

    Such is the True Nature Waiting and Paths Resulting from Any and All Wilful Denials of Certain COSMIC Secrets for Novel Noble Presentations, and easily spilled into Attentive Media Systems .... either with or currently without Advanced IntelAIgent Networking Facilities/Utilities/Abilities SMARTR Enabled.

    Q: Is Uncle Sam's the Big Bad Wolf here and China, Little Red Riding Hood?

    A: Yes. Is there any reasonable doubt? Is that not scandalous, Culture Secretary Oliver Dowden whenever and wherever true and deniable/undeniable?

    Q: What is everyone pratting about to protect and lead with? And lead to where exactly?

    Anywhere Better than Heaven or worse than Hell? Do you ever/never ask Media Mogul Led Drivers for Pictures of the Future Destinations with SMARTR Solutions to those Few Final Questions.

    And just so you know what you can no longer deny ..... SMARTR Solutions = SMARTR Mentoring Analysis Reporting Titanic Research Solutions.

  7. Steve Davies 3 Silver badge
    Flame

    UK Government to decide....????

    I really doubt that they will. It will be the USofA that decides. Our Puppet Government will just pass on the decision.

    If someone inside Whitehall had the balls they'd delay and delay and delay the decision in the hope that El Trumpo gets the boot in November. But they won't. After all, they that their Peerage and Directorships to think of now don't they!

  8. DavCrav

    "And while Huawei is trying to persuade the UK that it's an independent private entity, with company director Sir Kenneth Olisa describing it as being what BAE Systems is to Westminster, those pleas have fallen on deaf ears. "

    Ah, right. So Hauwei is heavily intertwined with the Chinese government, so much so that they will quietly kill off fraud and bribery investigations? Gotcha.

  9. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Maybe the UK government should announce a ban on both Huawei and Cisco for national security reasons.

  10. Kevin McMurtrie Silver badge

    Honest, it's OK

    China says they won't take control of Huawei equipment in foreign countries. It will remain independent, like Hong Kong.

  11. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    > NCSC will make the call, says UK digital secretary

    Bollocks. Trump will make the call.

    Still, if we go ahead, we should similarly ban all US kit for the same reasons.

    Of course, this is all to do with making a crappy deal with the US that hardly any of us want.. Lowered food and employment standards along with the ability for US companies to sue the government if our policies affect their profit?

    All the economics show a US trade deal wouldn't give us much anyway - it's value to the UK economy (even ignoring the downsides) has been overhyped. The whole thing is just a symbolic way for Boris to claim Brexit victory, and for the multinationals to squeeze our employees like American employees are.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      >Bollocks. Trump will make the call.

      After he and Boris have checked with Putin, I look forward to my Lada phone

  12. Klimt's Beast Would

    Look away...

    The change of heart might also have something to do with the Tory 1922 committee which has been banging on about dumping Huawei for quite some time.

    Following his general election victory in December, at least 40 Conservative MPs would have to rebel against the government to inflict a parliamentary defeat on Mr Johnson.

    https://news.sky.com/story/boris-johnson-faces-conservative-rebellion-over-huawei-in-commons-vote-11950865

    1. I ain't Spartacus Gold badge

      Re: Look away...

      It ain't just the nuttiest back benchers either. But more respected senior figures like Tom Tugendhat (he really ought to get an easier name to spell).

      1. Klimt's Beast Would

        Re: Look away...

        Oh yes, but there are voices or reason...just on the outside of the inside... or is that out through the in door?

        https://www.politicshome.com/news/article/former-chancellor-philip-hammond-attacks-alarming-rise-in-antichinese-sentiment-in-conservative-party-amid-huawei-row

        1. I ain't Spartacus Gold badge

          Re: Look away...

          Is a bit of anti Chinese Communist Party sentiment all that unreasonable? They had a perfectly fine system in Hong Kong which was brought in as a compromise to stop us introducing democracy before leaving - and they've just broken their word on keeping it going for another 25 years. Breaking a treaty they signed with us. They spent a couple of months covering-up a soon-to-be global pandemic, and even when they admitted to it and started taking action, continued to keep the whistle-blowers under house arrest and refuse to provide data to the WHO.

          They've grown their economy on mercantillist principles, that have been quite damaging to Western economies, which is entirely understandable, but now don't seem to want to come off that model and move to fairer trade which will allow them to join the open economies in more equal and less disruptive trade. I've no problem with the political spying, but there's an awful lot of state-backed industrial espionage going on, which again isn't playing fair and should therefore be objected to to protect our economies.

          Then there's the huge military build-up and regular sabre rattling against neighbours. And continual pushing at border disputes, and niggling border aggression against India, Vietnam, Japan, Tawain, the Philippines.

          Plus the debt diplomacy in Africa and Central Asia - which has also been moving into Southern Europe (due to some of the EU's disastrous Eurozone policies) - of building infrastructure via Chinese companies at often very high prices, and then converting that unpayable debt to military bases or political influence.

          And then we have the cyber-attacks on Australia for government policy on Hong Kong and all that jazz. And the Russian style tactics of paid forum-trolling too.

          There's a lot to be worried about. I don't want a new Cold War with China. But it takes two to tango. The Chinese government has to accept that everyone else have legitimate interests as well as they do, and accept that they can't just have everything they want. Obviously Trump doesn't help, but then much of this stuff has been going on for more than 4 years.

  13. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    It's childish O know but

    My next phone will be a Huawei.

    The idea of a totally Google free phone is very appealing.

    Cheer… Ishy

    1. I ain't Spartacus Gold badge

      Re: It's childish O know but

      I wouldn't. Their app store is rubbish. And they're just as insidious as Google.

      I've got an Huwawei Honor 20, and I very much like it. But since then, they now can't ship phones with the Googley stuff. But even before Trump buggered up their Android strategy they've already filled the phone with Huwawei apps - and gone to quite serious lengths to make it hard to tell which are the Google and which they Huwawei ones. The couple I tried weren't quite polished either, although that's also often true of Google's own apps...

      Plus nasty things like occasionally sticking up pop-ups trying to get you to shift to using their app - so my Mum lost access to her texts on holiday - because she's far more likely than me to click on OK to that kind of thing just so the bloody phone will let her get on with what she's doing. And UI designers know that full well now, so the dodgy ones take advantage.

      The first item on the settings menu is also a nag to get you to login to Huwawei so they can track you across the internet like Google.

      I like this phone, but I won't buy another without access to the Play store. And I'll replace this one if that access is ever revoked. Personally I'd still prefer a nice up-to-date Windows Phone, but since that ain't an option I guess it'll be a different Chinese-made 'Droid.

      1. Roland6 Silver badge

        Re: It's childish O know but

        > they've already filled the phone with Huawei apps

        Bit like Samsung then

        >The first item on the settings menu is also a nag to get you to login to Huwawei

        Don't see a problem, a similar 'nag' is present on Google Android, Samsung, iPhone...

        Having a Huawei phone with both Play and Huawei app's, it is very simple to drop all the Huawei app's into a folder and take the Google app's out of their folder...

        1. I ain't Spartacus Gold badge

          Re: It's childish O know but

          it is very simple to drop all the Huawei app's into a folder and take the Google app's out of their folder...

          True. I did think it was funny how Huawei had put all the Google apps into a folder to hide them. And it's easy to reverse the process.

          On the other hand, having carried out the above procedure for Mum to transfer her to Google apps, she got a pop-up a few months later while answering a taxt that switched her from Google's text message app across to Huawei's. Now maybe she went and looked in that folder hidden on the page of icons she never looks at and started that process manually? But I doubt it, because I've had at least one Huawei app ask me for permission to take over as well.

          As I said, I like the phone. Also in Huawei's favour is that I get updates every couple of months. And I've been moved up from Android 9 to 10 recently. On the downside is the risk of losing access to Google apps and marketplace. Plus I'd prefer stock Android, rather than Huawei's (perfectly fine) Magic launcher.

  14. 6491wm

    are they really going to dump Huawei ?

    Would Huawei pull out of this if they did?

    https://www.theregister.com/2020/06/26/huawei_cambridgeshire_rnd_facility/

    1. Roland6 Silver badge

      Well Huawei could demerge their 5G division and HQ it in Cambridgeshire and thus becomes a UK company with manufacturing operations in China and a London stock market listing...

      A bit like what Dyson have done in relocating their HQ to Singapore.

      1. Pier Reviewer

        Alas it’s not necessarily that simple. Huawei aren’t publicly listed - the (Chinese*) employees own the shares. I would be extremely surprised to see them list publicly as it risks western involvement in the board.

        —-

        * non-Chinese employees are plentiful, but not entitled to own shares.

        1. Roland6 Silver badge

          >Alas it’s not necessarily that simple.

          Agree, but I would not be surprised if through such a sleight-of-hand transaction the problem changes from one of the relationship between USA-China to the USA-UK relationship...

  15. Pangasinan Philippines

    So why buy Huawei /.

    Better technology, or cheaper.

    I suspect the latter.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Yeah, carrier grade businesses working on 10-15 year procurement cycles only care about capex and completely ignore opex ^^

      Cheapest very much gets you attention, but if during testing your gear is crap it doesn’t get purchased. I’m not saying their gear has the best engineering, but the quality:price ratio was clearly favourable. Huawei’s gear has seen use in the UK for around a decade now. If it wasn’t of sufficient quality to make the carriers money on their operations there’d be no need to ban it - nobody would buy it.

      IMHO the pressure from the US side is intended to open up space in the UK market (and others ofc) for their new 5G players who can’t compete with Huawei on cost, or even on price:quality.

      5G has pushed most of the “equipment” to software, in particular cloud. The days of multi-rack multi-million <currency> hardware is starting to pass. There are big US players well positioned to take advantage of the big move to cloud if some incumbents can be squeezed out without having to actually compete with them...

      1. DavCrav

        "IMHO the pressure from the US side is intended to open up space in the UK market (and others ofc) for their new 5G players who can’t compete with Huawei on cost, or even on price:quality."

        But this is the weird thing. Banning Huawei means that we go with Nokia and Ericsson. The same happens for other countries. CIsco are too far behind at the moment, and 5G contracts are being signed now. So US companies don't benefit so much.

      2. I ain't Spartacus Gold badge

        I don't think it's fair (even to Trump) to say pressure on Huwawei is purely to boost Cisco's chances. There was security concern about Huwawei in the Obama administration, and in the UK at the same time. That's one of the reasons they built that R&D place (the one I stupidy said was in Oxford somewhere upthread).

        So there are genuine security concerns. Of course Trump also wants to create "trade wars" that he can then "win" with his "great deal-making". And there are competition concerns too. The Chinese government have been allegedly subsidising Huwawei, allowing them to do lots of expensive R&D and then have a price advantage. And what will then happen to prices if we let them destroy all the non-Chinese competition? Which is why the UK decision ended up being no more than a third of kit, so even there we were using security rules to do the job of trade rules. Although at the time we were in the EU and therefore didn't control our own trade or competition policy, so had no choice.

        It seems to me that our economic advantage over China is about having rule-of-law and reasonably sensible rules reasonably and fairly applied. No we're nowhere near perfect, but our system is way better than theirs - and so we should use it's advantages. Set competition rules about subsidies, so people can know about them in advance and plan round them. And leave security policy for security concerns. If the intel people really think the threat has increased, then I'm fine with a ban, but it would now be hard to believe that now - even if it is quite possibly true.

        It's not like using easy access to cheap government finance to boost exports is unusual. China does it to a very high degree, but then that's how Germany, South Korea, Japan and others did their fast periods of growth. And many haven't totally stopped even after getting to the top rank of the economic powers.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Oh it’s not about Cisco. I’m sure they’ll benefit a bit by selling some extra switch gear, but the big winners will be large US cloud. Look at who has cloud compute. Have a dig around on <search engine> to see who is buying up/developing 5G core capability.

          Tbh operators aren’t at any more/less risk using one or the other. As with any product the security is in how you use it (“security is a process” etc). Dumb ass choices like email/Internet to the desk for people working on the management plane will get you rooted regardless of who you bought your kit from.

  16. Fursty Ferret

    We're asking the wrong question

    Instead of asking "Is Huawei a security risk?", I think we should be asking why the security services are sending critical data over public networks without robust protection at the source.

  17. Potemkine! Silver badge

    51st state

    UK will have no choice. The US ordered it.

  18. simpfeld

    Still Waiting to See Evidence

    We still haven't seen an example of Huawei having backdoored their equipment. We have had vague suggestions it is (or might be in the future).

    Whereas our transatlantic friends have had numerous public examples of them backdooring kit, Juniper Cisco it goes on.

    GCHQ even have (had) a lab security testing Huawei equipment and never found anything.

    Yet another example of the government saying trust us (how has that worked before). Whereas the truth is we just don't want to upset the Americans.

    1. I ain't Spartacus Gold badge

      Re: Still Waiting to See Evidence

      You wouldn't see evidence, even if there was any. And the people who didn't want to believe it would claim it was faked anyway.

      The question is, does the capability exist - or can it be created in future.

      1. simpfeld

        Re: Still Waiting to See Evidence

        Ermm, a third party security researcher could easily show evidence of Huawei backdoors, this hasn't happened! But it has happened with numerous US originated equipment.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Still Waiting to See Evidence

          Exactly that. Nothing has popped up on any security forums and they'd be the first to publish them.

          As for the risk profile - even if there was a "back door" how is that going to be accessed? Inside the data centre physically -you've already got a problem? Over wireless or bluetooth (would be spotted in the hardware), or through a mix of Cisco, Linksys, Huawei and other switches and routers (with controlled routing rules and ACL?). Not every core network device is Internet visible.

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Still Waiting to See Evidence

        The question is, are Huawei controlled by the Chinese Communist Party?

        The answer is obviously yes.

      3. DiViDeD

        Re: does the capability exist - or can it be created

        But isn't that true of any technology? FoxConn are a Chinese company manufacturing the world's iPhones. Most of the ECUs in cars are made in Chinese factories. Where was your Pixel4 built, or your always on home assistant?

        Why specifically Huawei? If there's no such thing as a Chinese company independent of the government, isn't everything manufactured in China suspect?

        Or does it only apply to stuff US companies aren't very good at making?

  19. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Wish they would make their mind up. I want the BT share price to recover a bit

  20. spold Silver badge

    Somewhat perplexing....

    ...about all the security stuff when their global CISO used to be the CISO for the UK government, and their US CSO used to be a CSO at the US government.

    Oh and much of their Shenzhen business/IT consulting they have purchased was delivered by IBM GBS consultants many flown in from the US. The Huawei product development methodology even has the same name as IBM's since I'm guessing no-one bothered to change it... and IBM sold them this stuff they didn't need to steal it.That likely says something about IBM GBS!

    We may not like this, and I'm not defending them at all - this is just context. (So no gratuitous downvotes *please* just because I am pointing this out).

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Other stories you might like