This really doesn't indicate that ASD has any confidence in their own controls and designs.
Surely, any operational/commercial controls would be maintained under the change of ownership, so we wonder what is really going on.
"we wonder what is really going on"
We don't. What's going on looks like amazing stupidity, but is in fact economic warfare: using blatantly ridiculous "security" arguments to discriminate against Chinese ownership. Personally I'd be more worried about American ownership, given the Trump regime's approach to privacy and human rights in general.
no it services
They may not touch the servers in the racks but they certainly provide the structured cabling which would become hard to verify.
and if a particular large share holder were to get someone on site, with the access to hit the EPO?
Bigger issue ?
AFAIRC, didn't Defence just outsource to IBM ? That worries me more given other stories around. As for not trusting Chinese companies, who trusts BAE, Lockheed Martin et al ? Governments don't even have to be discussed. Odd fear when considering bigger Oz Defence situation really. Our new subs and helicopter carriers cant leave port, our new fighters are still release 0.02 and our tanks cook the grunts they are supposed to assist. Dont even get started on new "new" subs the French are redesigning completely as a one off because the magik (sic) of nuclear energy must not blight Oz soil, not to mention mission scope. FFS, just buy a known working solution just once !! The Germans might even teach the local PHB class something about letting engineers make design decisions.
So far grunts guns still work, though some beancounter* is probably fixing that, and the Hornets and C17s still doing a good job.
* note, rumour a few decades ago that Defence actively did try to reduce effectiveness of common grunts weapon.