It's the Chinese Black one-eyed Muslim Vegan One-legged Jews you have to watch out for.
FCC boss to block 'national security risk' companies (cough, Huawei, ZTE) from US's $8.5bn broadband pot
Federal Communications Commission boss Ajit Pai wants to cut some overseas companies out of the market for lucrative US government broadband contracts if they are deemed a threat to the Land of the Free™. On Monday, the FCC chairman announced the restrictions on its $8.5bn Universal Service Fund, which is earmarked for …
COMMENTS
-
Monday 26th March 2018 20:24 GMT Anonymous Coward
If US investigators believe that certain Chinese communications equipment poses a national security risk, then it must present a risk to EVERY country besides China? If it's a given that US kit also presents a security risk, then what everyone else needs is open source comms hardware and software that can be independently verified.
-
-
-
Tuesday 27th March 2018 18:14 GMT Claptrap314
US is for US
And just what else should the US government worry about? Should Google execs care about the welfare of Dell stockholders?
I expect the leaders of any nation to worry about their own people first & foremost. If it is in the benefit of their people to be on kindly terms with mine, great. If not, well, that's the way it goes.
-
-
-
Monday 26th March 2018 23:29 GMT Anonymous Coward
How Deep Do You Want to Go
Any component that is sourced outside the US is a supply chain risk. Think back to the failures over the years due to substandard components such as capacitors. It isn't just chips or assembled equipment. Be lovely to see F-35's crashing due to over temp on marginal equipment or surges of one sort or another. NOT.
Supply chain risk is something that has only recently reared its head amongst the halls of power. In the security community we've been thinking hard on it for some 15 years that I've been involved. How often are glue chips decapped to verify their isn't something dodgy going on? Conducted a random sample of resistors using a gas chromatograph recently and regularly? How about that hydraulic actuator? Absolutely no easy answers or quick fixes. And it won't be cheap either.
-
Tuesday 27th March 2018 08:58 GMT Anonymous Coward
Re: How Deep Do You Want to Go
Who says a component sourced from the US won't be substandard? Corporations all over the world have profit motives to cut corners and make more money, this isn't something unique to China.
Instead of spending crazy amounts of money on components and trusting the company you are buying them from will use all that extra money to do the stringent tests you require, perhaps they should buy components on the open market - through shell companies so the sellers won't know they are selling to the DoD (so they can't jack up the price etc.)
They'd still specify high quality but not give a DoD-like list of conditions, and instead hire several testing firms to test all the components, and verify they meet the required standards. If they don't, they axe that supplier and buy more from the others. If one testing firm is not catching the failures the others are, axe it.
I bet the whole procurement process would be far cheaper done like this.
-
Tuesday 27th March 2018 18:20 GMT Claptrap314
Re: How Deep Do You Want to Go
When I was at AMD (in the '90s), we had a certification program for motherboard manufacturers. It was a constant game to ensure that the BOM (bill of materials) was properly honored. We even had cases where parts would change while the part numbers were the same.
So, yeah. There is work to be done. And believe me, the US DOD has been well aware of it since at least the Cold War.
Now if you REALLY want a good time, try building a radio intercept facility to listen in on Soviet-bloc communications...
-
Wednesday 28th March 2018 03:06 GMT Charles 9
Re: How Deep Do You Want to Go
"through shell companies so the sellers won't know they are selling to the DoD (so they can't jack up the price etc.)"
1. What makes you think the companies putting up bids aren't shell companies themselves?
2. What makes you think the bidders won't try to figure out that the buyer isn't the DoD in disguise?
-
-
-
Monday 26th March 2018 23:34 GMT JohnFen
Whatever
Maybe it's a "national security risk", but it's more likely that it's an effort to restrict competition for the major US telecom equipment manufacturers.
Pai's (and by extension, the FCC's) credibility is shot, and I'm certainly not going to think something is likely to be true just because they say it is.
-
Tuesday 27th March 2018 18:22 GMT Claptrap314
Re: Whatever
A little from column B, a bunch from column A. Which is which? Hard to say.
I am aware of a recent report from someone in the Pentagon that the entire Chinese society should now be viewed as a security threat. If we start acting on this, there will be a lot more repercussions.
-
-
-
Tuesday 27th March 2018 01:38 GMT Ole Juul
NDA
"The two China-based hardware manufacturers have found themselves subject to intense scrutiny as of late for their close ties to the Chinese government."
What exactly does "close ties" mean? What American (or other country) company doesn't have close ties to the government. Even just by way of being incorporated there. The government in all countries, though especially in USA, has huge control over what companies do and even order non disclosure agreements sometimes.
-
-
Wednesday 28th March 2018 02:20 GMT Yes Me
Re: NDA
"How does C-level executives being formerly of significant government agencies strike you?"
It strikes me as absolutely typical in every country, especially the US. Given how the Chinese economy works, it would be amazing if it wasn't also true of many large Chinese companies.
So, it's irrelevant. Pai is a Trumpista and following the Trump line. In terms of how industrial economies work, this whole business is just self-foot-shooting.
-
-
Tuesday 27th March 2018 09:26 GMT David Roberts
Paranoia
Then again, just because you think they are out to get you, doesn’t mean that they aren't.
Buying stuff from abroad is an obvious increased security risk. Is it outweighed by increased functionality and reduced cost? Now? In a year?
How about supplier lock in?
Insoluble because we all know that if you run a captive market in your own country then building a bigger barrel for the pork is a higher priority than innovation and cost reduction.
-
Tuesday 27th March 2018 18:12 GMT JaitcH
"Threats to privacy posed by US communications equipment providers are a matter of concern"
It's NOT the Chinese we need to worry about rather its the bunch of amoral characters employed by governments in Gloucestershire and Maryland - and many other locations around the globe.
Why, otherwise, is CISCO a preferred supplier?