
Chinese firm Huawei controls net filter praised by PM - RobAley
http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-23452097
======
jwr
I find two things incredibly ironic:

1) The UK willingly submits all of its net traffic to monitoring, snooping and
supervision by a Chinese firm. This is mindboggling. Why worry about NSA's
ECHELON or PRISM now, when the government has just passed a law requiring
every packet to be inspected by a Chinese system.

2) Let's learn from those who are best at censorship. Obviously China has
significant experience in that area. UK has a lot to catch up, but they're
working on it.

Think about it -- if somebody told you 10 years ago that the United Kingdom
will outsource country-wide Internet traffic monitoring, policing and
censoring to Chinese companies, you'd call them a nutjob.

~~~
mtgx
I find it extremely unfortunate that more of the "democratic" countries are
now starting to see China's model of censorship and surveillance of its
population as something to aspire to.

This is not just a one-off. It's a trend. They all seem to want what the
Chinese government has (full control over its population), while still
"pretending" it's a democracy and everyone's rights are unharmed.

~~~
smackay
There's an unfortunate view in the learned press that business-like
governments such as Singapore and China are able to work efficiently and
generally get things done and are generally to be admired (though not always
publicly). Combine that with the UK Government's Big Sister approach to
managing the population and the worst effects of political correctness and you
can see where this is all heading - a country safely protected from itself
under the watchful gaze of those that know what's best for us - Downton Abbey
on a grand scale.

~~~
Tyrannosaurs
It's unfortunate but it's true - China has the advantage that without those
pesky elections to worry about it can take a longer term view of things and be
planning over a 10 year period, not a 5 year period with re-election and all
the populist stuff that requires.

Obviously that's only part of the story but the discussion certainly becomes
more "interesting" than it did in the 80s when democracy seemed to give better
results across the board having the moral and economic high ground.

Not for a moment endorsing the Chinese approach, just saying that there is a
more interesting debate than there used to be.

~~~
waps
Too bad that actual planning seems to take a backseat to "my own swiss bank
account in 10 years" planning. The same problem "islamic democracies" (or the
"islamic republic") or dictatorships have. And then western (and Chinese)
companies come in who promise personal kickbacks in trade for contracts. And
soon the situation happens that companies who don't do this simply can't get
any business at all.

China will get killed by it's own politicians much quicker than any western
democracy. They're still growing, today it's easy for them because China is
growing at 7% per year. It will get hard soon and things will change. Fast.

~~~
Tyrannosaurs
Because no Western politician ever made decisions thinking about a non-exec
directorship at some point in the future or campaign contributions.

Politics is a mucky business full of self interest the world over, let's not
pretend that's a problem for China alone.

------
edent
Oh, it's worse than that. Every house which uses Fibre to the Cabinet (FTTC)
has to have Huawei equipment installed on the premises.

[http://huaweihg612hacking.wordpress.com/about/](http://huaweihg612hacking.wordpress.com/about/)

BT own the monopoly on the copper infrastructure and they are the only company
providing high speed ADSL. If you want 80Mbps broadband, you have no choice
but to use the Huawei modem.

The device is reasonably hackable (and, in fairness, complies with its open
source obligations
[http://www.huaweidevice.com/worldwide/technicaIndex.do?metho...](http://www.huaweidevice.com/worldwide/technicaIndex.do?method=gotoProductSupport&productId=3019))
- but there's no real way of knowing what secrets the silicon holds.

So, the UK has sold off the line equipment, monitoring filters, and mobile
infrastructure to one company. What could possibly go wrong?

~~~
jpswade
>BT own the monopoly on the copper infrastructure

* Apart from in Hull[1]

>they are the only company providing high speed ADSL

* Apart from Virgin Media[2]

1\.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingston_upon_Hull#Telephone_s...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingston_upon_Hull#Telephone_system)

2\. [http://mediacentre.virginmedia.com/Stories/Virgin-Media-
boos...](http://mediacentre.virginmedia.com/Stories/Virgin-Media-boosts-
Britain-s-broadband-speeds-2322.aspx)

~~~
corin_
Virgin Media generally provide cable services rather than ADSL - maybe they
offer ADSL in some areas? But your link doesn't mention that at all.

~~~
vidarh
I believe Virgin offers ADSL outside of the coverage of their cable network,
but then it is over BTs copper, just as all the other ADSL providers.

~~~
moocowduckquack
Virgin resell BT ADSL as a virtual ISP, like Tesco. It isn't just BT to the
exchange, it is BT all the way if you cannot get cable and still go with
Virgin.

------
jimworm
In 2011, Huawei offered to give roughly 50MM GBP's worth of mobile equipment
to the London Underground as a gift, which the UK declined due to "national
security" reasons.

In 2013, the UK is going to pay Huawei to filter all its Internet traffic.

------
dlitz
"Customers who do not want filtering still have their traffic routed through
the system, but matches to Huawei's database are dismissed rather than acted
upon."

In other words, when they screw up the implementation and it breaks something
about your network connection (e.g. IPv6, TCP options, or dozens of other
subtle things), there's nothing you'll be able to do to just get raw packets
routed over the Internet.

This is going to break the network.

~~~
EwanToo
It's been in place on TalkTalk's network for 2 years now, it really doesn't
break things. It's not particularly aggressive, and only looks for HTTP and
HTTPS traffic, not VPNs etc.

Whether you agree with it, like it, or want it, is an entirely different
question (I don't want it), but it hasn't caused significant issues yet.

~~~
omh
Are you a TalkTalk customer?

I'm genuinely surprised that it isn't causing at least minor problems with
some sites for more technical users. I manage a virus-scanning web proxy for
our company and this is enough to throw up regular little glitches with all
sorts of sites which "just work" when going direct.

~~~
pbhjpbhj
Can you give more details. Presumably the filter is just dropping traffic sent
to/from any of the IP addresses or domain names in the blacklist.

What are the glitches you're seeing?

~~~
omh
The corporate systems for this (usually) operate by proxying all HTTP traffic,
so any sites which don't play nicely with a HTTP proxy are affected. I've seen
"interesting" problems with some more esoteric HTTP 1.1 features and all sorts
of things with streaming sites.

You're probably right that this system isn't proxying everything, so its
impact would be a lot lower. It all depends on what layer it tries to operate,
which we don't really know. I'd love to see an investigation from someone on
TalkTalk.

------
cclogg
I sit here in Canada on my moose, watching with my binoculars at the craziness
unfolding below me (USA) and across from me (UK).

I whisper to the other 5 people that live in Canada, "Do you think they see
us?"

One person responds, "No... not yet..."

DUH DUH DUH - to be continued.

~~~
mhurron
Naive

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five_Eyes](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five_Eyes)

------
pbhjpbhj
Huawei is a UK registered company isn't it, certainly appears to be on
Companies House WebCheck database. It also used to be called Huawei Symantec
FWIW.

It's not a Chinese system, it's using Chinese technology, but then the PM uses
Chinese technology, along with the entire government, every day. As do the US
President and government presumably.

Yes there should be due diligence to ensure that data is not being collected
and off-shored. The BBC seem to be going to pains to suggest that this is a
massive Chinese espionage coup without actually stating as much.

What're the facts here. Chinese made technology is part of the UK internet.
ZOMG! If the tech was from Cisco would it really make a difference.

> _both Huawei and TalkTalk employees are able to add or remove sites
> independently_ //

Right so TT employ a UK company whose UK employees are able to do their job.

I'm not saying oversight isn't necessary but this seems so overplayed unless
the BBC have more facts they're choosing not to disclose.

~~~
Peroni
_Huawei is a UK registered company isn 't it_

Yes but that doesn't make them a UK company. Facebook & Google are UK
registered companies but you'd never class them as a UK company.

~~~
pbhjpbhj
But under the same token we should be stopping Facebook or Google from routing
our internet traffic as "they're going to be working for the US Government".
Indeed there's more evidence that FB and Google are maliciously colluding than
there is for Huawei having done anything wrong here.

I'm not saying we shouldn't be vigilent just that this story has a measure of
"Starbucks could be poisoning monarchists to further the aims of USA".

------
flexie
This Summer of Surveillance get's better and better :-)

~~~
eksith

      "Summer of Surveillance"
    

This should be on a T-shirt. Maybe borrowing the backdrop to Pink Floyd's
_Dark Side of the Moon_ album and cross it with the digital rain form The
Matrix. ;)

~~~
est
This is not surveillance, it's out right censorship.

Technically, censoring porn is no different from censoring anything else. It's
only a matter of time for politicians to abuse this power.

~~~
pbhjpbhj
They're blacklisting sites but you don't have to have the filter on your
connection. Doesn't censorship require that someone prevent you, or indeed
impede you from seeing something.

TalkTalk just ask you [ie the person who pays the ISP] if you want to be
filtered or not. Perhaps they also filter illegal sites, use of a list from
the IWF was mentioned, but who's going to know.

~~~
est
Porn site 101: every site will constantly change its IP and provide
alternative domains to avoid been blocked. Thus if UK need to cut out porn
sites completely, they have to implement some kind of keywords based system,
which is 100% what a censorship firewall is.

~~~
eksith
Are keyword based firewalls really all that effective?

What if someone's researching classical art and searched for "nude"? Surely,
that will cause a fair amount of hair-pulling to deactivate the filter in
public access locations like libraries and such.

------
runarb
So each time a UK residents visits a webpage his ISP will send the url to
Huawei to ask for permission?

Good to see that Cameron don’t waste the opportunity and get the UK to use the
same hardware platform as the Chinese. The Chinese are already one of the
leaders in technology for censorship, with the great firewall and all, so it
could be a lot of opportunities for synergy and cross border cooperation her…

~~~
mseebach
> So each time a UK residents visits a webpage his ISP will send the url to
> Huawei to ask for permission?

No, each time a UK resident visits a webpage, his ISP will send the URL to a
server in the ISP's network running software made by Huawei (which could be
backdoored), loaded with watchlists maintained by a UK entity.

It's unclear how that software will redirect the request, but it's probably
just a DNS hi-jack.

~~~
dijit
it wasn't a DNS hi-jack with thepiratebay

------
piqufoh
Maybe this is all a clever government ruse. If DC wants more of Britain's
youth interested in technology, what better way than to force them to find
ingenious technological solutions to get hold of their porn?

~~~
squidi
Or some bizarre way to strengthen trading links with China perhaps. Cameron is
not popular is Beijing since he met the Dalai Lama

------
HowardMei
Cisco helped China government build the Great Firewall 10 years ago. It's very
advanced and powerful. I don't think Huawei can beat Cisco in the 'net
filtering' business at GFW level. I guess it's just a budget limited version
:)

------
lifeisstillgood
This is very much about literacy

\- do we expect firewalls on books children read, on radio they listen to? No.
We expect parental supervision

Lets get back to blaming the parents please

~~~
pbhjpbhj
Do books and radio that children have ready access to have hardcore and/or
illegal pornography.

Schools purchase from book catalogues that are "censored" in this sense and
[legal] FTA radio is equally censored. So why shouldn't we allow people to get
their internet equally censored.

Parental supervision includes using commercial services that censor hardcore
pornography.

------
da_n
As an aside, I find it very interesting that the BBC website is so selective
about which articles they allow (moderated) comments on, for example here is
an article with a comment form

[http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-
europe-23465992](http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-23465992)

It would be good to hear them explain what the process is for deciding which
articles are allowed.

------
switch007
So now we must use a VPN for everything? of course that instantly means you're
guilty of ... something.

~~~
me2i81
Yes, like having a job...

------
chrischen
At least in this case of outsourcing to China, they're outsourcing to the
experts!

------
runn1ng
Well... chinese firm Huawei also made my cellphone

should I stop using it and start using US-made or North Korea-made phone
instead? ...nah, it's not that much better over there.

------
ttflee
What irony it would be!

The Green Dam project [1] which was advertised by the department of industry
and information technology of P.R. China as protection of children from online
pornography had been defeated after media exposure year ago. Now the authority
in Britain wants to introduce essentially the same stuff!

1
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_Dam_Youth_Escort](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_Dam_Youth_Escort)

------
bowlofpetunias
Seriously, this incredibly misleading headline should get this post removed
from HN.

Ever since the NSA story broke there seems to be a constant effort to post
overly alarming headlines in the style of "look how much worse things are in
places outside the US".

~~~
mcintyre1994
Can you explain why the headline is miseading? The UK is at least as bad as
the US because GCHQ and NSA have a special relationship, there's no plot here
to make America look good.

~~~
qwyck
For me the headline, whilst technically true, was slightly misleading because
"Chinese firm Huawei controls UK net filter" suggests a UK-wide net filter
that Huawei controls. Whereas the BBC article headline of "Chinese firm Huawei
controls net filter praised by PM" does not suggest that.

~~~
mcintyre1994
Hmm that's true, "Chinese firm Huawei to control proposed UK net filter" would
probably be best if it fits. I think this is more of a proposal (albeit one he
sees as de facto happening) by the PM than something he's praising.

------
tomphoolery
Doesn't Huawei have components in many of the major phone & laptop
manufacturers' products? Or am I thinking of another company?

~~~
dfox
Huawei is sort of "Chinese Cisco", ie. while they probably have some custom
silicon in their products they don't market silicon directly instead focusing
on complete devices. So, you are probably thinking of another company.

------
ihsw
Why didn't we know about this beforehand? I wonder how much China bribed the
UK to get them to use Huawei.

------
kmfrk
Must be great fun to be a start-up in the UK.

~~~
harrytuttle
As an established enterprise company in the UK, we have our "own internet"
which we run between our clients. It goes over encrypted point to point IPsec
channels over leased POTS and LSE lines.

This is because we can't rely on the Internet as a business...

------
riceonmars
This is some of the most racist trash I've seen on Hacker News.

~~~
vidarh
It has nothing to do with race, and everything to do with the concern of
having a company that there are concerns might be influenced by the government
of a dictatorship that are renowned for using net censorship to maintain its
political control, potentially be in control of a network filter that most UK
network traffic will end up going through.

I don't see anything in the article that complains about Huawei because it is
Chinese in itself, as opposed to because of concerns there might be political
connections at play, or the generic issue of having such filtering under
control of a commercial actor in general.

------
dfgsfgsd
UK -> China 2.0

~~~
tomhschmidt
Nah, China is relevant.

------
LekkoscPiwa
How hard would it be to have a script creating millions of email accounts
sending billions of random emails including words like "bomb", "attack",
"taliban" among others rendering PRISM useless?

~~~
takluyver
Work on the assumption that PRISM has spam filters at least as good as GMail,
so it wouldn't be trivial to overload it with automatically generated content.

~~~
LekkoscPiwa
doesnt this mean that as long as terrorists use software to make their emails
like spam the prism is useless?

