
Huawei, Failing to Crack U.S. Market, Signals a Change in Tactics - johnny313
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/17/technology/china-huawei-washington.html
======
bookperson
On a related note, the other Chinese telecom devices provider ZTE looks to be
half dead - ZTE will probably lose Android licensing soon.
[https://www.cnet.com/news/zte-may-lose-android-licensing-
fro...](https://www.cnet.com/news/zte-may-lose-android-licensing-from-google-
report-says/) And lose access to vital parts for 7-10 years.

Huawei will most likely try to focus its attention on Europe and Asia.
However, other countries might follow suit with US soon, following FCC's
proposal to withhold money from suppliers (such as Huawei).
[https://www.fiercewireless.com/wireless/huawei-moving-
from-u...](https://www.fiercewireless.com/wireless/huawei-moving-from-u-s-
market-following-fcc-vote)

South Korea, for example, has started questioning Huawei's close ties with the
CCP [https://venturebeat.com/2018/04/03/south-korean-carriers-
fac...](https://venturebeat.com/2018/04/03/south-korean-carriers-
face-5g-dilemma-due-to-huawei-security-issues/)

looks like Nokia, Ericsson, and Samsung will be the winners here, with Samsung
most likely winning the 5G race in US, and Nokia/Ericsson in Europe

~~~
dogma1138
Ironically the UK let Huawei to build and run it’s most secure networks it
even has access to the doughnut.

[https://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/2018/02/20/uk-
cyber-s...](https://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/2018/02/20/uk-cyber-
security-agency-sticks-chinas-huawei-despite-us-spy/)

This is despite multiple failures including the inability to verify the source
code and binaries that end up running on the hardware that is supplied,
operated and managed by Huawei.

[https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/...](https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/626110/20170413_HCSEC_Oversight_Board_Report_2017_-_FINAL.pdf)

(Page 15 is a gem so are many others).

------
AndrewKemendo
Evidence that Huawei has deep ties to the Ministry of State Security and Third
People's Liberation Army - the CIA and NSA respectively for China - is public
and well documented [1][2][3][4]. The argument goes, that if widely adopted in
the US, Huawei/ZTE would pose a national security risk. As a result, the US
wants to put barriers to the adoption of their technology in the US.

It's worth having the debate about the merits of this argument, and resulting
stances/actions taken by the USG.

[1]
[https://intelligence.house.gov/sites/intelligence.house.gov/...](https://intelligence.house.gov/sites/intelligence.house.gov/files/documents/huawei-
zte%20investigative%20report%20\(final\).pdf)

[2] [http://foreignpolicy.com/2017/11/30/feds-quietly-reveal-
chin...](http://foreignpolicy.com/2017/11/30/feds-quietly-reveal-chinese-
state-backed-hacking-operation/)

[3] [https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/oct/11/chinese-
tel...](https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/oct/11/chinese-telecom-firm-
tied-to-spy-ministry/)

~~~
bshepard
Do you think the same argument, if applied more generally, would lead towards
the exclusion of all foreign tech companies from all nations? Thinking here of
the deep ties between Google, Amazon, Facebook, PayPal and the US military-
industrial complex.

~~~
JumpCrisscross
> _the deep ties between Google, Amazon, Facebook, PayPal and the US military-
> industrial complex_

False equivalence. Google _et al_ exist in a system where private actors can
challenge the government. ZTE and Huawei are arms of a government which
recently devolved into a dictatorship. One can be trusted to, most of the
time, follow commercial logic; the other, geopolitical logic.

~~~
BlindGod
Noone can challenge the government on the basis of laws, as they can be
changed as needed or mechanisms introduced to ammend the law (e.g. FISA
courts). You can never win against someone who can change the rules.

You can base your challenge on the constitution, but amendments show that
although harder to change it isn't rock solid either, and you challenging the
government is based on the interpretation of the constitution by judges (e.g.
current US gun law constitution interpretion of militias).

You can base your challenge on human rights, but the US might leave the UN and
doesn't care either way. The situation is a little bit better in Europe with
the ECJ, where goverments can be challenged outside the framework where they
make the rules.

Companies are always maximizing profits in an environment, if this means
playing by the intention of the law makers, then that's it [1]. If standing up
to the government because it enhances its brand (Apple security) companies
will do that.

Granted, China pushes companies more then the US does, but it's not a
difference in quality but quantity.

[1]
[https://www.theguardian.com/world/interactive/2013/nov/01/ns...](https://www.theguardian.com/world/interactive/2013/nov/01/nsa-
tapping-cables-document)

~~~
mcguire
Quantity had a quality all its own.

I'm a big fan of comparing Tienanmin Square to various US responses to student
protests, but really, there is a difference.

------
chrischen
US issues national security letters to US based cloud companies for access to
data, and has tried to force a US company (Apple) to create back doors to its
encryption.

This is perspective on at least one major reason companies like Facebook and
Google were blocked in China.

If all Chinese people developed a habit of using Facebook it would essentially
(in theory at least) allow the US government to spy on Chinese citizens.

~~~
lern_too_spel
> US issues national security letters to US based cloud companies for access
> to data

NSLs can only be used to get non-content data, like whom an email was sent
from and to. China intercepts and filters the actual content of all
communication. [https://www.google.com/amp/s/qz.com/960948/what-happens-
when...](https://www.google.com/amp/s/qz.com/960948/what-happens-when-you-try-
to-send-politically-sensitive-messages-on-wechat/amp/)

> and has tried to force a US company (Apple) to create back doors to its
> encryption.

Apple had a "backdoor" to access data on its own phones via installing a build
that disabled password attempt throttling. The FBI simply asked Apple to use
its backdoor on the FBI's behalf, not to create a new backdoor that the FBI
could use on its own. In China, Apple acceded to the government's demands to
block any VPN service that prevents front door access by the government.
[https://www.google.com/amp/s/techcrunch.com/2017/07/30/apple...](https://www.google.com/amp/s/techcrunch.com/2017/07/30/apples-
capitulation-to-chinas-vpn-crack-down-will-return-to-haunt-it-at-home/amp/)

~~~
chrischen
> NSLs can only be used to get non-content data, like whom an email was sent
> from and to. China intercepts and filters the actual content of all
> communication. [https://www.google.com/amp/s/qz.com/960948/what-happens-
> when...](https://www.google.com/amp/s/qz.com/960948/what-happens-when..).

There's also the fact that the NSA has been archiving all data. Even if the
law says the government can't do something with that data, or that NSLs can
only be used to get non-content data, laws can change on a whim, while
Facebook's dominance of a market cannot be easily removed. How effective do
you think China suing the US for breaking or changing a law would be, if the
whole point of the law is to leverage power against a nation? The possibility
exists for potential antagonistic use if the data is stored in the US or owned
by a US company, as everything in the US is under US jurisdiction.

If I have a gun pointed at your head and you tell me your current laws say
that you will not use the gun against me if I give it to you, why would I
believe you? Once I give you the gun, you have the power and will no longer
need to follow your own laws.

> Apple had a "backdoor" to access data on its own phones via installing a
> build that disabled password attempt throttling. The FBI simply asked Apple
> to use its backdoor on the FBI's behalf, not to create a new backdoor that
> the FBI could use on its own. In China, Apple acceded to the government's
> demands to block any VPN service that prevents front door access by the
> government.
> [https://www.google.com/amp/s/techcrunch.com/2017/07/30/apple...](https://www.google.com/amp/s/techcrunch.com/2017/07/30/apple..).

This is not true. Please provide a source (I was unable to locate one).

~~~
lern_too_spel
> There's also the fact that the NSA has been archiving all data.

The NSA has done no such thing in the US. It has archived data in war zones
according to leaks, but such areas have suspension of many human rights, to
the point where this is a minor one.

> This is not true. Please provide a source (I was unable to locate one).

You included the link to my source in your quote.

------
Fjolsvith
I once bought a Chinese brand tablet and it turned out to have a malicious
root installed. Why would I even think of buying a Huawei phone when there are
rumors that they have spyware installed?

~~~
pbhjpbhj
Because you're in the 99% of the population who don't care?

GCHQ are already spying on me, along with every bank, social media company,
large business, ... China can know about my inane existence too.

Chinese companies probably made all the network infrastructure already. My ISP
uses Chinese made routers.

~~~
Fjolsvith
You may not care who knows, but I bet you would not put up with the slowness
of the device because of the spyware feeding everything to the other side of
the planet.

And when China starts doing something with your credit card info, I bet you
drop your Chinese devices.

------
coldacid
I would be happy to see us follow suit up here in Canada, but given that JT is
at least part-owned by the PRC, I doubt it'll happen. I miss the good old days
when we had our own telecoms equipment manufacturer. Northern Telecom, for all
its faults, put out good stuff.

~~~
mabbo
> Northern Telecom, for all its faults, put out good stuff

Yeah and then suddenly a Chinese company called Huawei started releasing very
similar products with a fraction of the R&D budget. I wonder how they pulled
that off.

[http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/former-nortel-exec-warns-
aga...](http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/former-nortel-exec-warns-against-
working-with-huawei-1.1137006)

~~~
gaius
Modern Western culture says buy the cheapest now and don’t bother to think
about the long term consequences. Including chucking into a landfill and
buying a new one a year later.

On every level, be hollowing out our economies, pollution, loss of national
autonomy, Western citizens have dug their - our - own graves.

------
mlok
Oh. That is why we hear lots of Huawei ads on French radio all of a sudden. (I
don't have a TV but I guess it's the same there) I noticed it, and it felt
weird. Now I understand better :

The US market is gone, so they target the EU market more aggressively now.

------
barrongineer
I'm really disappointed by this. To my knowledge, the upcoming Matebook X Pro
was the only non-Apple device that has a taller than 16x9 aspect ratio and
Thunderbolt 3. These are two criteria that are fairly important to me.

------
manishsharan
QQ: If I were to wipe a Huawei latptop and install Ubuntu, is my device still
vulnerable to malicious rootkts etc. what if I swapped out the harddrive. The
Matebook X looks very tempting . and someone has already got this work to with
Debian [https://github.com/lidel/linux-on-huawei-
matebook-x-2017](https://github.com/lidel/linux-on-huawei-matebook-x-2017)

~~~
Lionsion
> If I were to wipe a Huawei latptop and install Ubuntu, is my device still
> vulnerable to malicious rootkts etc. what if I swapped out the harddrive.

If the rootkit is in the firmware or BIOS, you'd still be vulnerable.

------
xchip
Got a Huawei phone, it sucks, they have disabled lots of software features
(OTG, MHL, miracast) just to make you pay for them in a more expensive model

~~~
pbhjpbhj
Sounds like your phone sucks because you paid the amount a sucky phone sells
for in your market?

I've got a cheap Huawei ("Honor"), so far it seems no better or worse than
other same price phones. Probably slightly better value than most tbh. It does
miracast, which is default in Android since 4.4 I think (?), no idea about
USB-OTG or connecting to HDMI.

Only problem I have is how to pronounce the name "ho-nor"? Always makes me
think "hold the nor-gate". #britishproblems

~~~
xchip
I had a worse phone years ago and it had OTG and the camera was great. Why 7
years later Huawei phones don't have OTG?

------
ec109685
Trusting networking gear to not eavesdrop on data is quaint. Moving to a world
of end to encryption should keep at least everyone besides the carrier /
device manufacturers themselves out of your conversations and data
transmissions. Then worse that could happen with a rogue vendor is a denial of
service.

~~~
cm2187
But if for instance your electricity grid or 911 calls rely on the service, a
denial of service can be a pretty big deal.

------
godzillabrennus
The article mentions that WISPS will be impacted. Aren’t they all using
Ubiqiti?

~~~
ferongr
Huawei's equipment is almost too cheap to be able to ignore it. Here in Europe
most telecommunication equipment (DSL, GPON, LTE radios, CPEs etc) installed
in the past 5 years comes from Huawei and ZTE.

I don't know whether Huawei and ZTE carry Chinese state backdoors in them, but
if China had a plan to widely distribute equipment around the globe to be able
to tap into any connection, it would have already succeeded.

~~~
rdlecler1
Maybe consumers can ignore it, but governments won’t. Whether or not there are
valid security threats, the US can use this to their benefit in the same way
that China has used media control to their benefit.

I see a bifurcation if two non-comadible but competing political systems which
will include different hardware, operating systems and applications. It will
be interesting to see which system has the ultimate Darwinian advantage.

~~~
Narkov
Good point. The Australian government banned Hauwei devices from being used in
the large scale National Broadband Network.

[https://www.smh.com.au/world/north-america/chinese-firm-
huaw...](https://www.smh.com.au/world/north-america/chinese-firm-huawei-
banned-from-nbn-supplying-phones-to-australia-defence-20170616-gwsne4.html)

~~~
kiwijamo
Meanwhile over the ditch in New Zealand we have no such restriction. I'm not
sure if our equivalent to the NBN (the Ultra Fast Broadband [UFB] network) has
much Huawei gear but I suspect there will be at least some depending on the
LFC (Local Fibre Company). At the least many RSP (ISP) supplied CPE gear is
Huawei and their gear at POPs is likely to be Huawei as well. Our wireless NBN
equivalent (the Rural Broadband Initiative [RBI]) has one major telco using
Huawei for 4G base station gear. I would hazard a guess that at least a third
(if not more than half) of all traffic in New Zealand passes over at least one
Huawei gear.

------
nsxwolf
Have they considered a name change for the US market?

~~~
pbhjpbhj
My Huawei is branded "Honor" (sic) in UK.

