(Though, as-expected, he won't be prosecuted https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20180313/15105739419/clock...)
Huawei went so far when copying that they copied the bugs on certain Cisco gear. Yeah, they lost that one in court.
CLAIMS to be among the world's top tech investors. Literally nobody outside of the communist party has any idea what their true finances are. We've already got proof of that in the money going into and out of Iran which was unaccounted for.
Trying too hard to badmouth them makes people look ridiculous.
I doubt there’s that much cloak-and-dagger involved. Every multinational company with offices in China or with Chinese nationals working in other countries are basically handing over their proprietary information voluntarily.
Nokia & E/// have tons of sites across the world and don't act like labor camp.
Slavery violates human rights. Industrial espionage does not, it only violates fictitious "intellectual property" rights.
Both of those are in use, in prod in Canada right now (for Rogers) as far as I know.
And as for it being "cheap" - let's be real - There's a reason why it's cheap - It's state sponsored.
This entire article is probably sponsored by China.
EDIT: I'm extra salty because of the fall of Nortel - which can easily be attributed to Huawei.
Unlike IBM of old (and apple of new) where newspapers are/were rewarded with ads, China rewards journalists, usually in kind so as to avoid all suspicion.
Just the other day as i was watching a video about a bridge being constructed in India, the top rated Youtube comment was a snarky remark suggesting that India talks first, builds later while it is opposite for China.A host of similar comments made an otherwise fine video undigestible.
Welcome to the post truth era.
Remember that China is a single-party system. You're either with the party, or you're not. In other countries, there are two (or more) major political parties to be aligned to. Any corporation that tilts towards one political group will lose power when the other groups come into office.
Ex: Farming corporations tend to be aligned with Republicans. Environmental corporations tend to be aligned with Democrats. While they get benefits when their party is in power, its hard to keep the subsidies going when the opposition enters.
That's not true of China. If you're with "The Party", then you get all the benefits of being with the party all the time.
That's why smart corporations sponsor government positions instead of specific politicians.
not if they simply shift their campaign donations to the other groups. federal level politicians spend a huge fraction of their time constantly and aggressively looking for campaign cash.
Huawei is far more technologically advanced than Nokia and E///.
Their stuff is cheap and well thought.
Let's take massive-MIMO (it's key for 5G)- Nokia is about 5 years behind Hua, E/// is at least year behind Hua.
Nokia HW for 5G baseband costs several times more than Hua equivalent.
Huawei has nothing to learn from Nokia - beside how not to do stuff ;-)
USA is pissed off on Huawei because every telco vendor tied to US failed miserably - Motorola & ALU. They have nothing and must rely on E/// & Nokia on their strategic infra. US operators have no options than take E/// and NOK - they are not in position to negotiate prices because you need to have at least 2 telco vendors.
Can confirm— Rogers at the very least is going with Ericsson for their coming 5G network. Don't believe they use any Huawei.
Bell and Telus, do, however—AFAIK
They're Chinese, end of story. If it's true, they had help from somewhere.
No matter what country or a people you belong to someone can find something about them that will "make you proud" and which surely applies because I already have one data point showing it.
And just because you were curious how empires are built but not enough to actually go beyond bigotry, here's an example: . Spoiler alert, it's stealing from the current leaders.
When Huawei got caught the Chinese government would "delay" certification in china of the companies suing them for infringement. This would ultimately end with an "understanding" that "no infringement" took place and that it was a misunderstanding. Problem is that misunderstanding always included Huawei and always western telecom vendors. Cisco, Lucent, Alcatel, Seimens all sued Huawei at some point - and all settled. Nortel's old headquarters was so riddled with bugs that IP Thieves left in their network the Canadian Department of Defense when they took over the building ultimately delayed moving in because of what they found:
Huawei has spent the past half dozen years trying to clean up their brand by building consumer products, massive advertising sponsorships, free and paid for "next generation trials" and colocating research centres in the cities and countries where they drove the local competitors into the ground. They're now the only partner local research institutions can turn to for funding. They think they're like Cisco..
The Chinese governments IP transfer rules for international companies wishing to do local sales provide their industries a chance to Learn, coerce, steal and ultimately live within a protected market for these ill gotten gains. Is China buying Western competitors Mobile network infrastructure? Hells no. Why they're shocked that other governments are reacting in protectionist stance and ultimately questioning the interaction between the company and the government should become no surprise.
They think way more highly of themselves than that.
The battlefields in the current world are, I think, more economic battles.
"U.S. officials, mindful of Huawei’s market advantages, are even trying to develop packages of U.S.-made gear to provide foreign companies an alternative to buying Huawei"
I think this is the crux of it. If Huawei was a security problem, the US would just worry about itself. But Huawei is actually an economic threat to them, which is why we've seen this anti-Huawei sentiment recently.
Sure, the things worked well enough. They maybe caused interference in some other equipment, maybe not, but in any case it was not too bad, because the EMC requirements were quite tight for these products.
(This was 15 years ago and I have no specific references, I just remember the frustration of our HW designers.)
How would a layman even start making up their mind about this ?
Up until the Clinton administration there was a status of Most Favored Nation that countries had to get. There was a lot of pressure from companies eager to sell to China's 1B+ people and there was a lot of politicking about this. I believe it was a big reason why "most favored nation" was renamed to "permanent normal trade relations" in 1998.
Tiananmen Square was still fresh in peoples minds having only happened less than a decade earlier. China at the time also sold military technology to countries the US wasn't on good terms with.
So China obtained MFN/PNTR in 2000 and joined the WTO the year after. One argument used for this was that the only way to make China play by the rules is to be a member.
What's become increasingly clear however is that China did not, does not and probably will not play by the rules. The examples that spring to mind are:
- Wholesale intellectual property theft from Western companies. To be fair, many Western companies are complicit in this. Eager to open up new markets they agree to "partnerships" with Chinese companies that are thinly veiled IP heists.
- Theft of military secrets and technology.
- Sale of products to sanctioned nations (eg ZTE).
- A concerted effort to ensure that no foreign company ends up owning a market in China. Take all the tech companies in the rest of the world and there's a Chinese equivalent (Google -> Baidu, Amazon -> Alibaba, Apple -> Huawei/ZTE/etc). This isn't an accident and it's not because foreign companies don't "get" the Chinese market.
- The Chinese government and military have a large-scale and active electronic warfare program designed to steal IP, threaten companies and control discourse (eg anyone critical of the Chinese government).
The big concern about this is that isn't rogue actors. This is state sanctioned to the highest levels. The rest of the world seems completely disinclined to tackle this.
But at some point in the future you'll expect to see things like:
- Companies won't do business in China
- Companies won't do business with Chinese companies
- Companies won't employ Chinese citizens (for fear of IP theft).
On the last point, I'm honestly surprised the US government hasn't restricted Chinese-born people from working with any classified tech given the history of theft here.
As to Huawei, this is a real propaganda piece by Bloomberg as anyone who is concerned about the security of their IP and their infrastructure should as part of their due diligence be assessing the risk of using networking gear from a company where there is a serious concern that the Chinese government or military may have compromised the code that hardware runs.
You can argue an update could deliver one I suppose, but the same is true of just about anything if you want that standard.