LinkBack URL
About LinkBacksRead more.BT had enjoyed a strong relationship with Huawei dating back to 2005.
Read more.BT had enjoyed a strong relationship with Huawei dating back to 2005.
Obviously the costs incurred won't be passed on to the consumer
What a huge waste of money. Totally ridiculous to rip out good quality, working equipment and replace it with another vendor like this.
Out of words to express how idiotic this is. So i'll go back to work and really hope the Nokia kit is better than the old ECI rubbish that they were busy replacing with Huawei.
Huawei isn't trustworthy, so not really.Originally Posted by Spud1
..............Huawei isn't trustworthy, so not really.
Taken from the mouth of Donald Trump that....we had a whole thread on this so I won't reignite that argument, but suffice to say, that is a very debatable point and those in the tech industry generally agree that it's a load of rubbish and this is really a US trade war issue (and by effect, a UK-US trade issue). Nothing to do with the hardware/governance/technology/ownership argument.
Jonj1611 (29-09-2020)
The thing that gets me if Huawei kit is SO bad why did the security services ever allow it in the first place. If it looks like and smells like trade war it probably is... At some point China is going to respond and given our reliance is quite concerning.
Spud1 (29-09-2020)
If Joe Biden wins, we'll be back to Huawei. If Trump wins, continue as intended.
Yet that hasn't been proven.Huawei isn't trustworthy, so not really.
This is all about the US trade war.
Rather than supporting US business, to make it better he just punishes the competition and artificially raises their prices, and hurts their ability to compete.
It was only allowed with the unprecedented step of having the HCSEC set up to oversee the risk - i.e. an ongoing process, and as such you'd expect it to a) get better information over time, and b) update information that becomes obsolete because people/technology/politics/whatever changes over time, and so the evaluation must of course up.
It was never about a company sitting an exam, getting a pass and then being free to do whatever it likes for evermore, without some exceptional change in circumstance warranting a change of treatment.
Would you care to prove how just trustworthy the CCP has been in recent years? Perhaps you have no skin in the game, so you don't care or are just ignorant. Some of us are not so lucky.
CCP isn't trustworthy but considering Huawei is under such scrutiny and is the lynch pin for a lot of the chinese telecommunications market, the CCP using it as an attack vector would be suicide.
Huaweis last report basically said that they found nothing malicious, no home phone or engineered backdoors or unknowns. But what they did find is either Huaweis engineers are incompetent or it is an engineered incompetence but nothing that can't be counteracted very easily.
Don't trust the CCP, that's fine, but trust that the UKs own government has spent millions establishing Huawei is not a high risk. Don't let Trumps racist anti Chinese sentiment detriment your reasoning and logic. Huaweis ban is a trade war, not because of them being a security risk.
Indeed. The amount of drivel written about Huawei is incredible.
This is not a debate about security.
Accusing me of ignorance rather than actually coming up with an argument.Would you care to prove how just trustworthy the CCP has been in recent years? Perhaps you have no skin in the game, so you don't care or are just ignorant. Some of us are not so lucky.
Has the risk actually been proven ? No.
It is just his word every time someone asks for evidence.
Is there evidence that existing equipment is either compromised, or able to be ? No.
You say it is an evaluation to be done over time, yet your mind is clearly made up already with exactly zero evidence.
What is most frustrating is people tend to forget that a couple of big american switch and firewall vendors were found to have engineered back doors exposed
One of them that rhymes with captain sisko and has had more zero day cvss 10.0s in the past 12 months than most other vendors in their lifetime!
Why so much subservience to US? Why every american whim should be paid by British taxpayers?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
