×

Announcing: Slashdot Deals - Explore geek apps, games, gadgets and more. (what is this?)

Thank you!

We are sorry to see you leave - Beta is different and we value the time you took to try it out. Before you decide to go, please take a look at some value-adds for Beta and learn more about it. Thank you for reading Slashdot, and for making the site better!

India Bars ZTE, Huawei, Others From Sensitive Government Projects

Unknown Lamer posted about 2 years ago | from the do-it-yourself dept.

Government 160

hypnosec writes "The Indian Government has decided it won't be using telecom equipment from international vendors, and has barred all such foreign companies from participating in the US$3.8 billion National Optical Fiber Network (NOFN) project — a project aimed at bringing high-speed Internet connectivity to the rural areas of India. The DoT has decided that it will be going ahead with 100 per cent domestic sourcing and has released a list of certified GPON suppliers. This decision comes after the research wing of the ministry, C-DoT, advised the telecom department to bar Chinese companies like ZTE and Huawei, keeping in line with a similar decision by the U.S. In an internal memo, the research body advised the department that both these Chinese companies are a security threat to the telecom world."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Tech support (0, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42654121)

Why use fiber when it would be so much cheaper to line up a bunch of tech support employees and pass the information along in a game of 'telephone'.

Yes, I'm a cruel cruel man!

Re:Tech support (1)

Cryacin (657549) | about 2 years ago | (#42654171)

Beats the current carrier pidgeon system dead into the ground.

Re:Tech support (2)

Crash McBang (551190) | about 2 years ago | (#42654393)

Because if you do, purple monkey dishwasher!

Re:Tech support (-1, Flamebait)

Wandy Koay (2820877) | about 2 years ago | (#42654403)

I think you are not cruel but its right if fiber is so much cheaper "to line up a bunch of tech support employees" we can replace it from other material.... http://x.co/sONn [x.co]

Tinfoil Hats? (2)

RudyHartmann (1032120) | about 2 years ago | (#42654147)

Okay, I'm not a big conspiracy theorist. But if there isn't a good chance of a backdoor in their software, I'm a monkey's uncle. Aren't these companies partly owned by the People's Liberation Army?

Re:Tinfoil Hats? (4, Insightful)

green1 (322787) | about 2 years ago | (#42654167)

I can understand the paranoia over buying equipment supplied by a company known to be tight with a foreign power you don't always get along with. But I also really wish someone would show some proof of something close to a security threat in one of these products before the whole world goes crazy about "OMG the Spies!!!"
There is tons of hardware by these companies available all over the world, and so far (to my knowledge) nobody has ever found any evidence of a back door, or any spying capability in any of it. And honestly, I don't see any reason to think that those companies are any more likely than any other company in the world to do that.

Re:Tinfoil Hats? (1)

AHuxley (892839) | about 2 years ago | (#42654261)

Much of the network maybe dual use like Australia. Would India want a country it has been at war with en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sino-Indian_War really doing their base to base to capitol optical links?
As for a "security threat" also view huge projects as a "security deal". We bought a huge telco system, you got jobs, we want hi tech weapon sales/code in return.

Re:Tinfoil Hats? (3, Insightful)

lxs (131946) | about 2 years ago | (#42654575)

Would India want a country it has been at war with rally doing their base to base to capitol optical links?

You do realize that most countries that do business today have at one time or another been at war with each other?

Re:Tinfoil Hats? (1)

AHuxley (892839) | about 2 years ago | (#42654679)

Yes ~1987 is some time ago en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1987_Sino-Indian_skirmish

Re:Tinfoil Hats? (1)

lxs (131946) | about 2 years ago | (#42654983)

India does have a lot of "skirmishes" with its neighbors doesn't it?

Re:Tinfoil Hats? (2, Insightful)

AK Marc (707885) | about 2 years ago | (#42654311)

There has never been one, and millions of dollars have been spent looking. It's all about racism (or nationalism or protectionism). Unless they have a hidden kill switch (not a backdoor) that's very very secure (for DoS only), there can't be anything there. The DoS would only come out when China declares war or something. Oh, and the moon landing was faked by Castro as part of the LBJ-hires-Castro-to-kill-JFK deal.

Re:Tinfoil Hats? (5, Insightful)

epyT-R (613989) | about 2 years ago | (#42654407)

No, it's not racism. It's a legitimate concern, but it doesn't just apply to the chinese. Who's to say that Cisco/nortel/juniper et al don't also have backdoors in their firmware? Frankly, no western country has a right to bitch about chinese government abuse of civil liberties and police state paranoia when they themselves are doing the same things. I'm surprised the indian government isn't choosing to distrust western closed hardware as well. They should.

This is yet another reason why closed software sucks. There's no way to audit what's running on the hardware.

Re:Tinfoil Hats? (1)

AK Marc (707885) | about 2 years ago | (#42654779)

I had that argument here when Australia did the same. Why would they trust Cisco/USA and Alcatel/France over Huawei/China, one of their largest trading partners? But if we don't like China, then nobody else should. At least India has a theoretical fear from China, as idiots everywhere seem to think China will invade the only large country more population dense than itself for "space".

Re:Tinfoil Hats? (2)

TheGratefulNet (143330) | about 2 years ago | (#42654931)

with US-created backdoors, when they break, there's a patch for it coming soon to restore functionality.

with the chinese ones, the bugs you get are the bugs you live with. you can't expect the chinese back-doors to be as well supported, can you? once they break, they are broken.

I'd prefer the US backdoors. at least I know there's support for them.

Re:Tinfoil Hats? (1)

AmiMoJo (196126) | about a year ago | (#42655837)

I imagine China will ban or at least just stop buying US and Indian telecoms equipment now, in retaliation. As the largest and fasted growing market the damage to these companies will probably be at least as big as the advantage they gain from not having to compete in their own countries.

Re:Tinfoil Hats? (1)

RocketRabbit (830691) | about 2 years ago | (#42654445)

Are you seriously suggesting that the PLA wouldn't hide secret functions in its gear?

Seriously?

This is primarily a security decision, and if there is nationalism or protectionism at play AT ALL it is secondary to the real actual threat.

You've posted similar fairy tales before, handwaving away legitimate security concern as racism. You realize that it's ridiculous to assert this, don't you?

Re:Tinfoil Hats? (2, Insightful)

AK Marc (707885) | about 2 years ago | (#42654721)

Are you seriously suggesting that the PLA wouldn't hide secret functions in its gear?

I'm saying they didn't. There's a difference.

This is primarily a security decision, and if there is nationalism or protectionism at play AT ALL it is secondary to the real actual threat.

There is no threat, so secondary concerns become the only one when the "primary" is a farce.

You've posted similar fairy tales before, handwaving away legitimate security concern as racism. You realize that it's ridiculous to assert this, don't you?

Yes, it's ridiculous to look for proof before wasting billions spending money on other companies who may have the same or worse. With so many people looking at Huawei under a microscope, how do you think they'd get away with hidden back doors? It's improbable at best, and at this point, pretty much statistically impossible. How long until you admit you were wrong? 5 years? If there's no attack by China in 5 years, backed by Huawei transformers leaping from their networking gear, will you admit it then? 10 years? Or will it take 1000 years of no Huawei backdoors until you believe?

Re:Tinfoil Hats? (1)

RocketRabbit (830691) | about 2 years ago | (#42655205)

You have no idea if there is code hidden in Chinese telecom gear. Neither does Australia or India - this is why they don't trust it.

Saying there is no threat is impossible. Just because a threat has not been identified, or publicly disclosed, does not mean there is no threat. The threat could be on the die itself - the Chinese have been busted implementing on die mystery functions on seemingly otherwise normal hardware before.

How about this - I won't believe that Huawei, essentially a PLA front, will ever produce anything that I would be comfortable with, ever.

Re:Tinfoil Hats? (1)

Clsid (564627) | about a year ago | (#42656097)

What PLA front are you talking about? Just because some US Congressman said that since the president of the company served in the PLA, therefore the company MUST be a PLA front do you actually believe it? It's like saying that any person that served in any military is just a tool for the rest of his life.

Why don't you educate a bit more about the issue before repeating words like a parrot. You can start with reputable sources like http://www.economist.com/node/18771640 [economist.com]

Re:Tinfoil Hats? (1)

Alien Being (18488) | about 2 years ago | (#42654499)

Nationalism and protectionism are fundamental when it comes to protecting a nation.

Re:Tinfoil Hats? (0)

AK Marc (707885) | about 2 years ago | (#42654729)

Protecting them from what? With so many asserting there "must" be a problem, how come nobody can find it?

Must be racism, nobody can give any other answer (other than there's still an unknown problem that a million people with a billion dollars couldn't find).

Re:Tinfoil Hats? (1)

Bearhouse (1034238) | about a year ago | (#42655331)

Indeed, looks something like that. FTA:

State-owned C-DoT also criticised the government's decision not to select a fibre technology developed by it for the Rs 20,000-crore initiative to lay optic fibre connecting all panchayats in the country, claiming this would undermine six years of research.

They're hardly thus impartial observers. Also, their recommendation seems entirely based on the US decision, no other sources or original work quoted. Personally, I've no problem if they say "we're spending a fortune on building our national infrastruture, so we're going to use that as an opportunity to develop our indiginous technology capability". This, after all, is what the Chinese have been doing for years, either by downright stealing of IP, or by forcing "partnerships" with foreign companies desperate to get access to their market.

But c'mon guys, just have the balls to come out and say it...

Re:Tinfoil Hats? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42655625)

They don't need a hidden kill switch, ordinary programming bugs will just do fine.

Re:Tinfoil Hats? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42655677)

There has never been one, and millions of dollars have been spent looking.

If the US can have backdoors in products, so can other companies:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crypto_AG#Back-doored_machines

Re:Tinfoil Hats? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42654313)

Like the constant security issues with Microsoft's products?
That are likely to have ties with one of the most powerful governments of the world...

Re:Tinfoil Hats? (1)

RudyHartmann (1032120) | about 2 years ago | (#42654411)

Shakespeare, in Henry IV, Part One, 1596:
Falstaff: 'The better part of valour is discretion; in the which better part I have saved my life.'

I'm with Billy Boy on this one. If there was one inkling of a national security issue, I would opt for a different choice than these Chinese companies.

Re:Tinfoil Hats? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42654507)

... national security issue ...

"Patriotism is the last refuge of the scoundrel." In short, this a 'think of the children' concept where rational thought disappears.

While another country shouldn't be trusted, the USA has massive industry protectionism in the name of 'national security'. It then travels the world demanding all other countries obey its 'free trade' policy.

As already mentioned, the USA is also capable of such skulduggery, but no-one complains about US-ian dishonesty, even when they have a proven record.

Re:Tinfoil Hats? (1)

azalin (67640) | about 2 years ago | (#42654933)

Well people do complain about the US shenanigans. A lot actually. Try reading foreign news from time to time (very often available in English).

Re:Tinfoil Hats? (5, Interesting)

Mike Frett (2811077) | about 2 years ago | (#42654895)

Did you forget about NSAKEY_?. Microsoft apparently took great lengths to shush that since you can't remember. There is no telling what Government backdoors are in Microsoft Windows since Indians and Chinese both help write code for it. There was also (and still is) an unknown hole in IE in 2010 that allowed Chinese hackers to steal Data from Google, Adobe and others. The question was: Was it really unknown, or intentionally put there?. Who knows, not us.

Then there is the Hardware backdoor from China, using the ASIC chip in US Military components. It's not a theory or a maybe, it's all fact. If you can't personally see the code for all this Software and Hardware, nobody should use it. But of course, we know that's not possible except with Open Source.

Re:Tinfoil Hats? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42655257)

Considering the source code for Windows has been peer reviewed by at least 4 western security agencies, the answer is: "Only the ones they want to be in there."

Re:Tinfoil Hats? (2)

TheLink (130905) | about a year ago | (#42655317)

Then there is the Hardware backdoor from China, using the ASIC chip in US Military components

Citation please?

If you're talking about the Actel chip, it wasn't done by the Chinese: http://www.csoonline.com/article/707542/china-not-to-blame-for-backdoor-in-us-military-chip [csoonline.com]
http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~sps32/sec_news.html#MEDIA [cam.ac.uk]

Re:Tinfoil Hats? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42655817)

Personally I wouldn't buy Huawei gear, not because I fear any intentional backdoors, but because I have seen their people work on a project in switzerland. The code those guys produced was completely abysmal, I wouldn't even doubt that there are a metric fuckton of unintentional backdoors in there. It was kind of fitting, because their idea of security really did look a lot like swiss cheese....

Plus, dealing with them is like talking to a wall, they just deny that there are problems until you finally give up and kick them out (if you can).

Re:Tinfoil Hats? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42654179)

It's not only the Chinese companies that are blocked.
Ericsson, Nokia-Siemens, Alcatel-Lucent, ... All companies that aren't doing too hot right now and could use the business.

Re:Tinfoil Hats? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42654187)

Does it really even matter in China?

Re:Tinfoil Hats? (5, Insightful)

rahvin112 (446269) | about 2 years ago | (#42654239)

The top three owners of ZTE are all members of the PLA. All three are high ranking officers. One of them is also believed to be a high ranking member of the Chinese equivalent of the CIA.

These men claim that their PLA association is past history and not relevant but they are all still ranking officers in the PLA. Maybe just maybe their ownership is related to the corruption of the PLA and communist party in general and that there is no real connection. The problem is that even if there is no involvement now, the PLA could direct intervention and backdoored firmwares.

I'd be surprised at any government stupid enough to put in place telecom equipment from a company owned by the military of a sovereign nation. You're probably at risk with any non native produced equipment BUT that risk goes up enormously if that foreign company is owned not only by the government of a foreign nation but the military of that nation.

Re:Tinfoil Hats? (1)

green1 (322787) | about 2 years ago | (#42654381)

And how is that any more of a risk than say every American company where it is well known that all their morals are for sale to the highest bidder?

People have spent a lot of time and money looking for security holes in these companies products, and none have ever been found. And yet the world immediately assumes they must be there, while generally giving every other company in the world a free pass.

We are fairly certain that ZTE and Huwaii products are safe, as they have been studied extensively in this witch hunt. I'd feel more confident with the security of their products than those of any other company that hasn't gone through the same scrutiny and is just as likely to be corrupt.

Re:Tinfoil Hats? (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42654511)

American companies are also excluded. India has specified that it will be supplied by a domestic supplier.

Re:Tinfoil Hats? (1)

CBravo (35450) | about 2 years ago | (#42654483)

Acces to the source code and influence in design decisions is good enough for complex stuff. Or you hire stupid people instead of smart ones which just create bad code for you (which functions just good enough for production purposes). Ba(ck)d(oor) software.

Not good enough (1)

Su27K (652607) | about 2 years ago | (#42654911)

Source code is only useful if you can be certain that the compiled code comes from the source code you reviewed, similarly design diagram is only useful if you are certain the actual hardware follows the diagram given to you; and this will need to be checked for every unit you bought.

Testing (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42654995)

Any competent buyer large enough can TEST the equipment, set a honeypot(s) and feed it replayed information.
You log the PSW and logic outputs. If they can't diss-assemble the code or do machine code, then they are not competent.
You can use open source to log and record events.
Otherwise core competency has been lost and they are just cargo cult administrators and drones.

The only threat is that the devices wipe their memory(self destruct) and become bricks (sony and apple know about that).
For a cheap labor country, overcome by having the basics to re-flash.

If they dont know software, dont have software test engineers worth tuppence, and don't know hardware at the component level, then yes, they will have to both trust another foreign power AND hope another foreign power is not sitting on many zero day exploits.

While hardware and router is a biggish deal, you have to balance risk - what if MS OS went down too. Why worry about routers when farms and boxes can be 'owned' .

Throw in some big brand high end stuff and you have no single point of failure.

Re:Tinfoil Hats? (1)

monzie (729782) | about a year ago | (#42655289)

I fail to understand why the military is running a telecom company.
I also fail to understand how uniformed service personnel can run a for-profit company.

Re:Tinfoil Hats? (2)

SuricouRaven (1897204) | about a year ago | (#42655373)

It's China. As they are officially (If increasingly less so in practice) a communist country, they generally see much less seperation between the state and industry than we expect in the west. Many large companies are openly state-owned (ZTE), and even private companies (Huawei) have a very close relationship with the government, to the point that government officials sit on the board of directors. This works both ways: Just as the companies do the government's bidding, so the government works to tilt the economic playing field in their favor. See the restriction on rare-earth exports for an example.

Re:Tinfoil Hats? (1)

Clsid (564627) | about a year ago | (#42656135)

Jesus, listen to yourself. You sound like Joseph McCarthy. But after seeing so many messages just like yours, it's not hard to see why wars start. Because instead of cultural understanding and mutual trust all you feed is your fears with baseless accusations, and then wonder several years laters why the missiles start flying. Sigh. World War 3 here we come.

Re:Tinfoil Hats? (1)

AK Marc (707885) | about 2 years ago | (#42654281)

Not any more a risk than Cisco from the US government or Alcatel/Lucent from France.

Re:Tinfoil Hats? (4, Informative)

azalin (67640) | about 2 years ago | (#42654945)

That's probably the reason those are excluded as well. While the summary focuses on the Chinese, it also states that no foreign suppliers will be involved.

Well, since the USA has done it for ages (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42654985)

I can see why they are worried about it.

The only problem is why didn't they see the problem when the USA were selling kit to everyone (with deliberate holes in it)?

Surely, too, India should be forbidding Microsoft Windows, right?

Or is that going to have them invaded for Un-American Activities?

Re:Well, since the USA has done it for ages (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42655263)

They'll probably do what every other Western country does, perform their own peer review of the Windows source code and compile it themselves.

Yes, really.

Re:Tinfoil Hats? (1, Insightful)

jandersen (462034) | about 2 years ago | (#42655071)

But if there isn't a good chance of a backdoor in their software, I'm a monkey's uncle.

A monkey's descendant, actually, according to Mr Darwin. There may well be backdoors of all kinds in SW; I don't think we need to be any more concerned about whether it comes from China or the US. Friendly nations are only friendly now, they may become less so in the future, and will quite likely have prepared for such a scenario in several ways.

Security by perfect code is just as illusory as security by obscurity; it is a kind of magical thinking. They can help slow down an enemy, but it isn't enough in any way. A better bet is to keep friend and foe where you can see them, and to make sure that your friendship is worth more than any alternative.

Aren't these companies partly owned by the People's Liberation Army?

No. The Chinese state may be involved in many enterprises, but the state is not the same as the army, and the army does not control the state. The picture is far more complex than you seem to think - the Chinese is no more one monolithic entity where all parts are in perfect lockstep, than the American 'state' of states; it wouldn't work in any other way - the national government rules over provincial governments, who rule over lower level, local governments etc. The higher level governments often have surprisingly little influence on the lower levels. Some companies are owned by government institutions at some level, but many are privately owned, and many private business people more or less 'own' their local government.

What we should worry about in China (and anywhere) is not the national government, but the foul taint of corruption that springs from unelected, private business owners, who have far too much influence. If you think about it, when we hear about the appalling working conditions in some Chinese factories, this is exactly what is going on: rich people - capitalists, if you will - who treat their workers worse than animals and use their wealth to buy influence and pay off the police.

The Chinese national government are trying very hard to get to grips with this problem, because it is vital for China's future. No one wants to do business in any sense with somebody that you can't trust, and you can't trust a system that is rotten with corruption and crime.

Re:Tinfoil Hats? (3, Insightful)

Issarlk (1429361) | about 2 years ago | (#42655085)

Am I the only one seeing this as an excuse to favor india's telecom companies without looking too protectionist?

Re:Tinfoil Hats? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42655785)

So I guess all network equipment going forward will have to be designed &
manufactured in good old USA. Using no chips, or components sourced
from any outside country.

When I read that it sounds more like protectionism and jobs rather than
a security issue. Break open a "trusted" Cisco or Netgear, they have
tons of stuff from China in them.

How can we trust Cisco when they contain so much Chinese stuff?
Could it be that some member of the PLA might own some factory
that produces chips for American companies?? Is it possible?

Re:Tinfoil Hats? (1)

EmperorArthur (1113223) | about a year ago | (#42655835)

Am I the only one who's watched https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ugdpbPW_k3g [youtube.com] ?

It's a Defcon 20 talk on how Huawei security practices basically don't exist, and all the bugs are things we saw in the 90s.

If researchers who didn't even have the source code could find holes large enough to drive a truck through, don't you think someone half competent could find them if they had the source code? Combine that with Huawei not having anything security related on their website. If you find a bug, there is no one to tell it to. As a customer there are only version numbers. They don't even tell you what's been patched between firmware versions.

They even say it in the talk. There are no backdoors because they don't need them. Plausible deniability.

http://cryptome.org/2013/01/tails-exploit.htm (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42654181)

http://cryptome.org/2013/01/tails-exploit.htm [cryptome.org]

21 January 2013

Tails Linux version 0.16 - Firewall Disabling Script Waits For Exploitation

A sends:

Tails Linux version 0.16 - Firewall Disabling Script Waits For Exploitation

"If youâ(TM)re running Tails version 0.15 or 0.16, please locate and delete the following file each session: /usr/local/sbin/do_not_ever_run_me

The file, if ran with correct permissions, will completely disable your firewall! So much for the idea that Tails always routes everything through Tor! Where this news has been posted and comments allowed, mysterious âoeanonymousâ users have expressed their low brow intelligence leaving comments such as, âoeWell you need to be root to run it so it doesnâ(TM)t matter, if you have root you can do anything!â

First of all, a file called âoedo_not_ever_run_meâ shouldnâ(TM)t be on a Linux system. If it should NEVER BE RUN, and that means by anyone, root or user, local or remote, it SHOULD NOT BE INCLUDED IN THE DISTRIBUTION!

Any current or future exploit which targets this file will âoedrop the shieldsâ for the Tails user.

Perhaps Tails itself in its next version, 0.17, should be nicknamed, âoedo_not_ever_run_meâ.

Another questionable decision by the Tails developers is to place the following line within the torrc file (located at /etc/tor/torrc):

## We donâ(TM)t care if applications do their own DNS lookups since our Tor

## enforcement will handle it safely.

WarnUnsafeSocks 0

Oh, really? We donâ(TM)t care? Who is we? Itâ(TM)s not me! As the man page for Tor states, this is set to 1 by default, yet Tails sets it for 0! So if something âoeleaksâ, you will never know it? Each session, delete this line or comment it out so the default is 1 like it should be for a Tor session.

What else can we find in this anonymously developed distribution? Iâ(TM)m glad Iâ(TM)m not driving a car with software made by this group of developers."

aka: Tails 0.16 lower shields

src: anonymous

reply: no, throwaway acct

It's safe to say... (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42654193)

That a large shout goes out to China saying "We dont Trust you" from the rest of the world.

Yet the rest of the world still insists on using the large, cheap, suicidal and robotic workforce of China to produce it's consumer goods!

Just wait until the Water Cooler starts listening in on your breaktime chats about the latest developments in secret tech.... ;)

Re:It's safe to say... (1)

vux984 (928602) | about 2 years ago | (#42654233)

Well sure, but its pretty easy to get your routers and network gear to phone home. Its going to be harder get someone to plug a network cable into the water cooler, or enter the wifi password. Well.. until watercoolers have apps of course.

Re:It's safe to say... (0)

c0lo (1497653) | about 2 years ago | (#42654321)

Well sure, but its pretty easy to get your routers and network gear to phone home. Its going to be harder get someone to plug a network cable into the water cooler, or enter the wifi password. Well.. until watercoolers have apps of course.

You still using a water cooler? I hear that there's an app for that: it extends the coolness of an iPhone to the water.
They even plan to make iPhone bigger (or was it to make iPad smaller?), so that the app could be used more efficiently against AGW.

(ducks)

Re:It's safe to say... (1)

RocketRabbit (830691) | about 2 years ago | (#42654473)

Google beat them to it with GoogleTap, but the water is lukewarm and it only works about half the time. Even when it works, the water comes out slowly and jerkily.

Re:It's safe to say... (2, Informative)

AK Marc (707885) | about 2 years ago | (#42654319)

Yet the rest of the world still insists on using the large, cheap, suicidal and robotic workforce of China to produce it's consumer goods!

Suicide rate is higher in the US than in a Foxconn factory.

Re:It's safe to say... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42654369)

And the murder rate, And the teen pregnancy rate....

Re:It's safe to say... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42654559)

Everything is higher when you compare a whole nation to 1 FACTORY. So, thanks Captain Obvious.
I hear the amount of shirts at 1 Wal-Mart is higher than how many shirts are in my closet too.

Re:It's safe to say... (3, Informative)

AK Marc (707885) | about 2 years ago | (#42654655)

I hear the amount of shirts at 1 Wal-Mart is higher than how many shirts are in my closet too.

"rate" means # per person. Try to think before you post next time.

Re:It's safe to say... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42656081)

Try to think about proper human interaction next time before posting a reply that makes you sound like a cunt

Re:It's safe to say... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42654659)

I think he means rate per capita.
Also foxcom factories are like towns, people live there. When someone jumps of their apartment block this suicide is added to the suicide rate of the foxcom factory.

And yes the suicide rate in a foxcom town is lower than in the rest of china and most towns in the U.S..

Re:It's safe to say... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42654565)

Which shout is that? The world, as in THE PEOPLE, are still buying phones, routers, modems, etc. from ZTE and Huawei. The world trusts China just fine, justified or not. Governments on the other hand are just protecting their masters, the local corporations. Nothing new to see here really.

Re:It's safe to say... (1)

DrEldarion (114072) | about 2 years ago | (#42654639)

The people where? I have literally never seen a Huawei or ZTE device in real life.

Re:It's safe to say... (2)

3.5 stripes (578410) | about 2 years ago | (#42655125)

Ever seen one of those little 3G dongles? Chances are one of those was a Huawei..

Re:It's safe to say... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42655247)

try leaving ur moms basement, 'doctor'

Components & software? (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42654227)

Did the govt also consider components(chips, circuitry, software) in locally sourced hardware also are not made outside India or are open-source. India does not have expertise in chip manufacturing except potato chips.

Re:Components & software? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42654567)

LOL, and they wonder why their jobs are moving to India! Ignorance is something you need to cure yourself of, or soon you will be completely redundant.

Above and beyond the two companies, (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42654241)

the department went all-in and has barred international companies including Ericsson, Nokia Siemens Networks, and Alcatel Lucent.

idk.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42654267)

Donde cenizas quedan fuego hubo

if you can do the work at home, do it (1, Interesting)

TheGratefulNet (143330) | about 2 years ago | (#42654387)

I support that.

I think the US should try to get its key tech from local companies, too. and their suppliers and their suppliers.

we are *too* globalized. somehow, we went too far in that direction and people are just mindlessly forging forever forward and not stopping to think.

countries are not permanent friends. its unwise to be too global.

Re:if you can do the work at home, do it (5, Insightful)

Zontar The Mindless (9002) | about 2 years ago | (#42654415)

I rather like the idea of interdependence growing to the point where countries simply can't afford to have wars with one another, myself.

Re:if you can do the work at home, do it (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42654597)

I like the idea, but what happens when some countries that are off the 'grid', or have little to no natural resources? How do we stop scenarios where the populace often blames the western/global world for their local exploitation?

I don't know the answers just that these are the questions that come to mind.

Re:if you can do the work at home, do it (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42654667)

Most insightful comment on slashdot. This also explains why USA tightened its borders so much after 9/11 and continues to create a gap between it and the rest of the world: it's much easier for them to make war.

Re:if you can do the work at home, do it (4, Insightful)

iserlohn (49556) | about 2 years ago | (#42654893)

This was exactly the same argument made on the eve of WWI, that the world economy was too interdependent for war to be waged between the major powers. What happened afterwards is history.

My own take is that the nuclear deterrent is much more potent than any economic deterrent.

Re:if you can do the work at home, do it (1)

TheGratefulNet (143330) | about 2 years ago | (#42654915)

I like the idea, too.

but I don't think its realistic to ever have it happen.

even small bunches of people eventually fight with each other. you expect the world to stay peaceful or even get peaceful and hold it for any length of time?

you are not describing life on earth. some other species and planet, maybe, but not earth.

Re:if you can do the work at home, do it (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42654425)

> countries are not permanent friends. its unwise to be too global.

Some believe that one of the intentions of global trade and international relations as they are is to ensure that countries ARE permanent friends... because it would be too costly economically to go to war. Not just the cost of bomb, but the inability to make bombs without your trade partners.

Duh (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42654401)

"In an internal memo, the research body advised the department that both these Chinese companies are a security threat to the telecom world"

You mean becoming completely dependent on another country, a specific company, etc. for resources, especially defense critical resources, can be a 'security threat'? Really?

No shit. I know I left that clue bat laying around here somewhe....

When government hands out money (0)

MichaelSmith (789609) | about 2 years ago | (#42654419)

They want it to be spent locally, where the voters live.

Easy (1)

mnajem (642318) | about 2 years ago | (#42654461)

Set up an Indian company, reassemble China made product, and claim made in Indian and sell it to the government Dead simple.

Re:Easy (1)

jiggs (472192) | about 2 years ago | (#42654835)

exactly what will happen. infact even the software will be packed as is without even testing. this is the case with all the indian handset manufactures who sell samsung salaxy s2 or higher spec android phones and tabs at 1/5 of the cost.

Why stop at this? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42654465)

The whole fucking outsourcing is National Security threat. American's should stop that.
And Americans? They infected Indian land with Parthenium hysterophorus. They can not be trusted.
And Chinese? No one trusts them anyway.

I think its good for man kind to go back to strict national boundaries. No outside import/export. Less interaction, less friction.

Re:Why stop at this? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42654585)

K.
Guess we should start by turning this Internet thing off. Stupid foreigners ruined it anyways.

So hardware OK, what about software? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42654481)

Do these guys still use windoze?

Irrelevant (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42654515)

The Chinese won't care. They don't need infrastructure access when the individual users are using ZTE/Huawei equipments (phones, ADSL modems, etc.) themselves.

So which are the Indian Networking companies? (2)

unixisc (2429386) | about 2 years ago | (#42654587)

So who are the Indian equivalents of Cisco, Avaya, Juniper, Brocade, et al? Yeah, they do have domestic Telecom companies like Airtel, Reliance Communications, but others? Only one I can think of is iBaton (Apple hasn't sued them for using I before the product name) which makes networking equipment like switches & routers. Otherwise, everything there is the usual DLink, Linksys, Cisco and so on.

It makes more sense if the Indians were to just ban Chinese companies, like Huawei and ZTE from the action

Re:So which are the Indian Networking companies? (2)

jiggs (472192) | about 2 years ago | (#42654871)

companies like airtel will use its hardware subsidaries like beetel(sp not just the unknown iBaton) or other indian manufacturere(rather import and relabelers) will import the same huwaei or ZTE spec devices manufactured in taiwan or indirectly in china and sell it. so govt here just helps the indian middle men if not manufacturing.
BTW the software for cisco to juniper et all are developed here in india and the hw made in china. so big deal its quite the same for american companies as well

So... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42654621)

The NOFN project is to be NOFORN? Hahahahahah... sorry, couldn't help myself.

It is only fair (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42654673)

The US sold photocopiers to the Russian government and were recording every document during the cold war. Why wouldn't China do the same with cellphones and networks? I am actualy more concerend about Google then any particular country. They have little trackers everywhere and collect "anonymous" data from cellphones for traffic maps. I bet they could pin point when you are at your computer based on your browsing profile. Imagine sending a friendly bomb locked on to an internet or cell connection.

Google bad!

Oh and a few years ago they blocked all Muslim you tube videos in Canada. :) Thank god for the onion and live leak. Without them I would never get to the real source of the story.

The consequense of corporate soverignty. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42654723)

When manufacturing equipment in China, India, Eastern Europe and Russia, it's modus operandi to place backdoors in hardware and software to ensure payment is received. If you think your nascent wall street investor or American Corporate Executive has anything on what these guys try to pull off on a daily basis, think again. Government corruption overseas is easily a hundred times worse than it is here.

It's almost of absolute certainty the backdoors placed in Huewei's and ZTE's kit was placed there by contract submanufacturers. It takes a government like China to view that as a value added feature and push for deployment in overseas systems. In all likelihood nobody knew about it except for the Chinese Government who's cybercorps actively search out and catalog such exploits.

The difference with American companies is they know they will be held responsible for any intentionally installed back-doors in a court of law should shazbot really hit the fan. The Sony Rootkit Fiasco resulted in a class action lawsuit which while itself is a joke, did get them on the short list of hactivist groups and the Sony Playstation Network being down for near 2 months really trashed the console. Although one can say Sony had it coming; the original playstation was designed as an add-on to the original SNES and Sony ganked it and all the rights and entered the market with it nearly killing Nintendo at the time. Due to that and other reasons, The company is now circling the bowl.

AT&T. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42655021)

"The difference with American companies is they know they will be held responsible for any intentionally installed back-doors in a court of law should shazbot really hit the fan"

AT&T.

Nuff said.

(Sony made billions on their rootkit and paid millions in fines. Hell, Jammie Thomas was put up for a fine bigger than they were for only 22 tracks! So your example is complete bollocks too.)

Just hire their engineers! (3, Insightful)

Dorianny (1847922) | about 2 years ago | (#42654899)

Even without backdoors or intentional bugs that can be exploited to gain access, Huawei engineers hired/coerced by the government would be very useful in finding exploits in Huawei products.

India joins the US (2, Interesting)

tyrione (134248) | about 2 years ago | (#42654963)

It isn't a coincidence that India agrees with the US on building out by using local talent. Europe will follow suit in each nation state, and South America will do the same. China's stranglehold on cheap materials/labor is no longer the driving factor in manufacturing. The top manufacturers in China are working on investing in foreign lands to avoid losing their present contracts. Over time, they'll lose them. It's an economic/intelligence/political trifecta approach to breaking China's dominance on flooding world markets and thus driving down competiting economies. In short, US, Euro and other nation states corporations realize that game is up. They know the import/export tariff imbalance days are over.

Re:India joins the US (1)

Kplx138 (2523712) | about 2 years ago | (#42655141)

I feel like china was never meant to be successful, forever as cheap labor for western corporations, oh yeah some of the people will be successful and they'll buy western goods but they're not supposed to be able to compete with us, that's not what free trade is about. I guess we'll have to invade them and bomb them back to the Stone Age so they'll be the impoverished third world labor they were always meant to be.

Re:India joins the US (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42655375)

Yes.

Because we've been influencing their policies for the last 4 thousand years...

Hint: stop feeling and start thinking.

Spy vs Spy (3, Informative)

Dorianny (1847922) | about 2 years ago | (#42654969)

We hear national security and we all start thinking espionage and conspiracy theories. Truth is that economic losses can be just as devastating. All that expensive equipment needs regular servicing to function properly. All China would have to do is bar Huawei from offering its services in India and all that vital equipment is rather quickly going to turn into very expensive junk, leading to downtime and huge losses for whatever services rely on them. In its current spat with Japan, China proved more than willing to use economic warfare in disputes.

Re:Spy vs Spy (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42655685)

In its current spat with Japan, China proved more than willing to use economic warfare in disputes.

Oh? Interesting. Any articles about that?

Re:Spy vs Spy (1)

aNonnyMouseCowered (2693969) | about a year ago | (#42656055)

Google: China "rare earths" Japan? You might even restrict the search to "site:slashdot.org", and you'll still get a number of relevant hits.

Pot meet kettle (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42655029)

IDK what the big deal is. USA does the same thing. Case in point: A few years ago someone involved in our country's military aviation told that they could not even use electric wiring from the USA to build their aircraft, due to inclusion of some "bugs" that would enable tracking of aircraft even when radar is down or stealth tech is employed (I'm necessarily vague here). Don't know how much more lowtech one want's to go than copper wire.

Nationalism is Great! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42655449)

That is, until Americans wants something Made in the USA again. That kind of Nationalism is RACIST!

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?