The CIA Accuses Huawei Of Being Secretly Funded By China's State Intelligence (reuters.com) 147
"U.S. intelligence has accused Huawei Technologies of being funded by Chinese state security, The Times said on Saturday."
Long-time Slashdot reader hackingbear shares a story from Reuters: The CIA accused Huawei of receiving funding from China's National Security Commission, the People's Liberation Army and a third branch of the Chinese state intelligence network, the British newspaper reported, citing a source. Earlier this year, U.S. intelligence shared its claims with other members of the Five Eyes intelligence-sharing group, which includes Britain, Australia, Canada and New Zealand, according to the report...
The accusation comes at a time of trade tensions between Washington and Beijing and amid concerns in the United States that Huawei's equipment could be used for espionage. The company has said the concerns are unfounded... top educational institutions in the West have recently severed ties with Huawei to avoid losing federal funding.
Long-time Slashdot reader hackingbear shares a story from Reuters: The CIA accused Huawei of receiving funding from China's National Security Commission, the People's Liberation Army and a third branch of the Chinese state intelligence network, the British newspaper reported, citing a source. Earlier this year, U.S. intelligence shared its claims with other members of the Five Eyes intelligence-sharing group, which includes Britain, Australia, Canada and New Zealand, according to the report...
The accusation comes at a time of trade tensions between Washington and Beijing and amid concerns in the United States that Huawei's equipment could be used for espionage. The company has said the concerns are unfounded... top educational institutions in the West have recently severed ties with Huawei to avoid losing federal funding.
Re: In other news (Score:2)
I think the CIA is operating with the completely wrong mentality
Don't be a crackhead: we have no idea how successful the CIA has or hasn't been at carrying out their objectives because we have no fucking idea what their objectives really are.
Re: (Score:2)
How convenient
The reason a country develops effective secret agencies is so they can accomplish things outside the voting influence of the constantly reelected. Being subject to less oversight is not always the boondoggle the financial markets make it out to be.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
we have no idea how successful the CIA has or hasn't been at carrying out their objectives
We know they were wrong about Iraqi WMDs being a "slam dunk".
We know they were wrong about the predictions of Iraqi units defecting during the 2003 invasion. Number of units that defected: 0.
We know that they were wrong about Iraqi casualties in the 1991 Gulf War. Their number: 80,000. Actual number: 20,000.
We know they were wrong about the collapse of the Soviet Union.
We know they were wrong about the predictions of our ability to interdict NVA supplies on the Ho Chi Minh Trail, only to learn after the
Re: (Score:1)
we have no idea how successful the CIA has or hasn't been at carrying out their objectives
We know they were wrong about Iraqi WMDs being a "slam dunk".
Quite the opposite. The actual analysts were correct, but overruled by the White House suits. Blame Cheney for Iraq (and Dubya for being a patsy) .
Re: (Score:2)
you for to mention they were wrong about the Russian interference in the 2016 election
Mueller report on the CIA? (Score:2)
I think the CIA is operating with the completely wrong mentality
Don't be a crackhead: we have no idea how successful the CIA has or hasn't been at carrying out their objectives because we have no fucking idea what their objectives really are.
Actually I would argue that one of the (many) implications of the (still partly redacted) Mueller report is that the CIA is NOT meeting their objectives very well. Even failed abysmally in 2016. However as regards the problems described in the Mueller report, the blame would be shared with the NSA, FBI, and probably some others.
Can't decide if this aspect is (0) or (3) in relation to my earlier long comment... The (0) would be as a precursor, whereas (3) would be as a new aspect of the problem.
I feel like I
Re: In other news (Score:1)
The big joke on everyone rushing to get services online in China was great. You either trade your IP away to get a few years in and then suddenly they have a competing business with all of your work. If you didnâ(TM)t fall for that ploy then they make up some laws that say you cannot own anything there. So you sell it all off for someone else to own while you operate it. Let me hazard a guess their telecom gear is great and the prices are better. At least some people are standing up to their shenanigan
Re:In other news (Score:4, Insightful)
*foreign country starts bombing US capitol*
AC: "Pot has made allegations as to the dark color of kettle. I am very smart."
The CIA isn't criticizing the Chinese or saying they're doing anything wrong, it's saying that there's a good reason for Americans to not use Huawei equipment for sensitive communications.
Re: (Score:2)
Not quite. While they specifically in this story right now today are only stating accusations, the CIA are very much pot meets kettle in everything else they've said on the topic:
Telling people to not use Chinese phones because they'll be tracked: https://www.theverge.com/2018/... [theverge.com]
Telling other countries to not use Chinese phones because they'll be tracked: https://www.theverge.com/2018/... [theverge.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
If being funded by the state is a reason not to support a company there there's a whole lot of American companies that I won't support. Or Japanese, or British, or German, or ...
There has been no actual proof of wrong doing by Huawei. Only vague accusations by the US. We heard plenty of those before the Second Gulf War and we know how those turned. Huawei has plenty of equipment already installed worldwide and if there were problems of spying it would be easy to detect yet there's been no proof of given. Hu
Is there in truth no funnies? (Score:2)
If it had a bit more substance, then that AC comment should have been moderated into visibility. (I was just checking for first-post effects on moderation, having already been dismayed after checking the favorably moderated comments.)
The insights I was actually searching for would have involved two aspects:
(1) The comparative economic models, where the American model is actually the socialist one. The American idea is that the CIA and other government security organs are smart enough to fund the important s
Heard that before (Score:5, Insightful)
You sound a lot like those guys who were mocking the (now obviously) prescient Mitt Romney and John McCain about dangers from Russia...
China is Russia 2.0, upgraded and maybe not actually going to collapse (maybe).
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Heard that before (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
China isn't like Russia at all. It's not really communist for a start, e.g. production is almost all private with government oversight and influence.
The biggest difference is that China doesn't have massive animosity towards the US and the west in general. Of course it looks out for its own interests but there is no huge ideological opposition or desire to spread Chinese politics to Europe and North America.
Re:RED DANGER! (Score:4, Insightful)
I am sure that you seem very clever to your buddies, but in fact, they *are* communists, they *do* routinely spy on us as a state activity, and they are trying to undermine the USA (and most of the rest of the world). Socialism/facism/communism has killed more people that all other sources combined since almost the day it was conceived, and continues to wreak havoc and crush personal freedom to this day. Why *shouldn't* we fight it and protect ourselves against it?
Re: (Score:1, Insightful)
Huh, given how poor the USA ranks for "freedom" and Democracy, freedom of speech, freedom of the press, etc etc etc etc, I would suggest the USA cleans up its own shit, ie stop interfering in other countries, stop funding terrorists, stop selling weapons to dictatorships, stop spying on Allies.
And as for killing, Americans have murdered more americans than have been killed in every single war the US has been involved in, including the civil war.
Americans are inherently violent. EVERY person who owns a gun f
Re: RED DANGER! (Score:2)
Re:RED DANGER! (Score:5, Insightful)
Socialism/facism/communism has killed more people that all other sources combined since almost the day it was conceived, and continues to wreak havoc and crush personal freedom to this day.
I don't know. It seems only fair to give religion its due as a rather prolific source of human population control, and for aeons now.
What crimes? Not being capitalism is not a crime (Score:1)
So what crimes? The assertion that communism killed 80 million has already been turned into a lie that it was 100 million, where the original authors, bar one who had and still has a bee in his bonnet about communism insist that the number is far lower but factors NOT communist was included to pad the numbers out and it was more likely 20-50 million, whereas capitalism is killing 10-20 million A YEAR.
WW2 can, by your assertion, be laid to blame entirely at christianity. near 60 million people killed by chri
Re: (Score:2)
they *do* routinely spy on us as a state activity
Works with "they" being the US, and "us" being, well, every country on the planet, including allies.
Re: (Score:2)
Gee, sounds just like a lot of the things we do.
Re: China? Communists? Bwahahaha! (Score:3)
PROTIP: The whole point of communism is a flat hierarchy of small sharing communities, without a central government or planning.
Sounds great on paper; reality suggests otherwise.
Re: (Score:2)
Where is the trial? I heard about indictments but, I also heard that they indicted a ham sammich...
Re: (Score:1)
When the CIA locks you up for your ethnicity, then you can make loose equivocations.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not sure what's funnier, someone complaining about racism using a derogatory racial term to describe the people they're trying to speak on behalf of or the fact that they used the wrong fucking term.
BS (Score:4, Insightful)
China - Communist party - State - Intelligence - (Company)
Where's the secret? A secret that the Chinese state sponsor it's business? That the same party is running the state and the intelligence gathering?
Of course the communist party may have an interest in and influence Huawei but would that be a secret?
In-Q-Tel? (Score:5, Insightful)
The CIA has their own VC company. WTF?
I've lost track of the number of Tel-Aviv cyber security startups funded by Mossad and/or the CIA. Having NSA, CIA, or Mossad members on the Board of Directors, or as Founders is a marketing point.
The UK does the same thing. Saying Huawei gets China spy money is like saying "water is wet". No fucking kidding.
Re: In-Q-Tel? (Score:2)
The CIA has their own VC company. WTF?
In other news, all kinds of things are news to low-information types.
Exactly. Verizon and AT&T get support from NS (Score:1)
CIA and NSA buy Cisco, Juniper and other hardware, not just COTS stuff either. ... sorry ... can't say.
Honeywell makes
Do you really think that facebook and google aren't helping govts track people around the world without their consent?
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/... [eff.org]
Pay attention sheeple.
We expect this from China. They are only doing things that the rest of the world has been doing much longer. And for people inside the EU - your spy agencies are just a committed. They track people outside their country
Re: (Score:2)
They are only doing things that the rest of the world has been doing much longer.
I'm not sure that's the case. The Chinese were highly sophisticated at espionage while most people thought subtlety was burning a village down at night.
The CIA Accuses China's State Intelligence Of Bein (Score:1)
The only US Telcom CEO to resist NSA was JAILED ! (Score:4, Informative)
“Just one major telecommunications company refused to participate in a legally dubious NSA surveillance program in 2001. A few years later, its CEO was indicted by federal prosecutors. He was convicted, served four and a half years of his sentence and was released this month.”
https://www.washingtonpost.com... [washingtonpost.com]
"None of the phone companies that handed over communications metadata in bulk to the National Security Agency ever challenged the agency on its data requests"
https://www.washingtonpost.com... [washingtonpost.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Woh, I can just imagine the outrage in American right now. The protesters are about to hit the streets. There will be marches in Washington any minute. Wait a sec, Keeping up the the Kardashians is coming on. What was I talking about??? Your country is bust.
Wait a second, now; we're not doing such a stellar job distracting the Aaa-merican public with bread and circashians as your post implies. The idiots are still voting in impressive numbers... one of endearing flaws of democracy.
Re: The only US Telcom CEO to resist NSA was JAILE (Score:3, Informative)
Several former Qwest executives, including Lee Wolfe, a former director of investor relations, testified about a surge of concern over how the company was going to meet its projections and over Qwestâ(TM)s lopsided reliance on one-time transactions.
Nonetheless, prosecutors said, Mr. Nacchio continually affirmed a bright financial forecast to analysts, even as the chorus of admonitions from other Qwest executives grew. Finally, in 2001, when he realized Qwest was facing a significant shortfall, prosecutors said, Mr. Nacchio began unloading his stock options, while still publicly proclaiming the companyâ(TM)s good fortunes. Mr. Nacchio even backdated the sale of the stock to make it appear unrelated to Qwestâ(TM)s downturn, prosecutors contended.
Convicted by a jury of something like, fourteen counts... guilty.
Re: (Score:1)
The point is, how often do prosecutors go after insider trading or the myriad of other crimes CEOs regularly commit? One could argue that laws are created so everyone is a criminal and the federal government than go after people selectively as they chose. In this case, I'd say it's more the opposite: a lot of CEOs at major companies regularly commit obvious crimes, but prosecutors look the other way either because the companies go along wit
The CIA should be disbanded. (Score:2)
Last time that was spoken about was by JFK. Shortly before he died.
Sorry, this is not hackingbear's story (Score:2)
That one is [slashdot.org]:
Title: US Spy Agency Reportedly Claims Huawei Received Funding from Chinese Spy Agency
After failing to convince others that Huawei equipments have backdoors and pose security risks, the CIA accused Huawei of receiving funding from China’s spy agency and military including National Security Commission, the People’s Liberation Army and a third branch of the Chinese state intelligence network, The Times said on Saturday. Earlier this year, U.S. intelligence, which had failed proving its case in the Iraq Weapon of Mass Destruction claims, shared its claims with other members of the Five Eyes intelligence-sharing group, which includes Britain, Australia, Canada and New Zealand. Huawei dismissed the allegations in a statement cited by the newspaper. “Huawei does not comment on unsubstantiated allegations backed up by zero evidence from anonymous sources,” a Huawei representative told The Times. A Motorola 2003 due diligence investigation, when it tried to buy Huawei, found no closing tie between Huawei and the Chinese military.
/., if you do not like to show contents inconvenient to the American public, you should write up your own under your name and not hijack the original submitter's name and completely rewrite their story.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, all TFA says is: "Long-time Slashdot reader hackingbear shares a story from Reuters :"
Your submission did indeed include the link to the Reuters story. So what they said was 100% correct.
The fact that they didn't also include your inflammatory rhetoric doesn't change that.
Hypocrisy (Score:2)
It's a good thing US tech companies like Qualcomm have never had any supply contracts with the US military or the US government.
Slanderer (Score:1)