<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/">
<channel>
<title>Techdirt. Stories about &quot;huawei&quot;</title>
<description>Easily digestible tech news...</description>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/</link>
<language>en-us</language>

<item>
<pubDate>Wed, 17 Oct 2012 16:13:39 PDT</pubDate>
<title>Leaked White House Report Finds No Evidence Of Huawei Spying</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20121017/14031720736/leaked-white-house-report-finds-no-evidence-huawei-spying.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20121017/14031720736/leaked-white-house-report-finds-no-evidence-huawei-spying.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ Remember that Congressional report from last week that warned everyone to <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20121008/17080120649/congress-fear-chinese-networking-companies-ignore-that-china-makes-all-our-networking-equipment.shtml">fear Huawei</a>, the Chinese telco equipment maker?  Much of the fearmongering was around Huawei's close ties to the Chinese government (and military specifically) with no actual allegations, but plenty of speculation that there could be espionage issues.  Of course, now, details of a White House report have leaked, claiming that they <a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/10/17/us-huawei-spying-idUSBRE89G1Q920121017?feedType=RSS&#038;feedName=technologyNews&#038;utm_source=dlvr.it&#038;utm_medium=twitter&#038;dlvrit=56505" target="_blank">found no evidence of Huawei spying</a>.  They <i>do</i> point out that there are problems with Huawei equipment that could lead to exploitable security flaws -- which is certainly an issue.  Of course, that seems like an issue that security experts to deal with, rather than politicians...<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20121017/14031720736/leaked-white-house-report-finds-no-evidence-huawei-spying.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20121017/14031720736/leaked-white-house-report-finds-no-evidence-huawei-spying.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20121017/14031720736/leaked-white-house-report-finds-no-evidence-huawei-spying.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>politics-at-work</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20121017/14031720736</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Tue, 9 Oct 2012 05:18:53 PDT</pubDate>
<title>Congress: Fear Chinese Networking Companies! But Ignore That China Makes All Our Networking Equipment!</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20121008/17080120649/congress-fear-chinese-networking-companies-ignore-that-china-makes-all-our-networking-equipment.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20121008/17080120649/congress-fear-chinese-networking-companies-ignore-that-china-makes-all-our-networking-equipment.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ For years, there have been reports or whispers about how Chinese networking giant, Huawei, might not be trustworthy.  Specifically, people talked about how China might hide trojan horses in the equipment for economic espionage or even cyberattack reasons.  These rumors got so loud that Huawei last year flat out told the US government <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110224/14244113248/huawei-to-us-government-please-investigate-us.shtml">to investigate it</a> and come to its own conclusion.  Well, the House Intelligence Committee has done exactly that... and <a href="http://intelligence.house.gov/sites/intelligence.house.gov/files/documents/Huawei-ZTE%20Investigative%20Report%20%28FINAL%29.pdf" target="_blank">Huawei is not pleased</a> (pdf).  Despite the investigation coming at its own request, with its promises to be as open as it could be, the report slams Huawei and another company ZTE, and basically says "don't trust these companies."
<br /><br />
Huawei has <a href="http://thehill.com/blogs/hillicon-valley/technology/260829-hauwei-blasts-report-accuses-house-panel-of-libel" target="_blank">hit back hard</a>, claiming that the report is "libel" and "utterly lacking in substance."  They also note that it appears to just be political, calling it "an exercise in China-bashing and misguided protectionism."  Indeed, some commentators are noting that this has all the indications of <a href="http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-10-08/congressional-report-on-huawei-smacks-of-protectionism.html" target="_blank">blatant protectionism</a>, rather than a legitimate concern, with some pointing out that the Intelligence Committee seems to consistently ask Huawei to <a href="http://blogs.wsj.com/corporate-intelligence/2012/10/08/on-questions-of-national-security-is-huawei-innocent-until-proven-guilty/" target="_blank">prove a negative and then bashes the company for failing</a>.
<blockquote><i>
But again and again, throughout the report, the pattern emerges: an allegation is made, Huawei denies it, without providing evidence deemed detailed enough to substantiate the denial, and the Committee is unimpressed.
</i></blockquote>
As that writeup notes, Huawei has not been found guilty, but is repeatedly asked to prove its innocence, and being unable to prove conclusively that it hasn't done anything, the Intelligence Committee insists that the threat is just too great.
<br /><br />
It is, of course, quite possible that something nefarious is going on with Huawei and ZTE.  But there doesn't appear to be any detals in the report that actually proves anything.  Instead, it's all just baseless allegations, followed by Huawei (and ZTE) not providing enough details to convince investigators that they're innocent.  Given Congress' history of grandstanding, this certainly raises some questions.
<br <Br/>
But... an even bigger issue is that the whole focus on Huawei may be kind of silly.  Yes, it's a Chinese company, but as others have noted, <a href="http://allthingsd.com/20121008/why-america-is-really-worried-about-huawei/?refcat=news" target="_blank">basically all of our electronics products are made in China</a>, and if that country really wanted to do something questionable, why not sneak in trojan horses there as well?
<blockquote><i>
One fundamental failure of all this official hand-wringing is that it neglects the fact that many if not most of the components, with the exception of certain higher-value chips like those from Intel, are manufactured in China. Cisco Systems and Juniper Networks in the U.S., Alcatel-Lucent in France and Ericsson in Sweden, all use Chinese-made parts and carry out at least some portion of the final assembly of their equipment in China.
</i></blockquote>
Furthermore, that same report notes that, if this is just kicking off a trade war between the US and China over telco products, the US companies may get hurt a lot more than the Chinese:
<blockquote><i>
Might China respond with its own restrictions against U.S. telecom firms like Cisco and Juniper? Is this the first shot of a telecom trade war? We&#8217;ll see.
<br /><br />
If that happens, expect Cisco to be hurt more than Huawei. U.S. sales account for only 4 percent of its overall revenue, whereas Cisco&#8217;s operations in Asia, the Pacific Rim and China account for more than 16 percent, and China was its second fastest-growing market in that region after Japan.
</i></blockquote>
Yes, it's entirely possible that Huawei and ZTE are doing something bad -- but you'd think any report claiming that would have a lot more evidence than what's in this report.  Of course, considering it's by the same FUD-spewing folks responsible for CISPA, perhaps we should get used to the fact that FUD without evidence is their standard operating procedure.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20121008/17080120649/congress-fear-chinese-networking-companies-ignore-that-china-makes-all-our-networking-equipment.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20121008/17080120649/congress-fear-chinese-networking-companies-ignore-that-china-makes-all-our-networking-equipment.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20121008/17080120649/congress-fear-chinese-networking-companies-ignore-that-china-makes-all-our-networking-equipment.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>where's-the-smoking-gun?</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20121008/17080120649</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Tue, 31 Mar 2009 02:59:00 PDT</pubDate>
<title>Pre-Brief Of The Upcoming CTIA Conference</title>
<dc:creator>Derek Kerton</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090330/2030174313.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090330/2030174313.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ <p class="MsoNormal">With the US mobile phone industry's leading conference kicking off in Las Vegas, I thought it might be fun to write a small &quot;pre-brief&quot; of the trends to expect from the show. This <a target=_top href="http://www.ctiawireless.com/">CTIA Show</a> comes close on the heels of the huge, Europe-based <a target=_top href="http://www.mobileworldcongress.com/">Mobile World Congress</a>, and I would have dropped a blog post from there...if my Netbook hadn't been stolen! Here's what to expect from the CTIA show:</p>  <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-weight: bold" class="Apple-style-span">App Stores</span>: What was innovative about Apple's App Store? It is a single point of sales, it's trusted, compatible, it offers tested apps, and it gives a large (70%) revenue share to the application developer. Nothing new there, but damn, what a success. Once again, Apple succeeded by (not doing anything revolutionary, but) using a simple recipe that makes sense and motivates all stakeholders. Sadly, a similar <a target=_top href="http://techdirt.com/blog/wireless/articles/20020816/092442.shtml">'imode'</a> app store has been done by DoCoMo in Japan since 2000, but North American carrier imitations usually neglect being remotely 'open' and don't offer a large revenue share to developers. Turns out, this is fairly important if you want to stimulate a large, diverse offering of useful, high-quality applications. Anyway, all those companies that didn't copy imode are now copying Apple, so expect to see more news around Microsoft's store, RIM Blackberry's store, the Android store, and more. The trend is good, since it will get more money in developers' hands, and should help some phone owners find applications that make their devices more valuable.</p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-weight: bold" class="Apple-style-span">Mobile Broadband/Embedded Broadband</span>: There will be lots of talk and probably a bunch of announcements about mobile broadband access at the show. I am referring specifically to the use of cellular broadband modems in devices that are not phones, such as <a target=_top href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090330/1145404308.shtml">Netbooks, Laptops</a>, cameras, readers, media players, etc. I am <a target=_top href="http://www.ctiawireless.com/attendees/educational_sessions.cfm?calID=820">moderating a panel</a> on this subject at the CTIA show, and I'm thrilled to be doing it, because it is such a major trend. The two driving forces to this trend are the 3G networks that are already in place, and carrier willingness to sell new kinds of service plans. Carriers have been somewhat stuck in a rut of thinking of mobile access as &quot;<a target=_top href="http://www.techdirt.com/blog/wireless/articles/20040423/182415.shtml">one phone, one contract, $60/mo.</a>&quot; But recently, their thinking has been changing, and the <a target=_top href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20071120/181127.shtml">notion of wholesale businesses of selling connections to devices like Amazon's Kindle</a> is gaining steam. Expect to see more news of daily connection plans for laptops (like Wi-Fi Hotspots), and wireless data bundled in the price of other consumer electronics.&nbsp;</p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-weight: bold" class="Apple-style-span">Femtocells</span>: A femtocell is a small box that looks like a Wi-Fi router, and similarly plugs in at your home or small office. But instead or routing laptops to the Internet, a femtocell routes telephone calls from your mobile phone to your carrier. Put one of these in a home or office with poor cell reception, and instantly get four bars. That's good for you and the carrier, who gets to keep you as a customer. But what also benefits the carrier is that your phone's traffic is now carried over your broadband connection, saving their towers from having to allocate capacity to you. Sprint has it, T-Mobile uses a special variant, Verizon has recently launched it, and AT&#038;T is piloting these devices. I expect femtocells to successfully creep into the marketplace, and we'll hear a fair bit about femtocells at the show, but also other new ways of delivering cellular service like Distributed Antenna Systems, Repeaters, and such.</p>  <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-weight: bold" class="Apple-style-span">Backhaul</span>: <a target=_top href="http://imcellular.org/2009/02/26/problem-data-traffic-growing-faster-than-revenues/">Wireless data use is taking off</a>. Driven by flat rates, popular and easy to use phones like iPhone, and supplemented by growing use of cellular modems to laptops and Netbooks, people are finally exchanging significant amounts of data traffic from cell towers. But these towers were initially put in place for highly compressed, narrowband voice traffic. As such, each tower was often connected by a meager T1 line. The connection that the towers have to the core network is called "backhaul," and yesterday's backhaul is woefully inadequate for tomorrow's data traffic loads. The short-term solution was to just add more T1s...but the costs of this rapidly become prohibitive. So the long-term solutions that will be discussed at length in Las Vegas are point-to-point microwave wireless relays, metro Ethernet, and fiber optic connections.</p>  <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-weight: bold" class="Apple-style-span">The Palm Pre</span>: I'm not sure when the bandwagon is going to hit the trail for <a target=_top href="http://www.fiercemobilecontent.com/special-reports/palm-webos-mobile-ui-advances-2009">this device</a>, but I'm saddling up right now. <a target=_top href="http://www.kerton.com/papers/20060117.htm">I've been negative on Palm</a> for a while, but I saw the Pre at CES in January and was pleasantly surprised, but unfortunately didn't allocate much time to Palm. Subsequently, I spent some time with the Pre at MWC in February, and was very impressed. Of all the phones I have seen since the iPhone came out, this is the first one that I think may be better -- and <a target=_top href="http://www.kerton.com/papers/kertoncall_iphone.htm">I am very fond of the iPhone</a>. I use a very powerful HTC Windows phone, and when I see the Pre in action, I find myself repeatedly saying &quot;I wish my phone could do that.&quot; 'Synergy,' the Pre's ability to pull together your contacts, emails, calendars into one consolidated view, is a favorite element. But what really struck me was the User Interface, which is very visual, very touch, and very intuitive. I felt the same way I felt when I first saw the iPhone in action. The Pre is not an evolution of previous Palms. It is a new starting point, and like the iPhone, it seems devoid of classic silo thinking and lousy UI baggage. I can't predict whether the developer community will rally around the Pre, or whether Sprint and Palm will be successful in selling big volumes, but I want to call this one early: the Pre is a great smartphone.</p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-weight: bold" class="Apple-style-span">More iPhone &quot;killers&quot;</span>: We've seen handset vendors offer so-called iPhone Killers at every turn since June 2007. I have found almost every such claim to be unfounded over the past 2 years. I have written that a touch screen and square icons do not an iPhone Killer make. But quarter-by-quarter, the competitors' claims get more and more credible. While HTC, Nokia, RIM, Samsung, and LG make incremental progress to matching the iconic device, I think Palm has the real bomb to drop, if they manage to get the Pre to market on time.</p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-weight: bold" class="Apple-style-span">Android</span>: The past year was almost devoid of Android handset announcements. <a target=_top href="http://www.eweek.com/c/a/Mobile-and-Wireless/MWC-Vodafone-to-Offer-Google-Android-on-HTC-Magic/">Barcelona was strangely silent on that front</a>. In fact, we haven't heard much about new Android handhelds since the T-Mo G1 was announced early in 2008! But there's enough rumors floating around to suspect a batch of Android announcements this week. Let's wait and see.&nbsp;</p>  <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-weight: bold" class="Apple-style-span">Google Voice</span>: Google <a target=_top href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090312/1711214100.shtml">recently announced their Google Voice</a> service, and it has created quite a stir in the industry. The fixed carriers have <a target=_top href="http://www.techdirt.com/blog/wireless/articles/20050824/113418.shtml">long felt threatened by Google</a>, although the search giant had yet to fire a shot across the mobile carriers' bow. So long as it stayed in search, email, web VoIP, advertising, and location services, Google was only a thorn in the cellcos' side. But with the addition of Google Voice (GV), Google is now going straight at the heart of the carrier's core service. GV is essentially a disintermediation play, where users will use just one phone number, provided by Google, and can intelligently route and manage their phone calls to desk, cellphone, voicemail, email, etc., by using a web dashboard interface. By using a Google phone number, users needn't even tell anyone their cellular or landline numbers -- the carriers become pipes for the Google Voice customer. Expect to see and hear some responses, which have already started from other newcomers like <a target=_top href="http://www.techdirt.com/blog/wireless/articles/20070522/113834.shtml">Skype</a>, or classic solution vendors like <a target=_top href="http://www.wirelessweek.com/article.aspx?id=167204">AlcaLu</a>.</p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-weight: bold" class="Apple-style-span">Meet Huawei</span>: If you are not familiar with this company yet, better learn how to pronounce the name. Huawei is the leading example of the next generation of telecom infrastructure providers out of China. They have been selling competitive equipment for years, but carriers in Western countries have been reluctant to adopt their products based on a perceived quality gap with leading vendors like Ericsson, Nortel, Motorola, and Alcatel-Lucent. But the winds are shifting. Tougher economic times, paired with some successful Huawei reference cases in Leap Wireless, Cox cable, and Canadian telcos, prove that Huawei can compete on quality and price. Huawei is growing its presence in the US, recently opening offices here in Silicon Valley. Could a major US carrier deal be in the making?</p>  <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-weight: bold" class="Apple-style-span"><br /></span></p><br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090330/2030174313.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090330/2030174313.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090330/2030174313.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>Too-Soon-For-A-De-Brief</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20090330/2030174313</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>