by Mike Masnick

Filed Under:
china, investigation, us


Huawei To US Government: Please Investigate Us

from the nothing-to-hide dept

Interesting strategy from China's telco networking giant Huawei in dealing with security fears from the US government: it's asking the US government to do a full investigation of the company to satisfy itself that there's nothing questionable going on. Obviously part of the idea is a PR move, to show that the company has nothing to hide, but it's pretty rare to see a company so openly ask a government to investigate it. I guess it's Huawei's attempt to call the US government's grandstanding bluff.

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

  1. icon
    TechnoMage (profile), 25 Feb 2011 @ 1:27am

    Re: Re: Re:

    I'll admit to not know a "ton" about EE, I know about CS (including computer architecture from CS perspective)

    but Let's examine the Pentium 1 CPU Some Facts
    - 273 pins
    - 3.1 million transistors

    Now, let's play a thought experiment...
    How many pins are active on the p1? lets say 145 pins(for the sake of nice numbers) that over half of the pins aren't used for logic , and that only 128 pins are used for any type of logic/flow control.

    Now.. It would take 2^(128) possible input combinations to test all possible inputs.

    Now.. Remember that ICs have memory in them... (let alone complex sequential logic sequential logic)

    Now.. 2^(128) different combinations to test... hmm sounds like cryptographically secure to me

    Now.. You have to try hundreds.. if not thousands.. of tests for each possible combination of each of these 2^(128) possible inputs...

    I'm not sure this is the way to try and test this... (Especially if they put DRM in the chip to stop you from figuring this out, which would mean you are trying to break copyright...{yeah yeah... gov't can do that, but you get my point})

    If you know how to do this, in some kinda of way that isn't exponential time... Then please let me know. Normal means to test for fault tolerances in IC isn't going to work b/c we aren't looking for "bad" data, where we know how the chip is designed, we are looking for backdoor access... which can be deeply buried in non-obvious logic areas.

    OHHH and do this for every chip on every device every time you buy a device.
    Perhaps I'm completely wrong... and the idea that "DRM"-like hardware being inserted into ICs but I don't think so.

    I have friends who live in China, I am not attacking China, hence the "evil" in my comment, sorry for omission of -sark-mark- *sigh...*

    And about the question of "Hell, do you think that we don't do that with companies in the United States to make sure that there are not any backdoors?" ... Um... Have we done this for MS Windows? Have we done this for... Sony Music CDs? Have we done this for...

    I somehow doubt that this is S.O.P. for electronics (NSA/DoD... MIGHT be the exception, but I doubt it)

    My original point was that we shouldn't trust production of system critical infrastructure to foreigners (no matter what country they come from). Due to it being too easy to inject some extra little "logic code" into ICs.(that doesn't even have to be on every device, one in a hundred is good enough for "bad" purposes)

Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
Use markdown for basic formatting. HTML is no longer supported.
  Save me a cookie
Follow Techdirt
Techdirt Gear
Show Now: Takedown
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Chat
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Recent Stories
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads


Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.