General > General Technical Chat
Huawei 5G now banned in Britain
Rick Law:
--- Quote from: blueskull on July 16, 2020, 02:12:12 am ---
--- Quote from: Rick Law on July 16, 2020, 01:25:10 am ---You can't have 4 countries sharing national intelligence securely and then have the 5th one relaying such information "in the clear", so to speak.
--- End quote ---
Presumably no one is going to transmit clear text intelligence over the Internet. It's gotta be encrypted, and since Ethernet, which is the basis of modern Internet, or at least at the last mile, is not secure by design, anyone with any access to the same network can tap into your communication, so regardless intelligence must be encrypted peer to peer, and that encryption can be using a custom algorithm, rather than standard AES, making it harder to hack than the infrastructure-level encryption. So really, what is the point hacking switches and routers?
Telephone is another thing, it doesn't support peer to peer encryption. But that's already easy to tap, unless you encapsulate it over VOIP with a good cypher, which everyone does nowadays.
--- End quote ---
My "in the clear" is not intended to be taken literally. Nothing is unheckable with today's technology. Just by intercepting it, part of the job is done.
Beside, just the meta data can do a lot of good. More on that in my following reply to MK14 following.
--- Quote from: MK14 on July 16, 2020, 01:38:07 am ---
--- Quote from: Rick Law on July 16, 2020, 01:25:10 am ---I think the most important aspect (in the Trump administration's minds) is probably I5. Trade may have some impact, but I5 is far more important.
As seen in some of Trump's press conferences, Trump said something about reluctance of sharing intelligence -- multiple times. In my opinion, that point is valid -- You can't have 4 countries sharing national intelligence securely and then have the 5th one relaying such information "in the clear", so to speak.
--- End quote ---
That makes sense.
It would be interesting, to know the full (secret) picture, with all the juicy details.
China seem to be especially angry about this, which makes me wonder why.
I.e. No smoke without fire, or No big noise, without something bigger to this story, as regards China.
China/Huawei just losing sales of some 5G equipment, shouldn't really bother China that much, I would have thought. Why all the fuss ?
--- End quote ---
Same reason why China wants their own GPS , I suppose. As it is today, USA has the key to the GPS. We can deny access to GPS, or "adjust the accuracy" of GPS. Battle of Jutland might have came out very different had they know the real-time location of their varies fleets.
But unlike GPS, 5G would be a technology that can have development cost shared by customers.
Next war (diplomatic or shooting), knowing what the other guy is thinking will give you a tremendous advantage. Even just the meta-data would be very useful. Just by knowing who from and who to, Britain was able to work out rather accurately what the German strength was, even before breaking the unbreakable Enigma. That was what kicked off Bletchley Park - they show what they can do with just the meta-data and shown it to Churchill. Bletchley Park got the resources and transformed from tiny "side thing" of half-a-dozen people to a major operation. Hats off to the Bletchley Park folks really, pioneers of computers and in particular pioneer of data analysis.
Then again, it could simply be National Pride which is quite understandable, or just $$$ which is also quite understandable. There is a lot of money in being the "goto" guy for 5G.
BravoV:
--- Quote from: MK14 on July 16, 2020, 12:03:45 am ---What I find funny, is "By 2027".
So they can potentially listen in for the next 7 years. Great! :-DD
--- End quote ---
That is clearly business talk and strategy, nothing about political.
As the US's most remote 51th "state", the UK country state of UK is just buying time with that excuse, as once DT is gone, this pressure is gone too.
Monkeh:
--- Quote from: MK14 on July 16, 2020, 01:38:07 am ---It would be interesting, to know the full (secret) picture, with all the juicy details.
China seem to be especially angry about this, which makes me wonder why.
I.e. No smoke without fire, or No big noise, without something bigger to this story, as regards China.
China/Huawei just losing sales of some 5G equipment, shouldn't really bother China that much, I would have thought. Why all the fuss ?
--- End quote ---
They've invested a huge amount of effort and money into an attempt to build a monopoly. It's not 'some' we're talking about here, it's supplying infrastructure on a global scale.
MK14:
--- Quote from: Rick Law on July 16, 2020, 02:33:19 am ---Same reason why China wants their own GPS , I suppose. As it is today, USA has the key to the GPS. We can deny access to GPS, or "adjust the accuracy" of GPS. Battle of Jutland might have came out very different had they know the real-time location of their varies fleets.
But unlike GPS, 5G would be a technology that can have development cost shared by customers.
Next war (diplomatic or shooting), knowing what the other guy is thinking will give you a tremendous advantage. Even just the meta-data would be very useful. Just by knowing who from and who to, Britain was able to work out rather accurately what the German strength was, even before breaking the unbreakable Enigma. That was what kicked off Bletchley Park - they show what they can do with just the meta-data and shown it to Churchill. Bletchley Park got the resources and transformed from tiny "side thing" of half-a-dozen people to a major operation. Hats off to the Bletchley Park folks really, pioneers of computers and in particular pioneer of data analysis.
Then again, it could simply be National Pride which is quite understandable, or just $$$ which is also quite understandable. There is a lot of money in being the "goto" guy for 5G.
--- End quote ---
Some very good points! That makes a lot of sense.
If there is a company China are interested in knowing about, e.g. in the UK, and they had just the meta-data.
They would know that companies IP address, so if they monitored lots of traffic (even if it was otherwise heavily encrypted meta-data), going to another company. That would let them begin to know, the activities of that important UK company.
They could then use private detective like techniques to infiltrate the other company, to find out what is going on, between the two companies.
Bletchley Park, did do a good job.
Some/many think, if it wasn't for Bletchley, I would be saying
"Ich kann nur deutsch sprechen".
MK14:
--- Quote from: blueskull on July 16, 2020, 02:54:41 am ---No, it's not Trump nor Xi. It's about national interest, and it is not even political.
The US has no problems with completely dictatorship countries (compared with China's collective/authoritative democracy) as long as they export interests to the US.
China happens to be the country which benefited from US's jump starting and doesn't want to keep exporting interest to the US.
And the US, or to certain degree, the Anglo Saxon ethnic, is rooted with colonialism, and you guys deeply believe by eradicating the old system in a new land you did a service to people living there.
And more importantly, the wealth of the I5 are accumulated in such a way.
So it's really a clash between I5's fundamental interest and China's national interest. It's nothing political, nothing presidential and nothing personal. It just has to happen regardless the fancy causes it is given.
--- End quote ---
Your post, and other(s), have shown my lack of knowledge/appreciation, of how important 5G is, and will be in the future.
I suppose it is a bit like all the worlds telephone, mobile phone networks air-space and cable (TV) combined, into a new, modern upcoming entity. With some/much of the internet and computer networks, thrown in for good measure.
I can well understand why China would want to be the main supplier of it, and why the US would want to stop China, from being in that position.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version