The US government is working hard on Huawei. Lawmakers and intelligence officials claimed that the Chinese government could exploit telecommunications giants by espionage. In particular, the United States raised a potentially serious national security risk when building a next generation fifth generation network. The Justice Department has indicted Huawei's chief financial officer (CFO) for alleged violations of sanctions against Iran and for stealing company secrets.
Huawei's response is simple. It is not a security threat. Most importantly, corporate leaders said they did not provide evidence that the US government was improperly or improperly functioning with the Chinese government in the future. There is also a way to mitigate risk – how it worked successfully in other countries. Huawei has even called the US government hypocrisy, criticizing China while the National Security Agency (NSC) monitors the world. The Company also denied any criminal activity.
Huawei raised this stake earlier this month. In the lawsuit, the company asked the court to adjudicate the US government's product ban to be unconstitutional. Huawei said the US lawmakers were not convinced of the safety of their products, and said they had no choice but to face legal problems.
Regardless of how the lawsuit is shaken, it can not be the last volley in ongoing combat. Is it the right of the United States to target Chinese equipment manufacturers like Huawei, or is it maintained by an unfairly malicious company? The Vertge invited eminent Chinese experts to give their views to Senator Marco Rubio.
Lightly edited responses for length and consistency.
Royal Williams, CEO of Paul Tsai China Center, Yale Law School
Considering a 5G communication network as an important infrastructure, formerly the company previously used hardware, foreign governments in the 5G network, It does not determine whether to allow the equipment. The problem is that the risk of espionage or sabotage is unacceptably high, depending in part on whether the company can claim to be independent of foreign governments. This can help explain why the Western government has broadly agreed on why Huawei poses security risks. These risks can be managed or mitigated in different ways.
You. Marco Rubio (R-FL)
Huawei is a Chinese government-led telecommunications company that uses trade secrets and intellectual property rights to undermine foreign competition and is supported by the Chinese government at an artificially low price. The Communist Party Chinese government poses the greatest long-term threat to the nation's national and economic security, and the United States must prevent China's state-run telecommunications companies such as Huawei and ZTE from infringing on the US 5th generation network and putting them at risk. Things like the future of high-tech industries, unmanned vehicles and the Internet depend on this critical technology, and any action that threatens the 21st century industry to develop and deploy 5G undoubtedly jeopardizes our nation and our economic security.
I can not be sure that the Chinese government can trust the Huawei audit more than I can believe that it does not steal the intellectual property rights of US companies without stealing intellectual property rights. No audit can reveal the future orders that the Chinese government will hand over the data to them. The United States must develop a long-term supply policy to prevent country-sponsored technology theft and dangers. We must also recognize that the ongoing threat posed by attacks on the US government's intellectual property rights, US corporate and government networks and information supports the CCP fully.
Qing Wang, Professor of Marketing and Innovation, "Warwick University
Is Huawei a Security Threat? There is no solid evidence to support this concept, and some of the reasons given for this concept are weak: Background to Huawei's Chairman Huawei's founder, Ren Zhengfei, worked in the People's Liberation Army. As we know, serving in the military was one way to get out of poverty for the rural people from Ren. It was short and not in a critical position.
Huawei is a private company like Alibaba, Tencent and Haier in the background of the company, unlike state-owned companies like China Mobile and China Railway Corporation, which came out of China's economic reform in the 1980s. If you do not move to the economy, these companies will never exist – state-owned companies will operate differently from private companies, while state-owned companies are government officials and government-appointed ones – they are products of old Communist heritage, The CEOs are either founders or descendants of the family business.They have developed technological capabilities and business insights through market mechanisms both inside and outside China, have adopted the same business practices and compete with Western companies without government preferences. Because support is no longer appropriate for new market economies,
Huawei is a serious company that has made a person like me who has been studying emerging market corporations for decades; unfortunately it is being sacrificed for anti-globalization policies, US emotions and ongoing trade war with China. Is now a security threat to the western world due to its suspicious or suspicious relationship with the government. As these companies become competitive in the global market and generate jobs and tax revenue for the government, the government aspires to continue their success
Sen. Mark Warner (D-VA)
It is important for the Chinese government and the Communist Party to be independent and major There is ample evidence that there is no Chinese company: Huawei, which promotes the Chinese government and the military as a "national champion" Allowing Huawei to be part of a 5G infrastructure can seriously jeopardize national security and jeopardize a critical supply chain. China is already technologically viable through state-led technical support and state-supported technology transfer. When you try to outdo the US economically, you can weaken America's competitiveness.
We are not currently looking for "backdoor" in Huawei products. That's stupid. Software review of existing Huawei products may not be possible in the future due to malicious vendor attempts to update them. A Chinese product that is considered safe is a firmware update that is out of the unsafe Chinese product.
University of California Berkeley Staff Research Nicholas Weaver
Sabotage is really subtle. There is a whole contest about how to make it almost impossible to detect interruptions, such as "an unfair C contest". Much more so on hardware. For example, if you know the password by interfering with the password random number generator, you can predict the password, otherwise you will not be able to use the password.
This is worse. In communication systems, these systems are designed specifically for eavesdropping, so it is very difficult to detect and detect some interference in certain eavesdropping routines. Also, a design does not mean that the product you purchased is an authentic product, even if the "design" is "certified." Single Minor Difference: Adding a small breakdown device chip eliminates all guarantees.
Francis Dinha, CEO of OpenVPN
While the United States has the right to treat Huawei as a security threat, consider that the ban on any equipment is the right solution. Whatever equipment we use for 5G, there is a security risk. These exponentially large amounts of data are inherently exponentially high risk. However, if you do not bring competitors to the market, other companies may not be satisfied. This means that the pace of innovation and development in the US slows down and overall security risks can be much larger.
Rather than rely on network security, we must seriously consider establishing an overlay secure virtual network across a 5G infrastructure that can provide end-to-end security controlled and managed by 5G network operators. We need guidelines to improve network security and we need to push this equipment to make the software open source. Open source means transparency and security. This is necessary as you move to 5G.
Huawei is a risk factor, but there are other ways to mitigate risk.
Professor of Law at Syracuse University William Snyder
Huawei poses a threat to US national security, but misses a bigger point. Vulnerabilities in network hardware and software supply chains are threatening national security in many countries, including the United States, including China. It is very difficult to appreciate that software with millions of built-in transistors or millions of lines of code performs only what the consumer knows and agrees with. Although Huawei has not committed criminal prosecution of the US Grand Jury, it is a threat to companies that supply a significant portion of the market for components of telecommunications networks and are linked to the People's Liberation Army.
Huawei's status as a threat is almost unique. Other Chinese companies such as ZTE and China Mobile are included in the supply chain as well as in other countries' suppliers. Huawei itself purchases parts from major US companies, including Qualcomm. These companies are subject to US law on cooperation with US intelligence agencies. Given the inherently liberal market economy of the United States, it is seldom that American companies are closely linked to the government, as are Chinese companies. If you are still a security decision maker in a country like India – how many times is the population of the United States – are not you worried about how many major armies are going to put your network on the network?
We all must be very careful while critical cybernetworks are designed and manufactured internationally at the key national level. This is a systematic problem. The scale of Huawei and the relationship with the PLA is of concern now. In the future, another supply chain threat will be at the center.