Slashdot Mirror


FBI Says Military Had Counterfeit Cisco Routers

There are new developments in the case of the counterfeit Cisco routers, which we have been discussing for some time. The NYTimes updates the story after an FBI PowerPoint presentation made its way onto the Web. It seems that experts at Cisco have examined some of the counterfeit routers in detail and proclaimed that they contain no back doors. Others don't believe we can be so sure. "Last month, [DARPA] began distributing chips with hidden Trojan horse circuitry to military contractors who are participating in the agency's Trusted Integrated Circuits program. The goal is to test forensic techniques for finding hidden electronic trap doors, which can be maddeningly elusive... The threat was demonstrated in April when a team of computer scientists from the University of Illinois presented a paper at a technical conference in San Francisco detailing how they had modified a Sun Microsystems SPARC microprocessor... The researchers were able to create a stealth system that would allow them to automatically log in to a computer and steal passwords."

186 comments

  1. And outsourcing.... by proudfoot · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Verification of the producer is essential here - and this is perhaps the moment where outsourcing will bite us in the ass. While you can only buy american made cisco routers, there is no doubt some chipsets made in it are manafactured overseas.

    1. Re:And outsourcing.... by moderatorrater · · Score: 4, Informative

      While essential, it's not the only step. Automatic tests of the router hardware, random checking, and employee control are all necessary steps if we really want our government networks to be secure.

    2. Re:And outsourcing.... by failedlogic · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I would agree on this one 100%. Outsourcing is in part responsible for this, although, we can't ever be 100% sure of goods manufactured domestically. These companies could care less about counterfeiting Cisco routers so let's say Cisco were to pull the contract. What's to stop the outsourced producer from selling these counterfeits in their own country without the Cisco name? Maybe they already are because presumably (as I understand) because IP law is hard or impossible to enforce in some countries.

      As the NSA already seems to be certifying comm. gear in the military (or might even make the chips for it). Perhaps even for other departments like the FBI. I see one possibility of this that the NSA certifies routers (or makes them itself) or at least makes them in the USA. I don't work with routers nor am I familiar with their manufacturer. I guess my last point, pertaining at least to the FBI investigation, would be invalid if Cisco makes some routers in the USA except, as you indicate, for some chipsets. Though even on chipset in itself could pose a significant risk.

      I'm just surpised that the FBI is even making a "presentation" to anyone on this; regardless of wether the presentation leaked or not.

    3. Re:And outsourcing.... by currivan · · Score: 1

      For some applications, it might be better to sacrifice performance and cost, and implement most of the logic in FPGAs. Then only one chip needs to be verified, and it can be bought from lots that were fabricated before you even finished your design.

    4. Re:And outsourcing.... by UnknowingFool · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I don't know if that will be enough. I remember there was a story from the Cold War on how the CIA spied on the KGB. The KGB used Xerox copiers in their offices. I don't know if the CIA convinced Xerox to modify the copier or they modified it before the KGB received it, but the copier would record all copies to flash memory. Every so often, the CIA would have to retrieve the memory. The KGB eventually got suspicious that one machine seemed to be serviced all the time while the other one wasn't. They weighed both machines and found a tiny difference in weights. Eventually they found an extra board. That's my recollection of it. I can't seem to google for the backstory. Even if you bought 100% American parts, there is not guarantee that it wasn't tampered with during a routine repair and maintenance or tampered with in the manufacturing process.

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
    5. Re:And outsourcing.... by mOdQuArK! · · Score: 1

      Uh...for a verifiable system, don't you want to be able to STOP someone from reprogramming your devices in the field? I don't think using an FPGA is going to be the best choice for a system like that.

    6. Re:And outsourcing.... by Detritus · · Score: 4, Informative
      --
      Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat
    7. Re:And outsourcing.... by dave420 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      As you say, even domestically-produced hardware can theoretically have trojans in it, so it should be standard practice to certify everything they use, regardless of where it came from.

      The outsourcing boogeyman has nothing to do with this - relying on the "USA A-OK" school of thought as some sort of defense against malicious hardware is obviously not a good idea.

    8. Re:And outsourcing.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Make them in the USA, in plant manned with illegal alien workers.

    9. Re:And outsourcing.... by Vancorps · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It's worth noting you can do everything a Cisco router can do with a Linux box. I just built a box with Zebra and a solid state hard drve along with a 4 port network card. I have some pretty good throughput with that and I would have no trouble adding additional cards for connections to OC48s and higher.

      Cisco is becoming increasingly irrelevant. They don't bring anything to the table that isn't already out there and they segment it all so it's a lot harder to manage than it needs to be.

      Anyone else notice a sharp decline in the quality of Cisco products over the last 5 years?

    10. Re:And outsourcing.... by everphilski · · Score: 2, Insightful

      but the copier would record all copies to flash memory

      Flash memory... cold war? Surely you must be joking ...

      They used a camera with a roll of film, which they then had to develop ... whippersnappers! get off my lawn!

    11. Re:And outsourcing.... by currivan · · Score: 1

      Interesting point, but it's probably no easier to replace the eprom that loads an FPGA than to make any other change to the device - routers have software already. And it wouldn't be an issue with an antifuse chip.

    12. Re:And outsourcing.... by redxxx · · Score: 1

      You're totally right. Because there is no way to pole the configuration of an FPGA, it is impossible to generate a hash from it's configuration--which could easily be used to create a secure hash that ensures it only works when the FPGA is set up properly.

      If you don't have site security, and people are going to have access to stuff in the field, they can break your hardware regardless of what it is. With FPGAs there just no way of telling if they reprogrammed it rather than breaking it.

    13. Re:And outsourcing.... by CodeBuster · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Even automatic checking and testing can be subverted by a determined adversary. For example consider the program, approved by President Reagan and beginning in 1982, whereby the CIA arranged for the Soviets, who were actively attempting to acquire western technology and hardware, to receive natural gas pipeline software and equipment that was designed to "go haywire" after a set amount of time in normal operation. When the pipeline software and hardware, which would have appeared totally normal at first even if the Soviets had bothered to test it, eventually went haywire (i.e. it ran the ultra high pressure scenario) the resulting explosion was so large that it was detected by satellites designed to monitor nuclear explosions from space. The following article from the Washington Post describes this and other programs and operations that took place during the Cold War as part of a coordinated CIA effort to slip bad technology to our enemies.

    14. Re:And outsourcing.... by Mister+Whirly · · Score: 1

      Their Aironet wireless access points are pretty solid still. I have one in a lab that has been up without a reset for almost a year straight.

      --
      "But this one goes to 11!"
    15. Re:And outsourcing.... by UnknowingFool · · Score: 1

      Surely you can't expect me to remember all the details while remembering to keep kids off my lawn.

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
    16. Re:And outsourcing.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except have a megaGBPS backplane. On both counts.

    17. Re:And outsourcing.... by t0rkm3 · · Score: 1

      Not really in hardware... However in the fringe software configurations, yes.

      I currently had 40 or so 42xx IPS/IDS, 12 pairs of ASA, and 4 MARS. We also have 250 ISR routers in our CSM deployment.

      Problems? Every problem I've had was over software. Configurations that they didn't think we would use or something of that nature. Except with the MARS, the first gen MARS (Protego acquisition) was complete crap.

    18. Re:And outsourcing.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ... using chips imported from China.

    19. Re:And outsourcing.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      (if you couldn't tell I work for Cisco..)
      Could you be more fucking wrong.. Jesus Christ. How many fucking idiots are on slashdot now? No you cant. Sure, you may be able to do *feature X* (albeit slower) on a Linux box. But not QoS,NBAR,IPS/IDS,CME,VM,etc,etc,etc, ALL AT THE SAME TIME regardless of speed.

      If you think that a Cisco router(or any router for that matter) is only a router you are so far behind the times you must be absolutely worthless to your organization. Cisco has the market share they have because they have been able to develop features and prevent their products from becoming commodity purchases.

      I mean I can certainly run various services (many of which are the big ones Linux excels at) on Cisco gear, but that doesn't mean I should or it will run anywhere near as fast or with even a smidgen of the features of the Linux box.

      The linuxtards are becoming the latest Apple Fanboi's in that their OS can solve world hunger, bring about world peace and stop global climate change.

      Can we make it a requirement that to post on Slashdot you must have at least 10 years of real world post-college experience? That would cut down on the brainwashed high school/college posters that post the most utterly absured comments known to man.

      For the record I run CENTOS 5.x for my Mail/Web/DNS/LDAP/F&P at my house. My laptops are all Kubuntu 8.04. My Mythtv FE is Fedora and my BE's are Kubuntu so I'm not anti-linux. I just use the right tools for the right job.
      And NO linux is not always the right tool.

    20. Re:And outsourcing.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Agreed. We run all of our routing using FreeBSD and the OpenBSD Packet Filter (which was ported to FreeBSD). We get live router fail-over, stateful firewalling, first-class load-balancing, and excellent performance -- all in a $1000 machine running free (as in it didn't cost us anything) code.

      It's also (obviously) open-source, which means we can (and have) pushed code upstream to add what we've needed.

    21. Re:And outsourcing.... by stonecypher · · Score: 1

      If we really want our government networks to be secure, we have to assume that they are not, and take appropriate measures.

      --
      StoneCypher is Full of BS
    22. Re:And outsourcing.... by Thundersnatch · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It's worth noting you can do everything a Cisco router can do with a Linux box.

      Except connect to a SONNET network. Or a DS3 interface. Or aggregate multiple T1s. Or suport terabit switching and routing speeds.

    23. Re:And outsourcing.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Try doing that with 1,000 ports on a Gigabit (or higher) network. A few Cisco routers and switches is still cheaper than 250 4-port Linux boxes.

    24. Re:And outsourcing.... by flyingsquid · · Score: 2, Funny

      I've heard that the problem is a lot more severe than they're actually letting on. Apparently, one of the biggest problems that they're facing is counterfeit Microsoft products. Fortunately, they're pretty easy to recognize, you just have to educate your employees about how everything is supposed to be functioning, and then be vigilant in looking for anything that appears out of the ordinary, any erratic or unusual behavior whatsoever. So if you notice that your computer is running unusually fast, that you're getting a lot of work done, or that the interface is intuitive and easy to use, then you can be sure that you've been sold a counterfeit Microsoft product.

    25. Re:And outsourcing.... by Vancorps · · Score: 2, Informative

      SONET, DS3, and DSUs in any quantity can be purchased for a computer without a problem. When you get into the terabit range you still have a lot of options.

      For switching Cisco makes zero sense, HP gives you higher through-put for less money and they aren't the only ones. Let the router do the routing and the switch can do the switching.

      The only reason Layer 3 and 4 switches are becoming commonplace is because routers get more and more expensive the higher up the stack you go. There is nothing worse than using a wire-speed layer 3 switch which is undergoing a heavy load from file transfers as a central routing gateway. Especially when you get into BGP and OSPF.

      Terabit backplanes are nothing new though, easily achieved through distributed computing and for far less money.

    26. Re:And outsourcing.... by Vancorps · · Score: 1

      I see you didn't mention Call Manager with Cisco VOIP. Software updates causing random breaks. CM requires a complete regression test before you can deploy it, especially if you have 3rd party tools. If someone doesn't work right you have a 50/50 shot at getting a good Cisco tech to help you.

      I've run into a lot of hardware related issues with my Cisco equipment, so much so that it mostly all got replaced with HP switching gear. Right now an HP switch does all the routing at each site but my Zebra setup is holding rather nicely so I'm going to offload all the routing as my next project.

    27. Re:And outsourcing.... by Vancorps · · Score: 1

      I was wondering about this, I've had bad luck with the Proxim access points. They seem to just die after so long of use, but I use them in some pretty tough mobile scenarios. I've been looking at Cisco wireless for a while, my scenario would have me deploying probably 30 to 40 access points at a moment notice so there is some appeal to the Cisco approach with light weight access points. I don't really like all the extra gear they make you buy though, especially if you plan on integrating RFIDs into the mix.

    28. Re:And outsourcing.... by Vancorps · · Score: 1

      You seriously think you can't do QoS or have IPS/IDS all at the same time on a Linux box? Seriously? You think it doesn't scale? Honestly, Cisco got to where it is today because there was no alternative before. Now there is real competition from all over the place and Cisco's offerings are anything but leading the industry. They always take an idea, we'll use OSPF for example and make a proprietary protocol which I will grant is a little more efficient but it is indeed proprietary and locks customers into using Cisco.

      If you really think 10 servers on two switches can't meet or beat any of Cisco's routers then you're in for a world of surprise as Cisco becomes increasingly pointless.

      I'll also add that I've had 10 years in the real world, 5 of them were using Cisco products, the last 5 years has been spent migrating away and the world is much much simpler and far more reliable, I'll also add quite a bit faster.

    29. Re:And outsourcing.... by stonecypher · · Score: 1

      I regret to remind you that as this is a question of in-governmental operation, even counterfeit Microsoft products cannot create unusually fast processes that get lots of work done. Otherwise, that would be a brilliant diagnostic.

      The intuitive interface bit might still work.

      --
      StoneCypher is Full of BS
    30. Re:And outsourcing.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Different Cisco employee here. I work in storage, and not on the cats, but I use them.

      While he may be somewhat trollish, he's right. Your cobbled together "routers" have what, 2, 4, 8 Gbps of IO capability? Even at your equipment's high-end, unless you start approaching the hundreds of gigabits in your backplane, you just aren't going to approach what hardware routers can achieve.

      He also didn't mention service. You get what you pay for. I don't know why anyone thinks high-end gear won't have hiccups too.

      And it's not like I will shun Juniper (I'm anonymous here, so I get to say it). People who install MANs seem to like them equally as much as Cisco. But you'll pay a lot for Juniper, too.

      I think it's obvious you have a small(ish?) network. And that's perfectly fine, and the solution you have is perfectly fine as long as your network isn't growing. But, if you're successful, you won't have the time to constantly support and replace your expanding fleet of in-house-built gear. You'll also need more throughput with less of a power requirement.

      When you actually need an SLA of five nines, low latencies, and more than one data center, you're going to definitely need somebody's high-end routers. But if you can't or aren't willing to spend the money for it, you don't really need all the rest. That's not an insult -- that's just my experienced observation.

    31. Re:And outsourcing.... by geekoid · · Score: 1

      Flash memory? are you sure it wasn't a small camera?

      I know US photo copiers had to be certified and locked down. After there would be two and uncertified one for routine office paperwork,and a certified one. You had to get permission to use either.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    32. Re:And outsourcing.... by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Cisco is relevant when you get into the craploads-of-ports range. In the handfuls-of-ports range, a PC can do fine. There are places in which Cisco's box should be drop-kicked, for example, anyone who buys a PIX in this day and age should have their head examined - but then, if you have a room full of Cisco equipment, what's one more box?

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    33. Re:And outsourcing.... by Vancorps · · Score: 1

      I'll grant the higher up you go the more the Cisco route makes sense. As for IO capability you can achieve much higher than 8gbit when you start talking about infiniband you start to approach 40gbit pretty quick. The problem the higher up you go is that you have to cobble together more and more equipment so it makes perfect sense on the low end where a single computer is quite sufficient, or rather a pair of computers to achieve redundancy. That alone would give you five 9s without a problem. It scales out pretty easily too.

    34. Re:And outsourcing.... by jd · · Score: 1
      Given the illegality of such an action (basically, it can be classed as anywhere from State-sponsored terrorism to an outright declaration of war - it took something a damn sight smaller than a nuke for America to bomb Libya at about that same time), the American government should breathe a sigh of relief that such actions didn't end all life on the planet there and then. A drunken Boris Yeltsin damn-near went nuclear when they mistook a weather satellite launch for an attack. Can you imagine the paranoid Soviet reaction if they believed a nuclear-like enemy attack had already taken place?

      I'm not going to argue rights and wrongs of the Cold War, beyond saying it wa bloody stupid and bloody dangerous, with nutcases that should not so much been in power as in a straitjacket.

      However, we must consider that any technologically advanced nation - particularly with a strong presence in Asia, where most chips have been manufactured for a long time - would be quite capable of launching such an attack on America. The Chinese would be immediate suspects, and the severity of Japanese nationalism doesn't rule out parties interested in a little revenge.

      That is not all, however. Chips have reached a complexity of such that an infiltrator could modify the design in progress to implant backdoors, wiresniffing, and so on. That would take enormous skill, but there are mathematical geniuses in China who could do it. Hell, over the past couple of years or so, two Israeli spys have been caught passing on American secrets, and they do have some of the finest Universities in the world. I doubt Israel has planted such backdoors, and discourage paranoia along those lines, I am merely pointing out that there has been abuse of trust by almost every nation in the world towards every other. (Antarctica can safely claim such an exception, owing to the lack of any human natives.)

      Electronics in use in nuclear, chemical and other plants of significant size is generally old (upgrading a segment of a complex mission-critical system is unsafe, so avoided as much as possible) and it is unimaginable that such systems will ever be screened against flaws designed by hostiles. Even where screening is possible, if the design is compromised, there is very little you can test against. If the flaw is stealthy (ie: totally inert until some very specific conditions occur over a period of time, making them invisible to all simple validations of state changes) then such flaws can only be found by low-level analysis of the specification, and the current belief amongst mathematicians is that this isn't possible except for very trivial problems.

      (I'm not convinced the problems have to be as trivial as insisted, but I've reached the point where I don't give a damn if the present and former superpowers go fry themselves. I've also reached the point where I'm convinced academics don't give a damn about doing any interesting work. So what does it matter to me if these two dove-tail into the end of the world?)

      --
      It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
    35. Re:And outsourcing.... by thogard · · Score: 1

      That is not all, however. Chips have reached a complexity of such that an infiltrator could modify the design in progress to implant backdoors, wiresniffing, and so on. That would take enormous skill...

      Lets say you have the FPGA code for a FPGA for a firewall. All it takes is put a bit comparator to next to the input buffer (which could be hidden with the checksum hardware) and when the magic packet hits it, it sends a reset to the filter section causing it to default into a "pass all" mode. The real problem is finding the FPGA code but that could be trivial depending on who makes the chip.

    36. Re:And outsourcing.... by CodeBuster · · Score: 1

      Can you imagine the paranoid Soviet reaction if they believed a nuclear-like enemy attack had already taken place?

      You misunderstand. It was the Soviets who built the gas pipeline and installed the western (i.e. American) pumping turbines and software that their KGB agents had bought through intermediary companies in violation of export restrictions (i.e. they used cloak and dagger to acquire the technology, hence the reason for the United States to introduce the 'bug' into the system...to prevent their thieving ways from paying off when they stole the fruits of our national defense technology research). It was the US satellites that detected the explosion (the Soviet satellites are probably monitoring the United States and not their home country). The Soviets knew EXACTLY what happened. It was either a faulty engineering job (which is probably what they did believe before the story became public since Soviet technology and construction had a reputation for being unreliable at best and dangerous at worst...this was not the first time that Soviet industry had experienced a major accident) OR perhaps they did realize that the turbines and pumps acquired by the KGB were sabotaged by the Americans and that any other technology that they had stolen was by implication also suspect (which was the real purpose of the American operation). There is no chance that the Soviets would have some how misinterpreted this as an attack, in fact the pipeline was in such a remote location that nobody actually saw the explosion (only its aftermath and the aforementioned satellite detection). Even if they did want to start a war over it (unlikely...the accident cost money and not even a single life) they would be too embarrassed to admit that either they had been slipped bad technology by the Americans OR worse, that their own incompetence had led to the economic disaster of the pipeline explosion. It was better for both sides to learn a lesson about stealing foreign technology and simply keep quiet about it.

      My point was that America has pulled the 'bad technology' trick in the past so there is every reason to suspect that someone else could attempt the same with us. The Chinese are notably able and willing to engage in just such activities because of their prominence in the international electronics and chip trade.

    37. Re:And outsourcing.... by clint999 · · Score: 0

      Interesting point, but it's probably no easier to replace the eprom that loads an FPGA than to make any other change to the device - routers have software already. And it wouldn't be an issue with an antifuse chip.

  2. We've always been at war with Eurasia by querist · · Score: 1

    Somehow, I find it hard to believe that DARPA INTENTIONALLY planted vulnerable chips into potentially critical military systems.

    This sounds like a case of spin worthy of Winston Smith from the Minstry of Truth.

    1. Re:We've always been at war with Eurasia by Ethanol-fueled · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I merely skimmed one article which said that Cisco examined the routers and found no backdoors. The Ministry of Peace is probably just trying to test the sneakiness of their own snooping electronics in the name of "national security". The trojans which are found are omitted and the ones which aren't found make it to the production runs. Oh, and before all of this happens, they have the Ministry of Truth spread FUD about Eastasia doing it "first", even though Cisco checked the counterfeit routers and found nothing suspicious. To paraphrase what another slashdotter said a little while ago, "...the government is using 1984 as an instruction manual." They even got Emmanuel Goldstein right: instead of making him advocate freedom, they chose a more unlikeable character(and will chose others like him): Osama Bin Laden.

    2. Re:We've always been at war with Eurasia by Ethanol-fueled · · Score: 1

      * Clarification: "trojans" in the hardware or firmware as well as the software sense.

    3. Re:We've always been at war with Eurasia by spikedvodka · · Score: 1

      okay... that last post had my mind goind way down the wrong path... "Cisco examined the routers in depth, and didn't find any trojans, only a few durex wrappers"

      --
      I will not give in to the terrorists. I will not become fearful.
    4. Re:We've always been at war with Eurasia by yukk · · Score: 1

      I hope you don't mean the ones with knots tied in them. They're all throw-aways.

      --
      The trouble with the rat race is that even if you win, you're still a rat." Lily Tomlin
  3. "Counterfeit" not an issue... by Em+Adespoton · · Score: 5, Interesting

    From what I understand, the counterfeit routers are made in the same factories by the same people who make the real routers; they just keep the assembly line running past the hours that Cisco is paying them for.

    In this case, if Cisco is comparing the counterfeit routers to their legit ones, they should always be the same.

    The question this doesn't answer is this: does the LEGIT Cisco equipment contain back doors? How can Cisco be sure it doesn't? Most of the components are manufactured offshore and the assembly is done offshore. Have they examined each part with an electron microscope to verify it doesn't do anything more than what the spec says it should do?

    They can't just watch for network activity; these routers might be filtering and caching data waiting for the eventual physical removal of the router in the next upgrade cycle -- or, they might all have a kill switch built in, so someone can remotely take out ALL routers. There are an infinite number of possibilities to look for, and since Cisco doesn't manufacture everything in-house, they really don't have much hope of detecting that none of the infinite possible modifications have been made.

    1. Re:"Counterfeit" not an issue... by dreamchaser · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I am generally for free trade and against protectionism, but I am leaning more and more towards the need for a law that makes it mandatory that all gear (guns, routers, computers, coffee makers, etc.) purchased by the Government for any use that is even remotely sensitive be made in the US by US owned companies. That won't necessarily solve this kind of problem, but it would certainly make it far easier to prosecute entities who do things that threaten our national security.

    2. Re:"Counterfeit" not an issue... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      As being someone who recently has purchased several Cisco products on Ebay lately, I can tell you that the counterfeit items are not made on the same assembly line. There are several design differences between them.I use the "Andover test" to tell if I'm purchasing authentic Cisco cards.

      If I did purchase a card or Cisco product that did pass the Andover test, then chances are that it was manufactured on the same assembly line, but then you would most likely see a report of a duplicate mac address on a "genuine" Cisco product somewhere. So yes it's a possibility, but highly unlikely IMHO.

    3. Re:"Counterfeit" not an issue... by Machtyn · · Score: 1

      And that software and hardware should open-sourced. This will, hopefully, allow peer review for security, snafu, and waste. Granted, this may not be practical in all situations. However, I think the Linux/BSD community has shown that peer reviewed and community supported software can be very tight, security and otherwise.

    4. Re:"Counterfeit" not an issue... by Frosty+Piss · · Score: 4, Informative

      From what I understand, the counterfeit routers are made in the same factories by the same people who make the real routers; they just keep the assembly line running past the hours that Cisco is paying them for.
      I keep hearing this. But look at the images of the hardware side by side ... Is it the same? No it's not. Clearly these two boards are not from the same manufacturing line.
      --
      If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
    5. Re:"Counterfeit" not an issue... by xj · · Score: 1

      Ok so if a counterfeit router is just a back door sale with a fake serial number who cares. If a counterfeit made elsewhere I would be concerned, not about back doors, but just the quality and reliability of the equipment. If you are producing a counterfeit product you don't care about quality or how long the thing lasts so long as it is long enough for you to sell it. Warranty returns and tech support problems are going to fall on the company you are faking not yours.

    6. Re:"Counterfeit" not an issue... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Obviously, except for Firefox plugins

    7. Re:"Counterfeit" not an issue... by Free+the+Cowards · · Score: 1

      The question this doesn't answer is this: does the LEGIT Cisco equipment contain back doors? How can Cisco be sure it doesn't? Most of the components are manufactured offshore and the assembly is done offshore. Have they examined each part with an electron microscope to verify it doesn't do anything more than what the spec says it should do? I see this sentiment expressed all over the place in these threads and I just don't get it. What is it about offshore manufacturing which somehow makes this such a problem? Why is it that you think these extreme checks are required if the equipment is made in China, but not if it's made in Kansas? Do you think that American workers are invulnerable to bribery, coercion, or just plain stupidity?
      --
      If you mod me Overrated, you are admitting that you have no penis.
    8. Re:"Counterfeit" not an issue... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, these two items could have come off the same line - look at the differences - very minor really. The "counterfeit" looks like the real deal except it fails certain quality checks.

      What could be happening is that the factory is trying to make some of its money back for those units that don't pass quality inspections.

    9. Re:"Counterfeit" not an issue... by Frosty+Piss · · Score: 1

      Actually, these two items could have come off the same line - look at the differences - very minor really.
      Take a closer look. Just eye-balling it quickly...

      * The metal flange is different.
      * The flange screws are different.
      * The silkscreened writing placement is different.
      * Most of the major components are in the same places, but not all of them.

      Sure, if a few cans had been soldered crooked, maybe. But really, take a close look. Not the same board at all.

      --
      If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
    10. Re:"Counterfeit" not an issue... by Mike1024 · · Score: 1

      Clearly these two boards are not from the same manufacturing line. There more detailed photos here.

      IMHO the extent of differences they are talking about (The brand mark on the RJ-45 connector, the font of the barcode sticker, and suchlike) could easily be explained by a completely normal mid-production change in suppliers. I would say it is far from clear that the two boards are not from the same manufacturing line. Indeed, it would be hard to make two such identical boards without the original CAD data.

      Just my $0.02
      --
      "Goodness me, how unlike the FBI to abuse the trust of the American public." -- The Onion
    11. Re:"Counterfeit" not an issue... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You don't have any experience with this sort of thing.

      The way it works is like this.

      Factory A has a contract with company B to produce 1000 of product C.

      The factory orders the pieces as required to fill company B's contract. These pieces being a specific quality and probably contractually from a specific supplier.

      Then orders more pieces, of lower or "cheaper" quality to produce more of the same product, as a counterfeit.

      Then the factory runs extra shifts and back doors the counterfeits. Which aren't exact replicas, they are cheap knockoffs, just happen to be made in the same factory on the same line as the real deal.

      That image looks to me EXACTLY like what I see all the time. And I KNOW FOR A FACT that it's coming from the same factory, I was there, I set up the line. And then I received, by accident, some of the counterfeit product.

    12. Re:"Counterfeit" not an issue... by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 1

      Zona Europa has a great writeup about how Chinese factories cheat. It's an eye-opener, it's got ways of cheating that I would never have dreamed of.

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    13. Re:"Counterfeit" not an issue... by zx-15 · · Score: 1

      Link to the test
      http://www.andovercg.com/services/cisco-counterfeit-wic-1dsu-t1.shtml
      Another 1/2 hour wasted, even though I don't even know what that card is for

  4. Evil Chinese Cisco routers? by s0litaire · · Score: 1

    Are these the routers that the US was warning us about. The ones where China counterfeits Routers and sticks in evil commie coding? :D

    --
    Laters Sol "Have you found the secrets of the universe? Asked Zebade "I'm sure I left them here somewhere"
  5. Not a big surprise. by Smenj · · Score: 5, Informative

    I work for a company that sells used electronics on eBay. We'll occasionally buy cheap gear over eBay too, then resell it at a profit. For many months now we've had a huge problem with counterfeit Cisco cards. It's amazing how detailed the counterfeiters are. My boss wrote up a detailed guide on how to spot fakes. Google "counterfeit cisco wic".

    1. Re:Not a big surprise. by nbritton · · Score: 1

      Why call them fakes or counterfeits when they are exactly the same as the name brand stuff? How about labeling them as generic, as in generic drugs vs brand name drugs.

      BTW, where can I get some of this generic equipment?

    2. Re:Not a big surprise. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why call them fakes or counterfeits when they are exactly the same as the name brand stuff? Because they are not exactly the same. Some of the stuff is made on the same assembly lines as the legit Cisco gear but most of the counterfeit gear is not made on those same lines and is really shoddily produced copies that have a much higher failure rate.
  6. Question is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    ... of the DARPA-hacked routers were any of the 'cisco experts' able to determine tampering?

    That seems like a logical test, so I have to wonder if they have done it already... or not?

    If they contain no backdoors, *THAT WE CAN FIND*, do we continue using them?

  7. I for one..... by cybvapor · · Score: 0

    .....welcome our new counterfeit Cisco Router overlords.....

  8. This is what we get by Khyber · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    When we outsource everything to other countries, we run the risk of getting bad goods, made with a malicious intent. Any company that's outsourcing is potentially harming us. It should be made a crime.

    --
    Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
    1. Re:This is what we get by gregarican · · Score: 2, Interesting

      More like any company that outsources and doesn't perform internal quality control of what they are reselling should be made criminal in this instance of reselling to governmental agencies. Buy a Cisco, throw it in a private LAN sandbox, fire up Wireshark. Rinse, lather, repeat. Yawn...

  9. "Partnership" by CustomDesigned · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Anne McCaffrey wrote a book called PartnerShip with a plot very similar to this situation. The villian provides chips to the Galaxy, including the military. When nearly everyone has upgraded, it turns out that he can remotely control every device, including military hardware, controlled by the chips. That's enough of a spoiler. How can such a grand and well planned scheme be defeated? You'll have to read to find out...

    1. Re:"Partnership" by spikedvodka · · Score: 1

      Great Book, great series of books, though it's been a long time since I've read them.

      If you're looking for more: "This ship who *" and "The city who fought"

      --
      I will not give in to the terrorists. I will not become fearful.
    2. Re:"Partnership" by Jesus_666 · · Score: 1

      Simple: One of the big carriers is too old to be fitted with the new chips as it faces decommission as a museum. When the bad guy shuts down almost all ships in the galaxy, this old ship is reactivated and sets out along with the few ships that weren't destroyed. Lead by the carrier's scruffy old commander and a teacher suffering from cancer, the remaining humans set out to find Earth.

      Seriously, what did you expect how this scheme is foiled? What I described is SOP for this situation.

      --
      USE HOT GRITS WITH STATUE OF NATALIE PORTMAN (NAKED AND PETRIFIED)
    3. Re:"Partnership" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Does it involve Jeff Goldblum and a PowerBook?

    4. Re:"Partnership" by Miseph · · Score: 1

      Uh, no, SOP is that they instead use the top secret prototype battle cruiser upon which all other battle cruisers are based, claerly indicating that it is the greatest fighting ship of all time, because by the nth time around design and manufacturing mistakes are always made which compromise the integrity of the original.

      The only other thing you need is an awkward, sexually frustrated adolescent boy genius to pilot it and you're golden.

      --
      Try not to take me more seriously than I take myself.
    5. Re:"Partnership" by jollyreaper · · Score: 1

      Anne McCaffrey wrote a book called PartnerShip [amazon.com] with a plot very similar to this situation. The villian provides chips to the Galaxy, including the military. When nearly everyone has upgraded, it turns out that he can remotely control every device, including military hardware, controlled by the chips. That's enough of a spoiler. How can such a grand and well planned scheme be defeated? You'll have to read to find out... Microsoft agress to roll out a beta service patch on auto-update early, when all the evil machines start choking on it, heroes come in with manually-controlled weapons to blow them up and save the day.
      --
      Kwisatz Haderach
      Sell the spice to CHOAM
      This Mahdi took Shaddam's Throne
    6. Re:"Partnership" by nsuccorso · · Score: 1

      What, and actually read something else by Anne McCaffrey? Sorry, the so-called "Catteni Sequence" ensured that that will never happen again.

    7. Re:"Partnership" by CustomDesigned · · Score: 1

      Close. But the properties of hyperspace in the storie's universe are essential to the solution.

  10. Fear Fear Fear by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Be afraid. Be very afraid. Vote for those that seek to protect you.

    This seems like a scare tactic to "warn" people about the dangers of fake hardware/software. Expect a big push around these types of "stories" as more bills like PRO-IP go through congress and as the creation of the IP & Copyright Czar in the Whitehouse gets a big push.

    It's a concern but seems to point more to incompetence rather than some difficult-to-spot threat. Why are government agencies not buying directly from Cisco? Seems they should have some sort of corporate connection.

    "We must protect our precious bodily fluids."

    1. Re:Fear Fear Fear by ahabswhale · · Score: 3, Insightful

      1) This has nothing to do with IP rights.

      2) It's a concern when you consider the potential effects of this kind of infiltration. Buying directly from Cisco, in no way, protects you from this problem. The hardware is still made overseas in some factory by a bunch of people who may not like the US very much (which is true of 99% of the planet right now).

      Apparently you lack the imagination to see how ugly this can get. Fortunately DARPA isn't run by you.

      --
      Are agnostics skeptical of unicorns too?
    2. Re:Fear Fear Fear by _Sprocket_ · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss the IP rights issue. Counterfeiting is all about IP rights. The law doesn't differentiate between you producing knock-off fashion items, work-alike network gear, or burning copies of a music album or movie. Expect these kinds of stories to show up more as pushes are made to put more teeth behind these laws. The same laws that most benefit hot-button topics for the Media industries.

      Having said that - I would agree that counterfeit gear is a real issue with real potential impact.

    3. Re:Fear Fear Fear by Em+Adespoton · · Score: 1

      1) ...yet.

      2) He was arguing from a sardonic "government spin" perspective. What you say is true; he's trying to point out how the PR groups will avoid that fact.

      I take it you didn't get the Dr. Strangelove reference.

    4. Re:Fear Fear Fear by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The gear was coming from the standard sales channel. Its not like .mil sites were buying them on eBay. I respect you opinion and might even agree with it in a sense but this is actually something to be concerned about. This is beyond the comprehension of the average voter so no politician would find value in speaking about it. If the high end gear can be duplicated and rigged, how difficult do you think it would be to rig the consumer grade stuff? This is a concern for those of us that work with this gear and make our living protecting our clients from the bad elements roaming the network.

    5. Re:Fear Fear Fear by ahabswhale · · Score: 1

      The story leads off about how the FBI found counterfeit routers being used by the military and then goes on to talk about DARPA's research project to test and prevent this kind of infiltration. At no point does it discuss IP rights. Given the sheer volume of IP coverage on /., is it really necessary to introduce it to other topics like this? Do we need another Godwin's Law to cover this?

      --
      Are agnostics skeptical of unicorns too?
    6. Re:Fear Fear Fear by Free+the+Cowards · · Score: 1

      You're the one who lacks imagination if you think that merely moving all production in-house and inside the US will completely eliminate the potential for this sort of problem.

      --
      If you mod me Overrated, you are admitting that you have no penis.
    7. Re:Fear Fear Fear by ahabswhale · · Score: 1

      You're the one who lacks imagination if you think that merely moving all production in-house and inside the US will completely eliminate the potential for this sort of problem. That's funny, I don't recall ever saying that would solve the problem. I was merely pointing out the enhanced risk of the current situation.
      --
      Are agnostics skeptical of unicorns too?
    8. Re:Fear Fear Fear by Free+the+Cowards · · Score: 1
      No, you just conveniently manage to heavily imply it:

      Buying directly from Cisco, in no way, protects you from this problem. The hardware is still made overseas in some factory by a bunch of people who may not like the US very much Since "still made overseas" is presented as the reason for "Buying directly in no way protects you", you certainly make it sound like you think this is the cause of the problem.
      --
      If you mod me Overrated, you are admitting that you have no penis.
    9. Re:Fear Fear Fear by ahabswhale · · Score: 1

      Oh dang, you got me! And I SOOOO though I could get away with it too!

      --
      Are agnostics skeptical of unicorns too?
    10. Re:Fear Fear Fear by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So here's a thought:
      Assuming it was standard channels, does that mean the not even Cisco was aware that they were selling "counterfeit" gear? If it's made by the same manufacturing plant, using the exact same parts, sold through the same channels, and (assumedly) shipped through the same channels too, at what point does it become a reason to be "concerned about piracy and counterfeiting"?

      This to me is the crux of why this story being told in from the angle it's told, being reported on in the context of the current governement and corporate initiatives, seems to be alarmist rather than a truely new, concerning issue.

      It's an issues for ALL products produced in the above example. Focusing on the "fake vs. real" is a distraction.

      If everything is the same as you would follow when purchasing a "legitamate" product, the only difference is who gets the profits. One entity owns the name and delivers a product under that name so that the name implies certain value. The other takes advantage of that name and delivers the exact same product. That sounds like illegal use of IP and a copyrighted name.

      Making this sound otherwise is smacks of disingenuousness (is that a word?) and designed to provoke an emotional reaction.

      We don't want them taking our precious bodily fluids after all.

    11. Re:Fear Fear Fear by Em+Adespoton · · Score: 1

      We can call it Ahabswhale's Law :)

  11. /Light Bulb Flashes Overhead by gregarican · · Score: 4, Funny

    So that's why my crappy Linksys wifi access points have to be rebooted every week or so. Damn commies!!!

    1. Re:/Light Bulb Flashes Overhead by davolfman · · Score: 1

      No, that's because of the new vxworks firmware.

  12. Non free software and offshoring are evil. by gnutoo · · Score: 0

    The lesson applies to more than the military - if you can't verify it, you should not trust it. Using non free software on devices produced in Communist China might save you a few bucks but it will cost you much more in the long run.

    The madness of the "IP" empire is most apparent in this specific case. Using machines produced by your enemy is stunning folly for any military.

    1. Re:Non free software and offshoring are evil. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You seem to imply that China is the United States' enemy. I don't know about the future, but that is certainly not the case right now.

    2. Re:Non free software and offshoring are evil. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It is the case right now WRT network security.

    3. Re:Non free software and offshoring are evil. by Dishevel · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Lets see. A non free society that can barley feed its people now. That has a huge number of people that is now comming into the industrial age and is going to NEED all the energy it can get its hands on very soon is an enemy to be to all who are near.

      --
      Why is it so hard to only have politicians for a few years, then have them go away?
    4. Re:Non free software and offshoring are evil. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      "gnutoo" is a twitter sockpuppet. He shifts from this to the post above to karma whore, but the message is the same. Use free software and all your problems will disappear. He doesn't understand nor does he care about capital costs or anything else - if only you would put your code on Sourceforge everything will be magically OK.



      Not counting the one you're replying to, he's already posted in this article with two other accounts, so YOU WILL hear him out, or else. He's probably compensated on a per-post, per-account basis.


      At heart, twitter is really a xenophobe, and his "Communist China is evil" argument is an old one.

    5. Re:Non free software and offshoring are evil. by billcopc · · Score: 1

      You seem to troll that China is not a threat.

      I don't know about the future, but I know tomorrow's invaders won't be speaking Dutch!

      --
      -Billco, Fnarg.com
    6. Re:Non free software and offshoring are evil. by gzipped_tar · · Score: 1

      ... But they might be aided by Python.

      --
      Colorless green Cthulhu waits dreaming furiously.
    7. Re:Non free software and offshoring are evil. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I would like to know after all this crap about Lenovo now being a chinese company (Hello *IBM* thinkpads had been produced in China for years) and the ranting about "counterfit hardware" has ever produced even a single confirmed instance where spy add-ons or kill switches have been found?

      I'm not saying that vigillance isn't good or necessary but at the same time blind unfounded mistrust is very distasteful.

      Most governments have access to "closed software" if they want it and systems are so complex that your fooling yourself if you think you can trust open software just because its open. (See recent viatnameses lang pack in firefox for example)

      Also how do we even know that the precompiled distributions everyone is downloading was actually compiled entirely against publically avaliable source trees? For governments your argument carries little weight as source code is avaliable in either instance.

      There is simply no way to guarantee security using COTS software/hardware methodologies.

      Rolling your own is always an option but very expensive to approach the security and reliability of widely deployed systems.

    8. Re:Non free software and offshoring are evil. by billcopc · · Score: 1

      Oh, they most certainly are. Python is such a resource hog, it's driving up demand for bigger servers, which just happen to use parts manufactured behind the Great Wall.

      Python and Ruby are real money makers.

      --
      -Billco, Fnarg.com
  13. You reap what you sow by MarkGriz · · Score: 3, Interesting
    --
    Beauty is in the eye of the beerholder.
    1. Re:You reap what you sow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Soviets were trying to acquire technology that we wouldn't have sold them. If they ended up with bogus stuff, then they simply were pwned and lost the round.

  14. Re:This is what we get - Go one further by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Outsourcing critical components is always bad,
    but when you outsource DIRECTLY to countries that

    A: do not like you and make little attempt to hide it
    B: are actively engaging in espionage, known and unknown
    C: have no distinctions between state and corporation, commerce and warfare

    Hand in your commission and your cover, you fucked up.
    You've hit the fubar trifecta. Your command is terminated.

    There is no excuse for this in a trillion dollar army. Good day.

  15. Selling out the back door by sjbe · · Score: 5, Informative

    the counterfeit routers are made in the same factories by the same people who make the real routers; they just keep the assembly line running past the hours that Cisco is paying them for. That happens ALL the time. I've visited manufacturing plants in China and I've seen it happen with my own eyes. Selling out the back door is not surprising at all. In fact this is why I'm less worried than I might otherwise be about the gear having back doors or being otherwise compromised. Simplest explanation is just theft in one form or another.

    does the LEGIT Cisco equipment contain back doors? Very good question. Got to be worrisome to the US military and security agencies. Much/most off the shelf hardware is made outside the US where it wouldn't me much of a stretch to imagine backdoors have been added by foreign governments. Same worries that other governments have about US made/designed software and hardware. And of course if you really want to get tin-foil-hat about it one has to wonder if our own government has had back doors installed. Very unlikely to be sure, but clearly possible.

    That said, it's pretty low on the list of likely threats. Pretty hard to know exactly what gear will be placed where and what it will give you access to. Plus even with a back door, places with sensitive data are more likely to be monitoring the traffic which is harder to hide.
    1. Re:Selling out the back door by Em+Adespoton · · Score: 1

      Pretty hard to know exactly what gear will be placed where and what it will give you access to. Plus even with a back door, places with sensitive data are more likely to be monitoring the traffic which is harder to hide.

      They can't just watch for network activity; these routers might be filtering and caching data waiting for the eventual physical removal of the router in the next upgrade cycle -- or, they might all have a kill switch built in, so someone can remotely take out ALL routers. There are an infinite number of possibilities to look for, and since Cisco doesn't manufacture everything in-house, they really don't have much hope of detecting that none of the infinite possible modifications have been made.
    2. Re:Selling out the back door by sjbe · · Score: 1

      They can't just watch for network activity; these routers might be filtering and caching data waiting for the eventual physical removal of the router in the next upgrade cycle Which presumes the entity making the modifications has access to the device and the upgrade schedule - rather a stretch I think. Plus, our government isn't exactly known for rapid upgrades. Timeliness of any information would be a huge issue.

      -- or, they might all have a kill switch built in, so someone can remotely take out ALL routers. Which presumes that all such said routers can receive such signals. Possible? I suppose, but incredibly unlikely. And even if it happened what are the effects? Hard to predict but probably not devastating. Now if it can disable warships? That's a problem.

      There are an infinite number of possibilities to look for, and since Cisco doesn't manufacture everything in-house, they really don't have much hope of detecting that none of the infinite possible modifications have been made. They wouldn't be able to check for everything even if they did manufacture everything themselves. If I was going to compromise a piece of equipment I'd get someone on the design staff if I could. Yes there are an almost infinite number of possible threats but a MUCH smaller number of feasible ones. My point is that it's easy to think of threats but most of them will be practically impossible to execute or not very useful in real life.
  16. Occam's Razor by tamrood · · Score: 1

    Since the hardware CAN do this, then it was designed to do this, it does do this, and always has. This is strictly a question of whether they would be able to detect one that was not theirs.

    --
    The meaning of your Life is up to you. Mean well. -- Me, 9/11/2001
  17. Technical details of malicious hardware by Sam+King · · Score: 5, Informative

    For those of you who are interested, you can find more technical details of how we designed and implemented malicious hardware from here

    -- computer scientists from University of Illinois

  18. it is important to carefully inspected new gear. by atarione · · Score: 4, Funny

    if your new rack mount routers and switches say "crisco" on the front you may have a problem.

    --
    actually I am happy to see you, however that is in fact a banana in my pocket.
  19. Great Case, if true. by gnutoo · · Score: 0

    It shows the difficulty of getting at non networked facilities of your enemy and the stupidity of trusting equipment made by them. Verifiable free software and hardware offer solutions to both of these problems and that's what the military should demand. Trusting the enemy with secrets you won't trust your customers with is insulting. It's insane when your client is the military.

    1. Re:Great Case, if true. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Give it a rest, Twitter.

  20. Government purchasing by sjbe · · Score: 1

    I am generally for free trade and against protectionism, but I am leaning more and more towards the need for a law that makes it mandatory that all gear (guns, routers, computers, coffee makers, etc.) purchased by the Government for any use that is even remotely sensitive be made in the US by US owned companies. That won't necessarily solve this kind of problem, but it would certainly make it far easier to prosecute entities who do things that threaten our national security. As for "prosecuting" the military has weapons for that sort of thing. Lot cheaper to send a team of Navy Seals to handle a situation than to insist everything be US made.

    On a more serious note, I think you should take some time to look at how the US government does procurement. Typically the US government is EXTREMELY rigorous (to the point of stupidity sometimes) in how they source, where they source from, the design of the products, how much will be paid and when. Generally speaking the US military and other security agencies are quite aware of the security risks of products designed overseas and generally speaking they take appropriate precautions. Being a supplier to the government can be lucrative (ask Haliburton) but it's also often a huge pain in the ass due to the security and regulations to (hopefully) keep ner-do-wells from ripping the government off or endangering national security.
    1. Re:Government purchasing by Reality+Master+201 · · Score: 1

      As for "prosecuting" the military has weapons for that sort of thing. Lot cheaper to send a team of Navy Seals to handle a situation than to insist everything be US made.


      Ha. Yeah. Let's send the military after, say, China where a significant amount of the goods the US consumes are made.

      Notwithstanding the economic and trade disaster that would ensue (take a look at who owns US debt these days), they could fuck us up militarily. They've got nukes, they've got a way, way larger army than we do, and ain't nobody dumb enough to take our side in that little tussle. We've got the best weapons and a very well trained army. They've got numbers and weapons that are good enough.

    2. Re:Government purchasing by _Sprocket_ · · Score: 1

      You must've stopped reading before the second paragraph which begins "On a more serious note..."

    3. Re:Government purchasing by sjbe · · Score: 1

      Dude, lost and found called. They have your sense of humor whenever you want to pick it up.

    4. Re:Government purchasing by dreamchaser · · Score: 1

      Yes, I know exactly how the Government does procurement, having had to deal with it often enough in a previous job. That has nothing to do with what I suggested, which would be a radical departure from the free reign allowed to companies WRT to outsourcing the manufacture of devices that are critical to national defense and infrastructure.

    5. Re:Government purchasing by Reality+Master+201 · · Score: 1

      Your mother fucks donkeys for money.

    6. Re:Government purchasing by sjbe · · Score: 1

      would be a radical departure from the free reign allowed to companies WRT to outsourcing the manufacture of devices that are critical to national defense and infrastructure. Such as? Seriously, I'm curious about your experiences. I've got a lot of experience with global sourcing though mostly in the private sector. I've also had exposure to government procurement though it's not my main expertise. I'm aware of many instances of defense infrastructure being outsourced (recent example: the Northrop/EADS tanker contract) but I'm hardly an expert on the matter. What have you seen outsourced that is genuinely critical and you feel should not be outsourced? No joke, I'd like to hear your thoughts on the matter.

    7. Re:Government purchasing by dreamchaser · · Score: 1

      Seriously? Everything. We're buying fuel tankers from Airbus, routers made in China, weapons systems made in Britain. This makes me sound like a protectionist and I'm not but I think that everything we use with regards to national defense should be made right here in the US. Not only would it help keep some manufacturing jobs here but it would just make me feel a lot safer.

      As for my experiences, those were mostly with providing people, consulting and services to the Government, not gear. I seriously can't and won't go into details here on this forum though. No huge secrets but I have signed NDA's in the past WRT to this and I'm not sure if they are still in effect or not. I was just acknowledging that I know how onerous it can be to deal with selling anything to the Government.

    8. Re:Government purchasing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      " they could fuck us up militarily. They've got nukes, they've got a way, way larger army than we do, and ain't nobody dumb enough to take our side in that little tussle. We've got the best weapons and a very well trained army. They've got numbers and weapons that are good enough."

      Thank you for that sterling analysis. Now would you care to explain to the Iraqi army how it got it ass kicked so hard it did not even show up the second time? Numbers do not count for much anymore. In the day and age of guns that can fire more then 1,000,000 a minute shear numbers are much less important. And although China does indeed have nukes they are fully aware that the response would sterilize every inch of their land.
      It is a case of what are you gaining vs what are you loosening. And in that game China would loose. They may even get a few through. But annihilation is a really strong motivator.

    9. Re:Government purchasing by sjbe · · Score: 1

      Not only would it help keep some manufacturing jobs here but it would just make me feel a lot safer. I understand. Believe it or not I used to feel the same way. I had to be involved in global sourcing for quite a while to come to terms with the idea that maybe, just maybe, it's ok if we buy some stuff elsewhere. It is not an intuitive idea, that's for sure and it IS a little unsettling to rely on something manufactured in a country you might not totally trust.

      Certainly there are critical items that absolutely should never be manufactured anywhere but in the US. But I'd submit that some less critical items are probably OK to do elsewhere. We can (and should) debate about where the cutoff should be, but I don't really care if the pencils the army uses are manufactured in China or not. Silly example I know, but that's the point. Not "everything" has to be made in the US for it to be useful and safe.
    10. Re:Government purchasing by dreamchaser · · Score: 1

      That's why I said everything that has a bearing on national defense. I think we basically agree.

      In general I'm all for free trade. I could care less if call centers move to India, or if we buy toys made in China (lead free please!). When it comes to cricital components though, they should be a bit closer to home. That goes for any network hardware used by the Government, too.

    11. Re:Government purchasing by Artuir · · Score: 1

      Where can I subscribe to this newsletter?

    12. Re:Government purchasing by Reality+Master+201 · · Score: 1

      Ha. Oh, man. Funny. Thanks.

  21. Re:free software distributes the effort. by gartogg · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Items with high capital costs don't work well as "open source;" basically, the manufacturing plants costs so many billions of dollars that no one who isn't doing proprietary work could afford it. Even if you could open source chip design (a dicey proposition, since there are many fewer EE Phds that want to donate time than there are CS Phds,) there are still difficulties with the actual manufacturing, and we would still need to guarantee the physical chips, which are individual, and cannot be "re-compiled;" if you think there may be an issue with a batch, you can't start over without paying for new chips.

    Maybe, however, I am missing something about the procedure you are proposing; what parts would be open source?

    --
    I'm a concientious .sig objector.
  22. How many back doors? Who has the keys? by natoochtoniket · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The question is not whether Cisco routers have back doors. That has to be assumed. If I was running NSA over the last several decades, I would have my people deep inside every communication equipment manufacturer. The manufacturers management might not even know about it.

    The NSA surely has arranged to have one or more back doors designed into virtually every kind of communications switch. The only Cisco employees who would know about them would be the NSA people who work inside Cisco, and some regular Cisco employees who have been cleared. If this has not been done, the NSA senior managers should be fired or jailed.

    The real questions are: How many back doors are there? and who has the keys? The (assumed) NSA back door might not be the only one. There is a possibility that the Chinese or Indian chip-fab or software contractors have also installed back doors for their own governments.

    With billion-gate machines, a few thousand extra gates would be hard to see. If the extra logic looks like instruction-cache, but just has a little extra code, it would be almost impossible.

  23. Re:free software distributes the effort. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative
    "inTheLoo" is a twitter sockpuppet. He shifts from this to the post above to karma whore, but the message is the same. Use free software and all your problems will disappear. He doesn't understand nor does he care about capital costs or anything else - if only you would put your code on Sourceforge everything will be magically OK.

    Not counting the one you're replying to, he's already posted in this article with two other accounts, so YOU WILL hear him out, or else. He's probably compensated on a per-post, per-account basis.

    At heart, twitter is really a xenophobe, and his "Communist China is evil" argument is an old one.

  24. An Evil Competitor. by gnutoo · · Score: 1, Insightful

    I think RMS summed up the current US relationship with China quite well:

    Rather than conserve oil, Bush is launching a new Cold War against Russia and China for control of the dwindling supplies. McCain has similar ideas. Unlike the first Cold War, in which countries that respected human rights most of the time opposed Communist dictatorships, this will be a contest between two groups of brutal tyrants, both of which deserve the opposition of all people of good will. I think these evil regimes will use this Cold War as an excuse to become even worse. Both sides will sponsor terrorists to attack the other side, and then both sides will use the "terrorist threat" as an excuse to further trample the human rights of their people.

    The rise of "IP" and corporate interests over democracy in the US has never been clearer than in the last five years. Everything you own can be confiscated for suspicion of "making available" crappy RIAA music that can be found on any radio station. Your email, web browsing, phone conversations and church can all be monitored without a warrent. Those who object will be put on "non fly lists" that are used by banks, employers even the local gym, so the accused is essentially proscribed. The military is now authorized to act against US Citizens in "an emergency". Massive voter fraud has been proved in several major elections. In short, most of the bill of rights has been violated in the interest of government and corporate power. Trade with China has not made China more free, it has made us more like them.

    1. Re:An Evil Competitor. by smittyoneeach · · Score: 2, Insightful

      two groups of brutal tyrants
      I find a considerable amount of what RMS has to say at least thoughtful and challenging, except on political topics.
      --
      Get thee glass eyes, and, like a scurvy politician, seem to see things thou dost not.--King Lear
    2. Re:An Evil Competitor. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Get yer tin foil hats here, tin foil hats on sale!

    3. Re:An Evil Competitor. by Free+the+Cowards · · Score: 2, Informative

      The military is now authorized to act against US Citizens in "an emergency". I think that 1807 is a little too far in the past to call "now".
      --
      If you mod me Overrated, you are admitting that you have no penis.
    4. Re:An Evil Competitor. by hesaigo999ca · · Score: 1

      I couldn't agree more!

    5. Re:An Evil Competitor. by dedazo · · Score: 2, Informative

      Everything you own can be confiscated for suspicion of "making available" crappy RIAA music that can be found on any radio station. Your email, web browsing, phone conversations and church can all be monitored without a warrent [etc]

      You know twitter, my dad and his brothers lived through Argentina's "Dirty War". I didn't really understand what they went through until I was a little older and he asked me to play (and pay attention to) one of his old LP records. It's amazing how a simple song will open our eyes to things you can't grasp when they are explained in other ways. If you ever have a chance to listen to "Yo Te Nombro" (would translate roughly to "I Say Your Name") by Nacha Guevara, do take the opportunity to do so. It's a powerful statement of all the things you lose (the most important of which is your own humanity) in an environment of total and complete repression.

      I doubt you will ever stop humping the "I hate M$" horse, but maybe what you need is to have some sense of measure when you talk about what a horrible place the US has become now that the RIAA can search your computer, just so you can make a point about your racially-charged dislike of China, which I assume is no different from the one you've displayed in the past towards India and other countries.

      --
      Web2.0: I love when people Flickr my cuil and digg my boingboing until my google is reddit and I start to yahoo
    6. Re:An Evil Competitor. by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      I find a considerable amount of what RMS has to say at least thoughtful and challenging, except on political topics.

      So uh, which country are you alleging is neither brutal nor tyrannical?

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    7. Re:An Evil Competitor. by smittyoneeach · · Score: 1

      Consider a reasonable definition of "tyranny":
      http://dictionary.reference.com/search?r=2&q=Tyranny
      China, though I haven't researched the matter thoroughly, might qualify.
      If you think the US a tyranny, then I wish you could go live in an actual tyranny, briefly, for comparison.

      --
      Get thee glass eyes, and, like a scurvy politician, seem to see things thou dost not.--King Lear
    8. Re:An Evil Competitor. by gnutoo · · Score: 1

      If what you say were true, you would know how these things start and your relatives would be very nervous right now. Friends of mine are survivors/refugees of Nazi Germany, the Soviet Union, Franco's Spain, Palestine, Vietnam and Guatemala. All of them that I'm in touch with are terrified of what they see. Which violations do you defend? Invasion of privacy, newspapers being raided, repression of opposition groups, rampant paranoia, torture and conquest, what do you think are appropriate for your new home? It can happen here and it will if we let it.

      Less importantly, why do you hate Twitter so much? All he's ever done is stand up for people's rights? Why do you defend the RIAA and Microsoft? They are instruments of repression that inevitably feed into the theft of dignity you both take so seriously and are so contemptuous of at the same time.

    9. Re:An Evil Competitor. by drinkypoo · · Score: 2, Insightful

      If you think the US a tyranny, then I wish you could go live in an actual tyranny, briefly, for comparison.

      arbitrary or unrestrained exercise of power; despotic abuse of authority. - check! It's just in other countries. the government or rule of a tyrant or absolute ruler. - check! The executive branch has been heading towards full dictatorial powers and can now "legally" seize them in case of an emergency, in so many words. oppressive or unjustly severe government on the part of any ruler. - check! In my opinion just the laws against victimless crime are sufficient to qualify. One percent of our population is in prison. And while we ostensibly do not permit cruel or unusual punishment, not only do we kill people for crimes (as if it solved anything) but we do it in horribly inhumane ways; while hanging has gone out of vogue (breaking or at least damaging someone's neck and strangling them by their own weight, which can take minutes) we still electrocute people (causing their body to dance, shake, twitch, and convulse for some time) or use a gas chamber (in which you have ample time to think about your impending death.) At least the lethal injection is relatively "humane" (as if putting someone to death unnecessarily after our social system has by definition failed them could ever be termed as such.) undue severity or harshness. - The system is full of it! Shit, you can potentially get sent to jail for years for copying a DVD for personal use! This government is completely out of control and just because it's worse in other places doesn't mean it's not bad here. Your standards are just so low that you're willing to put up with a government which repudiates everything this nation ostensibly stands for and deliberately causes pain and suffering in the name of profit.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    10. Re:An Evil Competitor. by smittyoneeach · · Score: 1

      Shit, you can potentially get sent to jail for years for copying a DVD for personal use!
      I could also be potentially hit by a jet aircraft.
      Is my government, in addition to being tyrannical, negligent concerning overall safety, by permitting, in its despotic abuse of authority by an absolute ruler, this obviously dangerous air travel above my head?
      You sig nearly causes me to dump this thread, but let me leave you with a link to a rather fashionable refutation of your charge of tyranny:
      http://www.zazzle.com/zortmeister/product/235250760192832758
      --
      Get thee glass eyes, and, like a scurvy politician, seem to see things thou dost not.--King Lear
    11. Re:An Evil Competitor. by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      You sig nearly causes me to dump this thread, but let me leave you with a link to a rather fashionable refutation of your charge of tyranny:

      If you were an individual with dark skin on death row basically because you're not white (where people who are statistically are more likely to get off) then perhaps you would change your tune. You don't seem to understand that there are people other than you in this country. The tyranny just isn't spread evenly, but then, it never is. And again, most of the tyranny is directed outwards, which is another reason why you haven't noticed so much of it.

      P.S. "fashionable" makes me less likely to follow your link, not more. I don't follow fashion - that'd be a joke.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    12. Re:An Evil Competitor. by smittyoneeach · · Score: 1

      This approach moral equivalency approach takes you down the road of all governments being tyrannies. No "perfect" government is possible, so there will be a non-zero count of people unjustly imprisoned.
      Clearly, this must be minimized.
      The link is to a t-shirt offer with the words:
      "Caesari si viveret, ad remum dareris"
      If Caesar were alive, you'd be chained to an oar
      By which I mean to say, if the US (presuming that your are in fact sitting in the US) really were a tyranny, there would be some actual tyrannical stuff going on. I wouldn't wish such, and I tend to think I'd be among those organizing a return to better times, were such a hypothetical to materialize.
      And the probability is a non-zero one. While I dispute the charge that the US is a tyranny at present, the drift of history since, say, Woodrow Wilson is in the direction of greater concentrated power in DC. Things like Social Security and the War Powers Resolution are the main threats, binding people to the Fed and giving too much latitude to the Executive.

      --
      Get thee glass eyes, and, like a scurvy politician, seem to see things thou dost not.--King Lear
    13. Re:An Evil Competitor. by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      By which I mean to say, if the US (presuming that your are in fact sitting in the US) really were a tyranny, there would be some actual tyrannical stuff going on.

      What I am saying is that there is some actual tyrannical stuff going on, it's just not happening to you. To be fair, it's not happening to me either; I'm simply not in the primary target demographic to be used and abused. I am not especially physically fit, I am old enough and smart enough to question orders, I am a white male (well, mostly) and do not come out of the box in a disadvantaged position. On the other hand, no one is free while others are oppressed, and not only that, but my tax dollars are doing the oppressing.

      Anyway, it's easy to say you don't live in a tyranny when you're part of the privileged class. But that body is shrinking. By the time they come for me, or for you, there will be no one left to speak out. Or did you think they built a big prison in Alaska for fun?

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    14. Re:An Evil Competitor. by smittyoneeach · · Score: 1

      I'm simply not in the primary target demographic to be used and abused.
      You are asserting that an organization, presumably the government, (or some subset of it) exists, which has "target demographics" it is consciously abusing?
      I suppose you could correlate the locations of Planned Parenthood clinics (which reveals a politically incorrect result) and conclude that eugenics is alive and well.

      no one is free while others are oppressed
      Yeah, I think that Tibetans and Palestinians are in a suck spot. Two points:
      - I don't see those holding the Absolute Moral Authority Cards taking on any personal pain in the matter. The leadership, e.g. Jimmy Carter, excels at telling me how to feel, but rarely, as a group, sets much of a personal example.
      - We really need not be so species-centric in our aims. We can, for example, include plants in the calculus: http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20080414/od_afp/switzerlandenvironmentplantsoffbeat_080414190243

      There seems, to me, a near-contradiction in the simultaneous desire for individual liberty on the one hand, and the earnest desire of some to consolidate power in the name of "fixing" stuff on the other. Most of the time, government "fixes" are cures worse than the disease, particularly where things like health and retirement are concerned.
      --
      Get thee glass eyes, and, like a scurvy politician, seem to see things thou dost not.--King Lear
    15. Re:An Evil Competitor. by dedazo · · Score: 1

      you would know how these things start

      Yes I do, thus my point that you don't, and you're just exaggerating, because on the internets no one can hear me scream.

      Less importantly, why do you hate Twitter so much?

      Hate is an emotional affliction I normally associate with disenfranchised teenagers and the intellectually challenged. I would recommend not letting it consume you, but you're beyond that, obviously.

      All he's ever done is stand up for people's rights?

      Lying is not "standing up" for anything, except your own agenda.

      Wait a minute "gnutoo", why do you care what I think about twitter?

      --
      Web2.0: I love when people Flickr my cuil and digg my boingboing until my google is reddit and I start to yahoo
  25. the real thing probably also has back doors--ours by spirit_fingers · · Score: 1

    I'm certain that if the Chinese haven't in fact installed back doors in bogus (or even real) Cisco routers that they manufacture, they at least have contingency plans for doing so. Their intelligence service wouldn't be doing their job properly if they hadn't. It's too good of an opportunity for intelligence gathering.

    Conversely, I would fully expect the CIA or NSA to have programs in place to surreptitiously install back doors in routers for our use, either with or without the manufacturers' cooperation. After all, Cisco routers are installed all over the world. It seems only logical that they would find this opportunity every bit as enticing as the Chinese.

  26. not as good as the original by surfi · · Score: 1

    experts at Cisco have examined some of the counterfeit routers in detail and proclaimed that they contain no back doors only the original Cisco routers have built-in back doors!
  27. Deja vu - COCOM, Berlin Wall, anyone?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    It's funny, how quickly corporate greed will make politicians forget history.
    Some analyst say, that the sudden collapse of the USSR, Berlin Wall etc. was attributed to an American secret service mission, in which CIA secretly supplied the Russians with "smuggled" computer equipments, which were on the COCOM technology embargo list. These computers used rigged chips and in the eighties the US government demonstrated that they contorl key installations by sabotaging an oil transport system - and possibly others. The Russians got into a situation, when they had no idea how deeply their military, etc. infrastructure was compromised without any hope to regain control.
    Americans forget very fast. How long do they think, other countries would do the same - especially, if production is sent to a country, which has been known for a long time as the biggest emerging future economic power, which also happens to be ruled by totalitarian political ideology? Is anyone surprized here? It took only a few governments in the USA to fall for the same trojan horse that they used themselves. But who cares, the shareholders are happy. For now.

  28. Backdoors or "bugs"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Did they look for any "accidental" bugs which could have been abused?

  29. Re:free software distributes the effort. by Jherek+Carnelian · · Score: 1

    Items with high capital costs don't work well as "open source;" basically, the manufacturing plants costs so many billions of dollars that no one who isn't doing proprietary work could afford it. That's counter to the reality of the current market. Almost all "computers," including routers and many other types of specialized systems are manufactured on contract. Lots of the components are manufactured on contract too, TSMC and IBM are some of the largest contract semiconductor manufacturers in the world. The ginormous capital costs of manufacturing plants and fabs are amortized over years of contract manufacturing.

    Even if you could open source chip design (a dicey proposition, since there are many fewer EE Phds that want to donate time than there are CS Phds,) I think we are beyond the point where "working for free" is assumed to be a requirement for opens source anything. The tens of thousands of engineers employed by Red Hat, HP, IBM, Sun, etc to work on open source systems sure aren't doing it for free.

    still need to guarantee the physical chips, which are individual, and cannot be "re-compiled;" if you think there may be an issue with a batch, you can't start over without paying for new chips. Which is the same regardless of whether the design is open or closed. The difference being that with an open design there is one less place for badware to be hidden and the opportunity for a really cautious customer to spend beaucoup bucks on their own manufacturing run of components under whatever conditions (armed guards, etc) they might feel is necessary.
  30. Brutal US Actions. by gnutoo · · Score: 1, Insightful

    The US invasion of Iraq has cost the US more than 4,000 servicemen and Iraq one million dead, 2.5 million refugees, an irreparable infrastructure and horrific civil war. If that's not bad enough for you, the advocacy and use of torture should be. Wake up! we are now a terrible abuser of human rights and we are doing it for oil, big fat "best year ever" oil. What we do to others we will do to ourselves sooner than later.

    1. Re:Brutal US Actions. by smittyoneeach · · Score: 2
      Emphasis mine:

      an irreparable infrastructure and horrific civil war. If that's not bad enough for you
      Is the goal here to trade examples of hyperbole, or to engage in a thorough critical analysis of some arguably crappy policy decisions and tragedies that resulted therefrom?
      I had subscribed to RMS's politcal RSS feed for a while, but the continuous stream of unhelpful thought along the lines of your quoted fragment became too much.
      Clinton, Bush, et al. are just flexing the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_Powers_Act. If you want my attention, tell me how we're going to restore the separation of powers written within the United States Constitution, and require a President to get a proper declaration of war before galavanting. Short of that, what are you doing but setting yourself up for More Of Same, sir?
      --
      Get thee glass eyes, and, like a scurvy politician, seem to see things thou dost not.--King Lear
    2. Re:Brutal US Actions. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Is the goal here to trade examples of hyperbole

      This is twitter, what did you expect? His posts (regardless of topic) are nothing more than buzzword-compliant hyperbole that barely deserve rebuke, no matter which of his nine accounts he happens to be using.

      Quoting Richard Stallman's political views (his blog reads like a 9/11 conspiracy nutter homepage) is just another example of how desperate he is for attention.

  31. Re:it is important to carefully inspected new gear by MarkGriz · · Score: 1

    if your new rack mount routers and switches say "crisco" on the front you may have a problem. True, but you can bake the moistest, most delicious brownies right on top of them.
    --
    Beauty is in the eye of the beerholder.
  32. Re:free software distributes the effort. by njcoder · · Score: 1

    Even if you could open source chip design You can open source chip design.
  33. Re:free software distributes the effort. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Even if you could open source chip design ...


    Sun has open-sourced the Niagra designs under the GPL, and you can license UltraSPARC from SPARC Inc. Unlike Xeons and Opterons, you can actually get SPARC CPUs from at least two manufacturers: Sun and Fujitsu.
  34. Re:the real thing probably also has back doors--ou by corsec67 · · Score: 1

    And to see an example that makes your theory not very far-fetched at all, one only needs to look at the steganography in color laser printers, where almost all color laser printers embed identifying information into each page printed out, in the form of yellow dots. (More here at the Eff.)

    It isn't like "New and improved: know which printer printed every page, whether you want it or not!" was a good marketing slogan.

    --
    If I have nothing to hide, don't search me
  35. re: contain no back doors by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Of course they don't contain any backdoors, they're counterfeit Cisco routers

  36. US made by zogger · · Score: 1

    I think the past couple months of economic headlines are putting to rest that notion that destroying your manufacturing base is a good idea. We were a lot better off when a lot more stuff *was* US made.

    1. Re:US made by sjbe · · Score: 1

      I think the past couple months of economic headlines are putting to rest that notion that destroying your manufacturing base is a good idea. Where did you get the idea that the US manufacturing base has been "destroyed"? Sure, a lot of labor intensive work has migrated to locations with low labor cost. But US manufacturing output has increased in the last 10 years. For example manufacturing output in Michigan rose 6.6% from 2001-2006 and Michigan is one of the harder hit states in the recent economic downturn. Employment in manufacturing has fallen but actual output has increased quite steadily. It's no different than the farm industry. Fewer individuals are directly employed in farming but output is higher than ever. Here is a link to a powerpoint presentation given by an economist at the Fed. His basic conclusions? Manufacturing in the US has never been higher. and productivity increases have been massive. Disagree if you want, but please support your position with facts and data, not vague assertions that the sky is falling.

      We were a lot better off when a lot more stuff *was* US made. Why do you say that? There are very few economists who would agree with you. Please study the concept of comparative advantage. While there are certainly downsides to global trade, there is overwhelming evidence that on balance it is beneficial to those who participate. Just ask North Korea how successful their economy has been by isolating themselves from the rest of the world.
  37. Crap when they were Linux too! Buffalo is BSD... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Linksys routers were crap back when they used to run Linux-based firmware too. I got tired of repeatedly rebooting my old early-generation original Linux-based firmware Linksys router and bought a cheap $39 Buffalo WiFi router at Bust Buy, and when I got it home and set it up, I was surprised to learn the Buffalo router was running a *BSD-based operating system. It's slow as hell to configure, but one set up and running, it is an unstoppable juggernaut. Best forty bucks I've ever spent on a piece of consumer grade network hardware.

    I should paint it pink and stick a pair of ears on it, and a little toy bass drum in front of it, because it keeps going and going and going....

  38. That is what you get buying from the flea market. by Neanderthal+Ninny · · Score: 1

    Since contractors has been getting all of the money from the "War on Terrorism" this is the only way that Pentagon could afford "Cisco" routers.
    Also could be getting these from back of cars and SUV down the street.

  39. Who Cares by HermMunster · · Score: 0, Troll

    And this is supposed to be my concern how? $20,000 for toilet seats and I'm supposed to worry about the military having counterfeit routers? I'd say they got took just like anyone else.

    Move on. Stop violating our Constitution, stop torturing people. Comply with the Constitution of the United States and stay out of our lives.

    --
    You can lead a man with reason but you can't make him think.
  40. Re:it is important to carefully inspected new gear by Tuoqui · · Score: 1

    Damnit I knew they were counterfeiting when they said they made an Authentic Crisco Router

    --
    09F911029D74E35BD84156C5635688C0
    +2 Troll is Slashdot's way of saying groupthink is confused
  41. Like Koolaid much? by zogger · · Score: 0

    I said what I said because it isn't theory to me or something I have to lookup on wikipedia, I can remember. You just keep on believing the wallstreet hustlers, they never lie....they are only out for you and the working dude....in fact, they are near charities! You just go on thinking 30 year mortgages are better and a better deal for people rather than 10 year mortgages (and paying near 50% of your income on housing is better than 25%), or that 5 year car loans are better now than 12 or 18 month car loans, or that health insurance so cheap that guys went door to door selling it and you had to go *out of your freekin way* to try and find a crappy job that didn't have it, is worse than today. You go ahead and compare an economy where one low to medium paying blue collar job was enough for a home and car and college education for multiple kids and vacations and still have enough left over for a good savings account, why, today two blue collar incomes to not do that is so much better, with added bonus some strangers raise your kids!

    Sorry, I just can't relate to casino huckerstism, it is the most obvious of congames. We have an economy now designed to make billionaires out of millionaires and they've kept it propped up by selling off the seed corn and issuing credit and printing up dollars by the boatload. The dollar is worth shit and falling so fast we are in peril of it being the "petrodollar" for not much longer, and once that happens, have fun, great depression version 2 on crack and steroids.

    We had a 50 state internal "common market" where we free traded around and it worked, because there wasn't a huge skewed difference in cost of living and pay scales, and by not exporting the cash so much it acted as a monetary force multiplier. Now? So far in debt they might as well give it up declare bankruptcy, print up more zeroes on the bills and pay them all off with the toilet paper it will be and start to rebuild.

    Really, I am sorry, but you are pushing what is in essence a cult like mantra pushed by the masterminds who now need "liquidity injections" to stay solvent. They are *thieves* man, grifters, at the highest level, and I can't help it if you can't see it yet, but you are obviously hooked, swalloed that bait bigtime. ooh, and you mentioned dipshit north korea! Like that is the only other example or implying the US used to be like that? Whatever, it was lame, stupid really...sorry.. My only advice for you is step away from whatever you are reading and start from scratch with an open mind and go back and look at history, talk to a lot of older folks who aren't MBA wall street shills and assholes. You'll get a different perspective. We had hoovervilles a long time ago, and increasingly we are now starting to see "bushvilles", and you can look that one up. The economy is skewing from building the middle class to destroying the middle class in favor of just two classes, it is pure feudalistic in nature.

    Here's a real big clue -> "debt" is not "produced wealth". When the US really produced wealth, and we were building the largest most truly wealthy middle class ever seen, we were the largest creditor nation..now it is the opposite. The exact opposite. That is the most basic simple clue I can offer. Being in hock past your eyeballs is just never a real swift move. Have a good day.

    1. Re:Like Koolaid much? by sjbe · · Score: 1

      Nice post. Hardly any facts, no meaningful statistics, and certainly no coherent arguments but I'm the one "drinking the coolaid". Sure... You stated earlier that the US has no manufacturing left which is demonstrably wrong and now you are off on some useless rant about national debt, 30 year mortgages and MBAs. I've no idea what you're so pissed about but it clearly upsets you whatever it is. That's one of the more random bits of ranting I've read in quite a while.

  42. Re:free software distributes the effort. by twatt3r · · Score: 0

    You probably still use closed-source, proprietary bread you buy from a store.

    I insist on open-source, GPL bread, with recipes freely available. You can't know your food is safe unless you can debug the source yourself.

    Compile times for sourdough are a bitch, tho.

    Windoze lulz.

  43. Re:free software distributes the effort. by CrazedWalrus · · Score: 2, Interesting

    This is all coming down to the fact that we need to assume NO network is secure; that we may be subject to man-in-the-middle attacks even within our own networks.

    The solution is not to verify every chip, because that's probably impossible. Somebody's going to sneak something in somewhere. The solution is to make all data that travels through the chip unintelligible -- e.g. point-to-point encryption for *all* connections.

    Once you encrypt all communications, the biggest security concern becomes the endpoints, not the myriad of things in between.

  44. Coming soon: The Ware on Counterfeits by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Clearly this is a big issue. I expect a decleration of "war" against it soon.

    Just say No!
    (to drugs)
    (to piracy)
    (to premarital sex)
    (to counterfit products)

  45. Re:And outsourcing? no US espionage in routers? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Who protects the rest of the world from trojans the US built into routers?

    The only sensible answer is:

    Do not trust. If you are a governement, compile the software yourself!
    Use Linux routers!

  46. Re:How many back doors? Who has the keys? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    NSA has a key into Windows that they don't talk about (Google nsakey). It would be pretty hard for one employee to sneak a backdoor into a piece of gear given all the code reviews, QA builds, production builds, etc. Additionally, I never know what I'm going to be working on from month to month, and people would get suspicious if I started submitting code updates for unrelated stuff. You really need collusion from several people to make this happen.

  47. how to define security by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    maybe it's just some hype at all
    freedom = no control/can't control/uncontrol
    security = know all/apply all/absolute power

    maybe 2 r against each other

    trust = freedom + security
    cheat = freedom - security
    fake = security - freedom

  48. Again: the best security practice is.... by bamwham · · Score: 1

    keep mision critical systems off-line. Do I need to repeat it? Perhaps with wireless routers there is an issue, but the ones in the picture looked to be of the wired variety. If they are on closed systems, with good physical security, it doesn't matter how many back doors they have.

  49. White House Pedofiles Nailed! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Looks like GWB, Chaney, Condie et al., have been nailed as pedofiles.

    Only a few hours, and the whole middle-level of the Federal Gov will be nailed as well.

    What a shame!

    It will be fun seeing the dangling dead bodies from gallows on the Mall when all this goes to furition.

    Toodles

  50. Why are we not surprised? by Douglas+Goodall · · Score: 1
    For those of us that have been paying attention, none of this comes as a surprise. As the cheap Linksys (and others) wireless routers started appearing everywhere, I started asking about the safety of infrastructure elements manufactured in China. Whether it is counterfeit Cisco hardware, or mainstream commercial items from Best Buy, our domestic Internet is constructed using cheap imported elements. In some cases encryption can help on the data leakage, but nothing would help if a carefully crafted packet of death" shut down every linksys router in America. We have only seen the beginning of "Network Hardware Terror Attacks".

    I could suggest that we start building our routers using inexpensive computers running open source *nix operating systems, but the firmware in the nic cards might be infected. The fine line between software and hardware means that malware can exist at any level. I would think that for engineers with no ethics, there is a wide open world of opportunity creating infected hardware for the future. I think we are on the brink of a "Warm War" where the weapons are computers and communications.

  51. Cisco is cloned due to profit margin--ripoff by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Just one more reason to buy gear from the myriad other companies making top notch network hardware.

    Shame on us all for building Cisco into what is has become; by blindly buying their gear for all the wrong reasons.

  52. Re: They called them "Flash" bulbs by Douglas+Goodall · · Score: 1

    I guess film could be called "flash memory" after the flash went off.

  53. Not surprised by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I used to work for a reseller, which happened to be a Cisco Silver partner, as a Cisco auditor.

    Counterfeit equipment became a huge problem. There are so many fakes floating around, it's not funny. Fear anything with an RJ-45 connector that says GLG in it.

    Some of the fakes were so blatant, it wasn't funny. Things like mispelling 'Cisco' on the box label. We were getting stuff that was Factory Sealed from China (and since the customers wanted Factory Sealed, we didn't open and test it).

    It got to the point where anything coming out of Asia was suspect. And some of the counterfeits are very very good. I had one set of 1721 Routers.. there was only one way I could *prove* beyond the shadow of a doubt they were fake. When I opened them up and took them apart, I tried to insert a DIMM (taken from an identical model 1721) into the fake ones... and they wouldn't fit. The tab in the slot was about a half inch to the right, just enough so that it wouldn't fit properly.

    The worst part of it was that, knowing they were fake, we shipped them to the customer as legit anyway.

    If you find a good deal on Cisco high-end WIC's, 2600XM Series routers, Gbics (both full sized and SPF's), take it with a grain of salt and caveat emptor. Even if it's from a reseller you do business with all the time, it may just be a matter of their auditing departments not knowing what to look for or their shady sales people trying to put one over on you.

  54. They aren't the same by the_raptor · · Score: 1

    RTFA below, the gear isn't the same, and do not use all the same parts and process which leads to the fakes having a higher failure rate. These probably aren't being produced in the same factory as the genuine gear, but probably a near by one that has contacts in the real factory to supply the plans etc.

    http://www.andovercg.com/services/cisco-counterfeit-wic-1dsu-t1-v2.shtml

    --

    ========
    CINC, 4th Penguin Legion
  55. Fake gear was spotted by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    When they noticed it came with more than 90 days of warranty

  56. Armageddon quote right? by egnop · · Score: 1

    Lev Andropov: It's stuck, yes?
    Watts: Back off! You don't know the components!
    Lev Andropov: [annoyed] Components. American components, Russian Components, ALL MADE IN TAIWAN!

  57. You got Crypto AGed by AHuxley · · Score: 1

    Iran got to read its diplomatic cables in the press.
    What did Cisco get to read?
    http://english.ohmynews.com/ArticleView/article_view.asp?menu=A11100&no=381337&rel_no=1&back_url=

    --
    Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
  58. Re: They called them "Flash" bulbs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You're an idiot.

  59. facts, data by zogger · · Score: 1

    I told you I *remember*. Short mortgages and short car notes where the norm, not the exception. One chump change blue collar job was plenty of money to support a large family with just one spouse working, with full benefits, good savings accounts, being able to afford all those kids going to college, and etc. Now, think the economy can match that? I sure ain't seeing it. when I was a younger dude, two spouses working was *rare*, it just wasn't necessary, not a bit.

    I've been listening to these globalist pirates lies for decades now. What do you dispute? That we aren't now the world's largest debtor nation, when a few decades ago we were the largest creditor nation? You catch the news the other day, they are projecting next year that 10% of the entire US population will be receiving food assistance. That's a good economy? You think crappy alleged service jobs and government make work jobs are actually better than the nuts and bolts manufacturing jobs with full benefits they shipped away by the multi millions?? Because that is all that is gaining is mostly McJobs and government drone jobs. Our biggest automakers slide nearer to being just totally bankrupt, always years behind the curve, because they got moribund, lead by wallstreet pirates and corrupt union heads out for short term profits with no forward looking. We got banks needing bailouts from the Fed on *huge* scales, and despite the bailouts tons of them are laying off right and left. This is good? You actually think having to bailout the largest banks is clear sign of a great thriving economy? You really expect me to dig upo links for that basic information, that's been in all the headlines for months now? We have personal bankruptcies and mortgage defaults at the highest levels in generations. the dollar continues to drop in worth daily, personal savings are at the lowest point since the great depression. This is good? that's all verifiable stuff but I ain't someone's personal google researcher either. this is basic, normal headlines information, I just have a memory that covers a longer timespan and can remember what stuff was like when the US actually made most of the stuff we found in the stores, and the economy was just overall better then. the drop has come about exactly parallel with killing off huge segments of the manufacturing base. Look at textiles, or furniture making, mostly gone. Hells bells, we don't even make ball bearing in the US anymore, or even TVs. Noprmal manufactuing things or normal consumer products. Mostly gone.

    Is it all gone, nope, OK- I admit that, it isn't "all" gone, but ton of it gone and a lot of folks hurting and is the economy heavily skewed way towards the more controller class than ever? Heck ya it is and you'd have to be drinking more than a glass of that globalist koolaid to not admit it.

    Now fair trade I could see, but this bullcrap they puish called "free" trade? Nope, scam, conjob, selling off the seedcorn, pawning your tools, just stupid.

    Sure, I admit it is a rant, but that's all true stuff and it's a rant because of those globalist traitors and the lies they have pushed have about ruined it all. I *care* about my neighbors, even the ones I don't know personally, and it is hurting them and will continue to hurt them and it is going to get much worse...hence..the ranting tone. It is deserved, they deserve it. You watch once the buck slides down even more how much folks will be hurting because of fast price rises, just wait and see. This has been around 30 years or so in the making, and everything the bears (and me) said way back when is coming true, because it followed a simple logical progression and it clearly violated the number one principle of wealth-wealth is grown, mined, or manufactured, you can't busy work paper shuffle your way to wealth, not for very long anyway,that is a grifter's scam and is what they have been doing with their toxic waste paper financial products games that they pushed after they sold off and gave away the robust manufacturing base. I guess you had to see

  60. Combating Counterfiet Cisco by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A good way to guarantee that you do not purchase counterfeit equipment is to work with companies who are associated with organizations such as UNEDA. The United Network Equipment Dealer Association (UNEDA) is a worldwide alliance of more than 300 of the leading marketers of pre-owned networking equipment. Members represent the entire spectrum of the secondary market, from companies with hundreds of employees and millions of dollars in inventory to small, entrepreneurial organizations. Together their combined yearly buying clout exceeds $1 billion, representing the sale of millions of pieces of equipment to tens of thousands of customers. UNEDA members must adhere to a strict code of ethics that includes a firm policy against selling any equipment that is not legitimate.

  61. Past IOS security holes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Look at past IOS security holes. When has Cisco IOS ever been secure?

  62. Re:How many back doors? Who has the keys? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Looking at past Cisco security bugs (talk about plenty) and all the bugs SSH/SSL has been subjected to (random numbers and all); Wouldn't it be better if these bugs were not implemented, for the sake of our national security and all... It seems to me more and more that we ourselves have been making these security holes on purpose, and end up paying for it. The recent NSA server down might be due to SSH/SSL keys being subjected to this same bug, e.g. bad certificates that were generated with bad RNG code. -> Guessable secret keys, even for the bad guys who can make the database. -> Again we end up hitting our own feet.