Slashdot Mirror


Senators Want To Punish Nokia, Siemens Over Iran

fast66 writes "After hearing about Nokia-Siemens sale of Internet-monitoring software to Iran, US Senators Schumer and Graham want to bar them from receiving federal contracts. They planned the action after hearing about a joint venture of Nokia Corp. of Finland and Siemens AG of Germany that sold a sophisticated Internet-monitoring system to Iran in 2008. According to Nextgov.com, Schumer and Graham's bill would require the Obama administration to identify foreign companies that export sensitive technology to Iran and ban them from bidding on federal contracts, or renew expiring ones, unless they first stop exports to Iran."

30 of 392 comments (clear)

  1. Because Cisco would never do such a thing by topham · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This is bull shit. Cisco sold the same type of stuff to China.

    This is just more bullshit for the U.S. government to work around trade agreements they've signed in the past.

    1. Re:Because Cisco would never do such a thing by plover · · Score: 4, Insightful

      And Google and Bing and Yahoo! have all cooperated with China (and other chronic human rights abusers) by censoring their search results.

      I guess the U.S. government is just going to have to fall back to using Altavista for a search engine. Don't forget their motto: "Over one million pages indexed!"

      --
      John
    2. Re:Because Cisco would never do such a thing by SquirrelsUnite · · Score: 5, Insightful

      So it's not about freedom or democracy just good old Realpolitik? I don't hate the idea but why not let everyone decide individually if they want to boycott these companies? I'm sure Nokia does more business with consumers in the US than the government and Siemens could be hurt pretty bad if the moral outrage was strong enough.

    3. Re:Because Cisco would never do such a thing by Max+Littlemore · · Score: 5, Insightful

      China does not threaten to bomb israel or destabilize iraq.

      So basically, this is the US trying to force foreign companies into executing the US political agenda.

      Isreal in it's current form is criminal and cruel and the US did more to destabilize Iraq than Iran ever has. But of course those opinions are counter to the US world, so flag waving morons will refuse to accept them as valid.

      Some senators want to punish a couple of non US companies for selling technology to a country that the US prevents it's own from selling technology to? I hope that Nokia and Siemens ignore them. It looks like another case of US selective policing, and the rest of world is sick of that shit.

      I don't agree with Iranian goverment internet censorship, but not for knee jerk "they are the bad guys" reasons, because I know all to well from recent history that the USA are the badder guys. The USA has negative moral authority. Even with the new administration, you guys have a lot of work to do.

      I really hope Nokia and Siemens say "shove it".

      References to US and USA refer to government/politics, not necessarily you, the people.

      --
      I don't therefore I'm not.
    4. Re:Because Cisco would never do such a thing by EbeneezerSquid · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Individuals may boycott these companies if they wish.
      The bill doesn't ban them from doing business IN the United States,
      It bans them from doing WITH the United States Government.

      In other words, as a unit, the Government would be boycotting these companies.

      I do agree with the double-standard; however, The Chinese Communist Party has been far more accepting of gradual loosening and openness than has the Iranian Mullahs. Engagement does work, if the organization you are attempting to engage with is a rational actor.

    5. Re:Because Cisco would never do such a thing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      That is bullshit (forgive linking to a press release, but Nokia Siemens Networks doesn't even make equipment as described).

      It looks like Nokia Siemens sold exactly the things which the USA forced them to include in their system and nothing more. Most of the legal interception requirements have been driven by the US in the first place.

    6. Re:Because Cisco would never do such a thing by digitalunity · · Score: 4, Informative

      About as stupid as these senators apparently. I mean really....

      Siemens, not bidding on federal contracts?

      Bwaaaaaaaaaaaahahahahahaahaaaaaaaaahahhaahhahahaa

      uh huh mmmmmmmmmmmmmm

      my side hurts now. Maybe these senators don't realize, but either directly or indirectly, you'd be hard pressed to find a federal contract that didn't support Siemens somehow. They're a $120 billion a year company making a gazillion little gadgets most senators never heard of, used in everthing from bulldozers to fire alarms.

      This is all political bullshit.

      --
      You can't legislate goodness. Let each to his own destiny, by will of his freely made choices.
    7. Re:Because Cisco would never do such a thing by michaelhood · · Score: 5, Funny

      Google is an American country

      I just woke up from a nap.. what did I miss?

    8. Re:Because Cisco would never do such a thing by Alphager · · Score: 4, Informative

      I think this is also because Nokia sold more than net limiting technology. Apparently they also sold devices which pick up the EMR's emitted by cell phones which allowed police to home in on any person who has a phone on their person - especially to those who are making calls/texting/transmitting data. To my knowledge such technology is not in use in China (currently).

      This is bog-standard technology implemented in any modern network. It's used by 911-operators to home in on your location if you are unable to speak (or cut off) and used by police to follow suspects (in addition to a GPS-Tracker in the car). There's nothing specialy made for repressive regimes; it's just technology which also may be used to suppress people.

    9. Re:Because Cisco would never do such a thing by Unipuma · · Score: 5, Informative

      Actually, the EU is doing its work, and fining companies who abuse their monopoly.
      http://www.sortedsites.info/general-stuff/eu-fine-telefonica.htm
      (Which, in case you were wondering is an European company)
      http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601100&sid=aasUT7jU_bd8
      (Also European)

      It doesn't matter what country your company is from, if you abuse the rules, they go after you. They might even go after all those bank bailouts:
      http://www.reuters.com/article/dealAtoms/idUS391610202420090605

    10. Re:Because Cisco would never do such a thing by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 4, Funny

      Well, let's see:

      - Google buying out California after the latter going bankrupt; and also Texas filing their 5th petition to be purchased again, which was predictably turned down by Their Imperial Majesties Sergey I and Lawrence I

      - President of the Persian Democratic Republic of Iran proposing stronger economic sanctions against the Emirate of the British Isles and Northern Europe, after the latter executed another three juvenile offenders for adultery by stoning.

      - A port of DN4E to Microsoft GNU/Hurd (Microsoft's CEO, Richard M. Stallman, demoed it last month)

  2. Selling to the NSA is good but Iran is bad by tinkerghost · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Unless you're in Iran in which case it's the other way around. Or since neither of these companies are US based companies do we have to decide if the EU likes the US today before they can negotiate contracts?

    1. Re:Selling to the NSA is good but Iran is bad by tinkerghost · · Score: 4, Funny

      There is the "us" and there is the "them". What is confusing you ?

      Is a multinational company that's based outside the US but happens to do business here an "us" or a "them"? I lost my scorecard and can't figure it out anymore.

      As a side note, evidently the equipment sent to Iran is standard telephone switching equipment with digital wiretap capabilities - the same hardware mandated by the US & most other governments.

  3. Yes that makes sense by Dunbal · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Internet monitoring equipment should only be allowed to be sold in "free" countries, like the US... er...

    --
    Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
  4. fucking hacks, both of them by Uberbah · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Where's the blockage of federal contracts to AT&T for spying on American citizens? U.S. officials have a complete lack of self-awareness on issues like spying, detention & torture:

    "I have more than two hours of video footage showing Sheikh Issa's involvement in the torture of more than 25 people," wrote Texas-based lawyer Anthony Buzbee in a letter obtained by the Observer.

    The news of more torture videos involving Issa is another huge blow to the international image of the UAE . . . . The fresh revelations about Issa's actions will add further doubt to a pending nuclear energy deal between the UAE and the US. The deal, signed in the final days of George W Bush, is seen as vital for the UAE. It will see the US share nuclear energy expertise, fuel and technology in return for a promise to abide by non-proliferation agreements. But the deal needs to be recertified by the Obama administration and there is growing outrage in America over the tapes. Congressman James McGovern, a senior Democrat, has demanded that Hillary Clinton, the US secretary of state, investigate the matter and find out why US officials initially appeared to play down its significance.

  5. It's only fascist when they do it by _merlin · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It's the same equipment they sell to the US, UK and others, and they're in compliance with UN and EU regulations. Why is it suddenly evil and deserving of punishment when another government decides to use it?

  6. Don't be so quick to defend the corporations. by GrpA · · Score: 4, Insightful

    As far as I'm concerned, multinational corporations deserve this and have done so for a long time.

    They are crying foul that by selling the tools of oppression to one government, they jeopardize their chances to sell their wares to another.

    That's not hypocrisy on behalf of the governments. That's just politics.

    And they do have a choice to avoid this - by staying out of that market.

    No one forced them to sell systems to allow oppressive regimes to track and crack down on dissidents. They came up with that product all by themselves. And they most certainly would have been aware of what their product was going to be used for.

    If all they sold was phones and phone systems, they wouldn't be in this mess, so I really don't see a problem with the US Government deciding that if Nokia supports it's political enemies, that it shouldn't benefit from US government contracts.

    Corporate pariahs's deserve to be treated as such.

    I don't like what the US government is doing itself in the area of human rights abuse, but I have to admit that I support it on this matter.

    GrpA

    --
    Enjoy science fiction? "Turing Evolved" - AI, Mecha, Androids and rail-gun battles. What more could you want?
    1. Re:Don't be so quick to defend the corporations. by chill · · Score: 4, Interesting

      What about selling to non-oppressive regimes? These systems, and similar ones by Cisco, Alcatel-Lucent, Narus and others are in widespread use throughout the U.S., Europe and the rest of the "free world".

      Been there, installed that.

      Hell, I know of one system that uses a MySQL database to store the warrant and tap info. The interface is an Apache module. The front end is rather ugly closed source GUI written in Israel which sends the info via an HTTPS POST.

      Narus' key products were based on Snort and Wireshark, just on custom super-computer class hardware.

      Gotta love FOSS. With all the hacking tools available for Linux/BSD, including source code, who needs custom code?

      --
      Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
  7. and in Germany? by Tom · · Score: 4, Interesting

    So, now that we here in Germany have introduced Internet censorship (via the crazy Zensursula von der Leyen law, your choice whether "crazy" applies to the law or the person) - will the US senators punish the companies that supply the infrastructure for that as well?

    Oh wait, Germany isn't a "rogue country", right? We don't go by facts, we go by political climate, don't we?

    I'm looking forward to an embargo...

    --
    Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
  8. Re:Turnabout is fair play. by Allicorn · · Score: 4, Funny

    I warned Europeans on this board that protectionism was coming with a Northern Democrat sweep... but oh no

    Yep - damn those Europeans for voting Obama in.

    --
    OMG!!! Ponies!!!
  9. Re:First uncensored post by MrNaz · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Off topic? More like insightful.

    Senators want to punish Iran for placing fetters on freedom of speech and democracy? First do something about the NSA running around like the Stasi, the FBI running around like the Gestapo and the TSA from running around like nosy nannies with clubs. Then sort out the "Free Speech Zone" debacle. Then sort out the PATRIOT Act. Then sort out the US government's working on ACTA treaties that are secret.

    Maybe then they can get all high-horsey about freedom in other parts of the world. Until then, calling Iran "unfree" is a case of the pot calling the kettle black.

    --
    I hate printers.
  10. Re:First uncensored post by GrpA · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Accepting abuses of human rights in other countries is still a bad thing, even if your own government is abusing those very same rights.

    If you don't stand against it openly, even if it is hypocritical to do so patriotically, then there's no reason for those within your own country to desist from their own actions.

    After all, ignoring another country's abuses just because your own country does likewise is even worse than hypocrisy. It's complicity.

    GrpA

    --
    Enjoy science fiction? "Turing Evolved" - AI, Mecha, Androids and rail-gun battles. What more could you want?
  11. Heaven forbid by kalpaha · · Score: 4, Informative

    How dare they sell equipment to implement legally required (and specified by ETSI and 3GPP standards) capabilies for the mobile networks: http://www.nokiasiemensnetworks.com/global/Press/Press+releases/news-archive/Provision+of+Lawful+Intercept+capability+in+Iran.htm

  12. THIS IS THE ONLY RELEVANT POST SO FAR by da_matta · · Score: 5, Informative

    As stated in the linked article:
    - It's a piece of standard 3GPP (=GSM) equipment for lawful intercept, i.e. to allow law enforcement to wiretap calls (according guidelines set by local law).
    - It only handles voice calls and does not allow internet traffic monitoring, let alone deep packet inspection.
    - The equipment is compliant with EU and UN export regulations

    Also, it's much less of a privacy threat than the mechanisms currently in place in US, UK (and I'm sure EU).

  13. Read your bible every day, dear senators! by Opportunist · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Matt 7:3

    For those not wanting to bother, it's the part about beams in your eye and splinters in that of another one.

    Hey, I just want to give them something they can understand, considering how many politicians ride on God and his will into the house, I'd say they should know the good book, eh?

    OK, snideness aside. Do you think this is about "freedom of speech" or similar bullcrap? It's about power. It's the attempt to dictate to foreign companies what they may or may not sell. Neither Siemens nor Nokia is a US company. It's simply an attempt to find out whether those companies rely heavily enough on US government contracts to actually bend over to US government's will.

    And that's the shameful part. IF it was about free speech, I'd be very happy for such a bold and outright good move. Similar actions taken in the US lead me to the conclusion that this is not the case. Else, why care for the splinter in someone else's eye?

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  14. Re:First uncensored post by davester666 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I think what's annoying is just the stupid grandstanding. They are fine with the EXACT same usage in the US, as the gov't now can arbitrarily declare anybody an enemy combatant, arrest them, hold them indefinitely without charge, and even then transport them out of the country. It's not like congress was briefed on the NSA wiretapping and did something about it. And it's not like ALL internet traffic goes through the NSA's computers (now, whether they can actually do DPI on it all in realtime...).

    But, when the people we have hired to watch our police forces don't bother doing it (I mean really, the FBI doesn't know how many NSL's they have issued OR where all of them went to HAS to be willful incompetence after this many years), and we keep re-hiring them, it's really our problem. We know there's a problem, but not enough people are willing to get together to be able to fix it.

    --
    Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
  15. Re:First uncensored post by bigtomrodney · · Score: 5, Informative

    The US has an embargo on Iran and Nokia Siemens broke it.

    Nokia Siemens is a joint venture with its headquarters in Finland. The two contributing companies are Nokia, who were founded and are headed in Finland and Siemens were founded and are headed in Germany. The United States of America set an embargo on the country and yet all others are expected to follow - this is what's wrong with the American outlook.

    I'm just glad I've been able to buy Cuban cigars legally in my country all along.

    --
    I never get used to these constant resurrections
  16. Re:First uncensored post by Jesus_666 · · Score: 4, Informative

    Unfortunately, the embargo does not cover that. European companies like Nokia and Siemens are bound by Council Regulation 423/2007, which forbids the export of the following things:
    - Military goods of any kind
    - Services relating to maintenance, preparation, production or use of military goods
    - Just about anything related to nuclear weapons or ballistic missiles

    I just read through the damn thing (151 pages in the German version) and software is only covered where it is used for the design, operation or maintenance of nuclear enrichment facilities or military weapons, especially guided missiles. Unless I overlooked something (unlikely as the appendices are simple tables) or the embargo is covered by an additional regulation I am not aware of Nokia and Siemens did not violate the embargo.

    The morality of providing filtering technology to Iran aside, I just can't see what the States are trying to accomplish here. They try to punish companies from other countries for something that wasn't illegal at the time. In the best case we have an ex post facto situation with jurisdictional issues, in the worst case we have "screw the rules, we want your money".

    --
    USE HOT GRITS WITH STATUE OF NATALIE PORTMAN (NAKED AND PETRIFIED)
  17. Re:First uncensored post by Beyond_GoodandEvil · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Oh? I missed the news then. When did the US annexed Germany and Finland?
    They didn't that's why the action is hey we won't be buying your shit rather than, hey we're fining the fuck out of you. Really, this is such a non-story. During economic crisis, country uses fuzzy logic to exclude foreign manufacture over domestic one. Fire still hot, water still wet. Just wait for the appearance of the Blue Eagle before you start getting too indignant.

    --
    I laughed at the weak who considered themselves good because they lacked claws.
  18. Re:First uncensored post by schon · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If you don't stand against it openly, even if it is hypocritical to do so patriotically, then there's no reason for those within your own country to desist from their own actions.

    No.

    If you denounce it abroad, while not doing anything about it at home, then there's no reason for anyone to believe you're being sincere, and therefore you are actually saying it's a good thing.