Slashdot Mirror


Vodafone CEO Says Banning Huawei Could Set Europe's 5G Rollout Back Another Two Years (cnbc.com)

The CEO of Vodafone, the world's second-largest mobile operator, warned excluding Huawei from Europe's 5G networks could be "hugely disruptive" to national infrastructure and consumers. CEO Nick Read said that it would be "very very expensive" for operators and consumers if companies were forced to swap their Huawei equipment in favor of competitors', adding it would delay Europe's 5G rollout by "probably two years." CNBC reports: Speaking at a press conference at Mobile World Congress in Barcelona Monday, Vodafone CEO Nick Read said banning Huawei from providing 5G infrastructure in Europe would hamper competition in the supply chain. China's Huawei, Finland's Nokia and Sweden's Ericsson are the three biggest providers of telecommunications equipment in the world, accounting for more than half of revenues in the market, according to research firm Dell'Oro Group. "If we concentrate it down to two players I think that's an unhealthy position not just for us as an industry but also for national infrastructure in the country," Read said.

"It structurally disadvantages Europe," he said "Of course the U.S. don't have that problem because they don't put Huawei equipment in." Vodafone's Read said governments need to take a "fact-based" approach to assessing security concerns with Huawei, adding he will not be meeting with any U.S. officials in Barcelona this week. "I would at this stage prefer to be working with governments and securities on a national basis and making sure we have a fact-based conversation," he said. Vodafone's Read said there is "high competition" among the three equipment providers but added Huawei has had "leading technology." In a roundtable with media on Sunday in Barcelona, Huawei's rotating chairman Guo Ping claimed the company is 12 months ahead of its competitors when it comes to 5G technology.
Huawei has been left out of the U.S. market with officials citing security concerns that its technology could enable spying from the Chinese government, accusations Huawei denies. The U.S., the UK and Germany are weighing possible bans on Huawei's 5G equipment citing security risks.

13 of 120 comments (clear)

  1. less disruptive compared to backdoors. by WindBourne · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Seriously, this is less disruptive than having backdoors in it. Far far better for Europe to buy European 5G.

    --
    I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    1. Re:less disruptive compared to backdoors. by Narcocide · · Score: 2

      Seconded. And I'm not even European.

    2. Re:less disruptive compared to backdoors. by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 3, Interesting

      But they're not being harmed by inadequate equipment, they're being harmed by ridiculous pricing. That's NOT going to be fixed by 5G deployment any more than it was fixed by 4G deployment.

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    3. Re: less disruptive compared to backdoors. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Well, Huawei margin of 12 months is a lie. It would surprise me if there is a margin at all.

      My reasoning: CMCC, the biggest operator in China (and in the world) is government owned. It has several deals and testing sites with Nokia and Ericsson, on latest 4G and 5G technologies. Most of the deals were done within the last year.
      As Huwai is suspected of government connections, and if it's equipment is so superior (their CEO said the margin is so high), one would expect no outside equipment is needed. Yet, the deals are in motion, equipment is tested in China. Maybe it is industrial spying, as 5G progresses so fast Chinese companies need to resort to catching up. So Huwai is maybe in front, and maybe is a little behind. But the gap is not so large if it's even present.

      What will hinder 5G acceptance in Europe is spectrum allocation. As Nokia CEO pointed out in Barcelona, Europe is not freeing the spectrum fast enough, or the prices are through the roof.

      And for the 5G nay-sayers: network slicing is needed to get low latency/(low or even high) speeds needed for machine to machine, as high latency/high speeds we already have with latest 4G speeds. Low latency is the key for autonomous vehicles, robots, and other critical systems.

      Source for the CMCC: https://www.zdnet.com/article/nokia-signs-2b-deals-with-chinese-carriers-ahead-of-5g/

    4. Re:less disruptive compared to backdoors. by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 2

      This fantasy yellow-peril BS is racism by another name.

      "Fantasy BS"??? Are you kidding?

      We KNOW how Huawei cheats and spies. It's neither fantasy or speculation.

      Trusting your communications infrastructure to lying, spying Huawei would be an act of sheer stupidity.

    5. Re:less disruptive compared to backdoors. by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 2, Insightful

      To hold to that, they should also have banned the by for more problematic gear, made in USA, even worse than made it China, a whole lot worse.

      Wow - three posts before someone sings the praises of Huawei, and makes this the fault of Evul 'Murrica.

      Ever wonder why people consider you a nutcase? This isn't about America. It isn't about Apple, it's about Europe and it's about Huawei, a provider of known spyware. There must be some reason that Huawei is going to hold up 5G rollout.

      You can collect your yuan now, and I'll stand by for your buds to mod me down to -1.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    6. Re:less disruptive compared to backdoors. by Z00L00K · · Score: 2

      Don't underestimate the ability to make some really obfuscated solution. And how can anyone be sure that the software that the intelligence agencies gets is the same that's executing on the network devices?

      Just consider what the price to pay is if there's a backdoor implemented that's extremely convoluted and could be sprung any time.

      Especially something that could cause all devices in the net to shut down and go into "brick mode" by a remote command. Also don't underestimate the knowledge of installation locations - sometimes it's all that's needed combined with one or two persons entering a key facility and drop an inside electronic bomb.

      --
      If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
  2. Things I know, things I don't know. by Narcocide · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I don't know if Huawei can be trusted.
    I do know that anyone mistrusting Huawei that still trusts Cisco is naive.
    I don't know if this warning will get to anyone in time, or if it will be heeded.
    I do know this post will be aggressively attacked by sock puppet moderation and astro-turfing trolls.

  3. I mean... does it matter? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Like seriously? Does it? Do you need that much faster speed(that you're probably not going to get) and limited bandwidth(10GB per month for $100?! sign me in!), on your mobile phone?

    I'd argue most people just use their data to access their social media or other crap instead of doing anything productive with that mobile bandwidth and anyone smart enough use wifi anyway. So they can afford to wait 2 extra years, let more phones be released that are compatible with it first.

  4. Shocker by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Everyone is so concerned! I mean literally hundreds of millions of people cannot live without 5G Internet. Oh, wait, most find 3G quite sufficient for their needs. It's not like you need to watch high bitrate HDR 4K movies on your cell phone or send gigabytes of data daily. // b.

    1. Re:Shocker by thegarbz · · Score: 2

      You're an idiot if you think speed is the only enabler of this technology and that "people" are the only target market.

      I for one am looking forward to better battery life, seamless tower handover, and not having my phone drop off every time there's people watching a football game in the stadium next door.

  5. If the concern is for real then it's a no brainer by goombah99 · · Score: 2, Informative

    If they suspect Huwaii isn't secure, then it's irrelevant how many years it sets them back.

    --
    Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
  6. Re:you full of shit troll by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    China is not a country where citizens can enjoy freedom of expression, freedom of religion, political freedoms, etc. The Uighurs are actively suppressed and a million of them are held in concentration camps. There is good reason as why equipment from China should not be trusted. Of course, there is not much reason to trust critical and infrastructure equipment from any non-free country with nuclear weapons. But I mistrust U.S.-made equipment less than what comes out of the People's Republic, or Russia. I would certainly trust EU-made stuff more. Except censorship-inducing Articles 11 and 13 of the proposed update to the EU Copyright Directive, pushed by MEP Axel Voss.