Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Huawei Sues the US In Pushback Against Security Risk Claims (latimes.com)

Posted by BeauHD on from the fighting-back dept.

hackingbear writes: A suit filed by Huawei in Texas, where an American subsidy is located, this week is the latest maneuver in the Chinese telecommunications giant's global offensive against American pressure and persistent criticisms that it poses a national security risk. The company's lawsuit contends that the law which bans Huawei equipment without evidence and trial is a violation of the U.S. Constitution. The U.S. also argues that Huawei poses an unacceptable security risk due to its tie with the Chinese government, though a 2003 due diligence by Motorola in a merger talk found Huawei was independent (Warning: source paywalled) of Chinese government or military (the merger failed after Motorola board thought the $7.5 billion price tag for Huawei was too high.) In the lawsuit announcement, Huawei Chairman Guo Ping also accused U.S. agencies of hacking Huawei servers and stealing emails and source code. In a similar case, China's Sanyi sued the Obama administration and forced CFIUS to determine that the the company's acquisitions "have not raised national security objections."

118 comments

  1. Lol by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    Good luck suing the US in Texas, Chinese company.

    1. Re:Lol by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Why, is the USA not a country of law and justice ?

    2. Re:Lol by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, If it were, there would be no H1B visas and no commerce with an evil communist China. But here, money talks, and the top .1% want more.

    3. Re: Lol by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not for chinks

    4. Re: Lol by edris90 · · Score: 1

      There are more malignant parasitic economic mentalities in Texas then probably anywhere else in the US. Texas is the big o oil state. Bunch of spoiled crazy racists, flip flop to become independent from Mexico in order to retain their slaves. Because Mexico freed all the slaves before the US did. Texas is one of the u.s. is biggest shames still in full operation

  2. It's so laughable, good luck Chi-Coms by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    In US Court, invoking the US Constitution.... after all that bluster and evading US law and the shell corporation they used so transparently obvious... are they asking for a public undressing or what? Discovery requests, inbound.

    The public is about to see Huawei's Chi-Com fupa in a few months.

    1. Re: It's so laughable, good luck Chi-Coms by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      So, you say, in the US judicial system the case will not be decided on the merits, but on the prejudice?

      Well, that's what Huawei has been telling us is happening, good that you illustrate it with your racist bigotry.

    2. Re:It's so laughable, good luck Chi-Coms by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are basically saying the US courts should ignore the laws and US constitution. It doesn't matter how fucked up other countries are, anything less than fair and equal treatment in the US courts makes a mockery of everything we claim to stand by and makes us no better than the Chinese government.

    3. Re: It's so laughable, good luck Chi-Coms by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bray all you want you slovenly idiot, your completely corrupt judiciary is just as likely to rule against your wishes as for them. Nothing matters except money here, including you.

    4. Re: It's so laughable, good luck Chi-Coms by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah...our "completely corrupt judiciary" isn't really. You'd know that if you had ever stepped foot in a US court of law.

      Thanks for the effort of trying to spread fear, uncertainty, and doubt though. I mean nobody believes it and you become the butt of a pretty savage joke and laughed and mocked because of its shear over-the-top ridiculousness of it, but we do all enjoy the entertainment it provides.

      Good job buddy. Never ever change! lol

    5. Re: It's so laughable, good luck Chi-Coms by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Add in a national security override for good measure solly cholly.

    6. Re: It's so laughable, good luck Chi-Coms by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Our judicary is corrupt. Been there done that. I can confirm.

    7. Re: It's so laughable, good luck Chi-Coms by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Some good, some bad. Completely corrupt? Whatever.

    8. Re: It's so laughable, good luck Chi-Coms by edris90 · · Score: 1

      Judiciary system is completely corrupt although once in awhile you get an individual but wants to do right but unfortunately is bound by the system to do wrong or lose their station and livelihood

  3. CALLING ALL HACKINGBEARS! MUST DEFEND CHINA! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    https://www.androidauthority.com/huawei-viral-video-961168/
    https://www.theguardian.com/news/2018/dec/07/china-plan-for-global-media-dominance-propaganda-xi-jinping
    https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2013/03/chinas-apple-propaganda/316927/
    https://www.lawfareblog.com/detention-huaweis-cfo-legally-justified-why-doesnt-us-say-so

    1. Re: CALLING ALL HACKINGBEARS! MUST DEFEND CHINA! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I thinks da Chinese forgot what dey do to bears in China so conveniently when dey say hacking bear and not bile bear

    2. Re: CALLING ALL HACKINGBEARS! MUST DEFEND CHINA! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fancy bear is Russian tho

  4. They should push for source code inspection by Snotnose · · Score: 0

    That would help show if the NSA or the Chinese government is the biggest privacy concern. I hate to say it, but I trust Huawei more than Cisco, given the current political climate.

    1. Re: They should push for source code inspection by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh man I remember drinking grape Cisco down at the graveyard in high school. Knock you on your bear ass

    2. Re: They should push for source code inspection by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I mean Cisco aren't exactly a company I want to defend when it comes to that, but if you think Huawei is better than Cisco, whoooboy are you mistaken!

      It's like being in a prison courtyard and the second biggest bad dude there (Cisco) points out that the actual threat to everyone there is the biggest bad dude (Huawei). They are both not to be trusted and if you have to trust one more than the other, right now it isn't Huawei.

      The real kicker about it is that Huawei are better at doing what is tradjtionally thought of as the US corporations thing, bribing politicians to get favorable laws and/regulations, paying off those who bring lawsuits against them to avoid having been found in breach of regulations/laws, and doing whatever it needs (to include using gov't supplied hackers to dig up dirt on and harass people ) to get deals done. They have more people to put to the task and a government that is comfortable knowing most of what it does, won't have serious long term repercussions.

      They took the whole US playbook and are using it against them....

    3. Re: They should push for source code inspection by green1 · · Score: 1

      One of the players in this debate has a long history of actually putting back doors in commercial products, and spying on everyone. The other player is Huawei.

      Why would you have more trust in the one that has proof of wrongdoing than in the one that has the most eyes on it of any company in the history of mankind, and where none of those eyes have managed to turn up a single thing?

    4. Re: They should push for source code inspection by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh man I remember drinking grape Cisco down at the graveyard in high school. Knock you on your bear ass

      Your high school had a graveyard?

  5. Dead in the water. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Non-citizens have human rights, but not constitutional rights. SCOTUS has already decided that.

    No one has the inalienable right to do business in the US.

    Any one's constitutional rights can be suspended for public safety or national security.

    Huawei should be fined for wasting the court's time and their lawyers sanctioned.

    1. Re:Dead in the water. by Aighearach · · Score: 2

      If a case never even should have been filed, typically it is only the lawyer that gets penalized, not the client.

    2. Re:Dead in the water. by hackingbear · · Score: 1

      Wrong. An American company has constitution rights, whether its owned by US or foreign citizen / company.

    3. Re:Dead in the water. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wrong. No organization has constitutional rights. Owners and employees do and they may enact those rights through organizations.

      This is well covered in case law. Don't be lazy. Look it up or remain ignorant, but spare us the misinformation.

    4. Re:Dead in the water. by hackingbear · · Score: 1

      Don't be lazy. don't be ignorant. Look it up and don't spread misinformation, dude!

      BTW all rights anyone can have, including "human rights", only exist because they are covered by some constitution clauses.

      Only foreigners physically outside of a country and foreign companies not registered in the country do not have constitution rights, else no foreigner or foreign company would dare to come to the US.

    5. Re:Dead in the water. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fox News. Really.

      Don't be lazy. Don't be ignorant. Don't spread misinformation. It's immoral.

      At least rise to the level of a Highschool civics textbook.

    6. Re: Dead in the water. by edris90 · · Score: 1

      And the us or corporation is an entity, with all the same constitutional rights as a person. Therefore a US subsidiary of a Chinese company retains US constitutional rights. It was a stupid LA and the first place but US economic gain by it it's only fair that they lose by the same mechanic. It's time to pay the piper.

  6. I feel a touch of nationalism coming on by rmdingler · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It's fair to say the American nation isn't the envy of the World it once used to be, but the fact the Chinese can sue in American courts with a decent chance to win still says a lot about the differences between the two juggernaut nations.

    “Congress acted unconstitutionally as judge, jury and executioner,” Huawei executive Guo Ping said Thursday after announcing the court action.

    Guo Ping's evidently been binge-watching some Mandarin-dubbed spaghetti westerns.

    --
    Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.

    Ernest Hemingway

    1. Re:I feel a touch of nationalism coming on by bogaboga · · Score: 1

      It's fair to say the American nation isn't the envy of the World it once used to be, but the fact the Chinese can sue in American courts with a decent chance to win still says a lot about the differences between the two juggernaut nations.

      (...bold mine...)

      Looked at the situation through another lens...

      Whereas one nation has sought to assert its will onto others, it's found one that will not simply sit back and watch. Huawei is fighting back.

      In addition, of the two juggernaut nations, one has had a proven MO of fomenting chaos (read regime change) in distant lands, the other country has mostly followed bilateral cooperation even though some experts have seen this as a form of imperialism.

      Think about that!

    2. Re:I feel a touch of nationalism coming on by Gravis+Zero · · Score: 1

      Looked at the situation through another lens...

      Is that lens labeled "50 Cent Army"? ;)

      --
      Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
    3. Re:I feel a touch of nationalism coming on by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They have no chance of winning this.

    4. Re:I feel a touch of nationalism coming on by hackingbear · · Score: 2

      the fact the Chinese can sue in American courts with a decent chance to win still says a lot about the differences between the two juggernaut nations.

      The differences only exist in your brain, washed over by American propaganda.

    5. Re:I feel a touch of nationalism coming on by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Looked at the situation through another lens...

      Is that lens labeled "50 Cent Army"? ;)

      Thanks for playing "50 Shekel Army";)

    6. Re:I feel a touch of nationalism coming on by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 1

      And like all patriotic Americans, your feelings are rooted in fear, racism, and hatred of immigrants. The Chinese Exclusion Act had a lot in common with how you feel: "keep the dirty slants out of our pure USA". What's next, reestablishing Jim Crow?

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    7. Re: I feel a touch of nationalism coming on by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Some of the most patriotic Americans are those who have most recently become citizens. They left shitty countries and people in them behind to seek out better futures in the US. Try again.

      Five yard penalty for wasting everyone's time. Repeat first down.

    8. Re: I feel a touch of nationalism coming on by c6gunner · · Score: 1

      In addition, of the two juggernaut nations, one has had a proven MO of fomenting chaos (read regime change) in distant lands, the other country has mostly followed bilateral cooperation even though some experts have seen this as a form of imperialism.

      Ah, another millennial who thinks history started in the last few decades.

      https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wik...

    9. Re: I feel a touch of nationalism coming on by c6gunner · · Score: 1

      Sorry, I'm confused ... are you ignoring the fact that the current case is one of a Chinese company suing the US government, while your example cases are ones of foreign companies suing Chinese companies? Or are you just implicitly acknowledging that Chinese companies are in fact an extension of their government, and, as such, assuming that suing a Chinese company is equivalent to suing their government?

    10. Re:I feel a touch of nationalism coming on by Zontar_Thing_From_Ve · · Score: 1

      It's fair to say the American nation isn't the envy of the World it once used to be, but the fact the Chinese can sue in American courts with a decent chance to win still says a lot about the differences between the two juggernaut nations.

      I'm not a lawyer, but I have several friends who are. I'm American by the way. Let's just say I think Huawei's chance of winning is a lot lower than you do.

    11. Re: I feel a touch of nationalism coming on by thereddaikon · · Score: 1

      When you link wiki articles remove the .m from the url. The regular url works in all situations, on a mobile device it will redirect to the mobile site, but the mobile link will always load the mobile site. Even on my 27inch display.

    12. Re: I feel a touch of nationalism coming on by c6gunner · · Score: 1

      I'll try to remember that. Thanks.

    13. Re: I feel a touch of nationalism coming on by hackingbear · · Score: 1

      1. the GP talked about just "suing in American court" and not specifically "suing US government in American court"

      2. if you haven't heard of those in the biased American media, doesn't mean they don't exist. (Of course, given you speak on China without knowing much, you obviously don't actually read in Chinese and need some help from online translation.) (And I'm claiming these cases are frequent, but GP claimed there is none. They are rare maybe because foreign companies are actually quite happy in China.)

      And this one, while technically not the foreign company GalaxoSmithKline suing, it is about (Chinese) patients suing the Chinese government for refusing to reveal the R&D cost information of GSK drugs.

    14. Re: I feel a touch of nationalism coming on by c6gunner · · Score: 1

      Heh. What delicious irony; a chinaman talking about "biased american media".

    15. Re: I feel a touch of nationalism coming on by Aighearach · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure it counts as ironic when it is literally illegal for them to say anything else when they talk about it; they certainly aren't allowed to invert it and say the opposite, if that is what they believe.

  7. Trade war in disguise... by ClarkMills · · Score: 1

    ...though having a viewport into the net is also something that all governments want to keep. We're all expecting naughtiness on the internet and are practicing "safe sex" though eh?

  8. Laughed out of court by Gravis+Zero · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The company's lawsuit contends that the law which bans Huawei equipment without evidence and trial is a violation of the U.S. Constitution.

    Anyone that's even heard of a clue, let alone has half of one, knows that national security is a valid and perfectly constitutional reason to prohibit government agencies from purchasing equipment or services from a foreign actor.

    They are challenging John S. McCain National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019 (NDAA 2019), specifically Section 889.

    Nothing in the law prevent private businesses from buying Huawei equipment but doing so could effectively lock them out of doing business with the federal government. It's just like the Kaspersky Anti-Virus situation where people a free to use it but it's a big no-no for the federal government.

    --
    Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
    1. Re:Laughed out of court by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Krasperry milkshake.... Mmmmmmmm.

    2. Re:Laughed out of court by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes it is a perfectly valid and constitutional reason as long as that REALLY is the reason. All indications are that this really is just the public excuse and the reason is actually that our US companies are behind in this space and the only way to protect their marketshare is to exclude foreign companies.

    3. Re:Laughed out of court by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      then the 96% of the worlds population that are NOT US citizens should take heed and be suspicious of US companies.
      After all the USA has been caught multiple times doing the WRONG thing.

    4. Re:Laughed out of court by AmiMoJo · · Score: 2

      Doesn't it concern you that the government can just say "national security concerns" and ban pretty much anything? Even if it's not a ban on private business use, businesses are going to heed that message, especially if they want government contracts.

      Ping is right, if there is no oversight or evidence required then the government is out of control and the normal system of checks and balances has failed.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    5. Re: Laughed out of court by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Google up Carl Nicolai and Phasorphone.

      The intelligence apparatus is very powerful; Huawei is toast (as it should be). It is not in our interest to let any foreign-owned company control communications infrastructure, let alone a Chinese owned entity. Dislike it all you like, little islander, but weâ(TM)re still big enough to control the variables... for now anyway.

      This is not a game; itâ(TM)s a cold war.

    6. Re:Laughed out of court by Nidi62 · · Score: 2

      Research the Act of 1871. The UNITED STATES (all caps, no "of America") is a federal municipal corporation that own D.C. and is the defacto government.

      /Facepalm

      The District of Columbia Organic Act of 1871 served only to incorporate (ie. bring together) the cities of Washington and Georgetown, as well as the surrounding areas, into a single entity-the District of Columbia-for local governmental purposes. It had and has no bearing outside of DC, nor did it create a corporation governing all of the territorial US. There is not a second Constitution. Next you're going to say that because flags in courts have gold fringe it makes them maritime courts and invalidates their authority.

      --
      The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
    7. Re:Laughed out of court by thereddaikon · · Score: 1

      Not really no, because they aren't telling me I can't buy Huawei. They are telling government employees they can't purchase for it work. Business restrict vendor options all the time for a multitude of reasons. The US government doesn't have to buy Huawei equipment if they don't want to and they don't even have to give a reason. I only buy HP servers for my business. I like to keep my data center as uniform as possible in terms of hardware, configs and support contracts. That doesn't give Dell or anyone else the right to sue us because we didn't buy their stuff. You might have a point if the government banned the importation of all Huawei products including ones for consumer use. But they didn't. And even if they did they can do that. Products have been banned from import on many occasions and for various valid reasons. And even if the security concerns weren't real (but they definitely are), a trade war is a valid reason to block products. That is essentially the entire intellectual basis for the concept of tariffs. If a country decides it doesn't want you to sell your products in their land, or if they think you are too competitive and want to handicap you versus domestic producers then it is entirely within their power and rights to do so. I should also point out this is something that China exercises every day on the US and everyone else and the entire point of this trade war is to give them a taste of their own medicine and re-balance trade between China and the US to be more fair.

    8. Re:Laughed out of court by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Doesn't it concern you that the government can just say "national security concerns" and ban pretty much anything?

      Drink! Amimojo beats up a strawman created out a misinterpretation of what was said (somebody else already explained it)

    9. Re:Laughed out of court by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The difference is that in the case of Kaspersky there was SOME evidence that Kaspersky may have been sifting through the data. In Huawei's case there has been no evidence whatsoever being presented. Even intelligence agencies from other allied countries haven't been able to get any evidence that Huawei is doing something wrong.

    10. Re:Laughed out of court by Gravis+Zero · · Score: 1

      Doesn't it concern you that the government can just say "national security concerns" and ban pretty much anything?

      Not really because they are only banning it for government use. As long as I'm free to make my own mistakes, it's all good.

      Ping is right, if there is no oversight or evidence required then the government is out of control and the normal system of checks and balances has failed.

      No, not really because A) the government is only setting rules for the government (not the people) and B) two branches of government (Executive and Legislative) have cooperated to create this ban.

      Ping is just trying to have it both ways, knows he can't and is muddying the waters as much as possible so that useful idiots like you won't recognize this is the government acting properly.

      --
      Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
    11. Re:Laughed out of court by f16c · · Score: 1

      The constitution is for US citizens and US companies. They would like to expand the reach to China-owned companies doing business here. Sure. Right after they stop targeting US technology, secrets and businesses. This law suit isn't going anywhere, even in the state of Texas. This a a big waste of money and time.

      --
      bob@Osprey:~>
    12. Re:Laughed out of court by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you are joking right?

      If China could spy on us (if we used their equipment) how do we go about fixing it? Can we sue the company and win? Can we make the company pay for all the redeployment of non compromised hardware?

      The answer to all the above is NO.

      If I am the US Gov't, I would not be building infrastructure using sources outside the US. The Gov't just loses too much leverage and accountability of the corporation they work with.

      The security issues are pointless, as our NSA / CIA / etc will find a way to break through and spy, regardless of the company.

      Think of it this way,:
      If Cisco decides to backdoor their hardware / software for China, and we find out, how do we fix it? Well shit, we sue the fuck out of the company, take all their assets, make them pay for all the new hardware / fixes, and also jail or kill the decision makers that helped China with the backdoor (Treason and all).

      How do we get retribution if Huawei backdoors their hardware / software for China? Pretty much we can sanction or go to war with them. We could sue them and take all their US assets, we could try all the same things above, but I don't think China would let us extradite or take their assets as damages / punishment.

      It would be like the US outsourcing the creation of a stealth fighter to a Russian corporation. Or having NK build our nukes.

    13. Re:Laughed out of court by Aighearach · · Score: 1

      Yes it is a perfectly valid and constitutional reason as long as that REALLY is the reason.

      Wrong. The Court is not permitted to substitute their own judgment about what the reason "really" is.

      When Congress grants the Executive the right to make some decision based on National Security, then the Court has to balance the Rights of Congress against the Rights of the Executive. So in that type of situation, which is more common, the Court has to consider not only the discretion granted by Congress, but also if it was exercised reasonably. That standard is easy to meet, unless the Executive went in the opposite direction than Congress allowed for. Or for example with some of the problems President Trump has had implementing his policies, if the Executive comes right out and gives a reason in public, then that might be given a small amount of weight. But only where it is something that the President decided directly. And, under normal circumstances any public statements will be carefully hedged and the Court will see that and ignore them.

      But here, it is the action that Congress took that is being challenged; so it is a totally different type of situation. The right of Congress to pass the budget, including whatever spending restrictions they include, is only balanced against rights explicitly stated in the Constitution, and to a lesser extent the body of English Common Law that existed at the nation's Founding. And there is no Constitutional Right at play here; being refused government contracts is not a "taking" that requires compensation, nor is it a criminal charge that requires a Jury.

      And foreign actors don't have any rights that would even be balanced against National Security; the closest they can get is for the Court to look at, "are the accusations about some subject matter that is related to National Security?" That's it. They're not going to weigh the facts. They're going to weigh only if the subject matter is part of National Security, and if Congress has the authority to make spending determinations based on it. The answers to which are all totally obvious.

      This is a PR suit, nothing more. It is exactly the same, legally, as if Russia sued the US military for refusing to buy weapons from them.

      And if you're up for a thought experiment; if they did have a colorable legal argument, they'd still have to lose, because all the evidence would be classified and they wouldn't be able to use it. They'd do discovery, have nothing but redacted pages, and the Court would have to rule that they hadn't produced enough evidence to prove their case. And on the other side, the Court will have to take the Government's word about how to characterize their secret evidence in a civil case. You can't really sue the Government successfully over matters of National Security even when you have a legit legal case to make! There are exceptions, but they "prove the rule" by their novel elements.

    14. Re:Laughed out of court by Aighearach · · Score: 1

      Doesn't it concern you that the government can just say "national security concerns" and ban pretty much anything? Even if it's not a ban on private business use, businesses are going to heed that message, especially if they want government contracts.

      Nope. As an American, possessing Free Speech, if the Government banned use of my equipment by Government I'd simply use it in a marketing campaign and wallow in increased sales.

      If it hurts sales, it is because they're a foreign company, controlled by a largely-hostile foreign government, who positions themselves as a political and military rival of the US. That's normal. It is the US Government's job to warn us about that sort of threat, so as a side-effect of their spending decision, it is entirely within their bailiwick.

      If the military decides to only buy bullets from companies in the US or Allied countries, that wouldn't bother me either. The idea that this represents some sort of slippery slope is not only absurd, it is fucking daft.

    15. Re:Laughed out of court by Aighearach · · Score: 1

      Hilarious! Thanks Ivan for sharing the results of your afternoon with Google Translate.

      I hope it was as much fun to write as it was to laugh at.

      A simple, common word such "incorporate" can be so hilarious when misunderstood! Presumably your native tongue lacks Latin roots, so it didn't occur to you that the root translates to "body" and to "incorporate" means to give something a body. If you had that insight, you'd expect it to have a wide variety of contextual meanings. But if you don't know about Latin roots, then the mistake you made makes sense.

  9. Huawei: The story of a controversial company by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-sh/Huawei
    Interesting article. Here's some snippets:

    "The African Union headquarters in Addis Ababa is a shiny spaceship-like structure that glistens in the afternoon sun.

    In 2006, Beijing pledged $200m to build the headquarters. Completed in 2012, everything was custom-built by the Chinese - including a state-of-the-art computer system.

    But in January 2018, French newspaper Le Monde Afrique dropped a bombshell.

    It reported that the AU’s computer system had been compromised.

    The newspaper, citing multiple sources, said that for five years, between the hours of midnight and 0200, data from the AU’s servers was transferred more than 8,000km away - to servers in Shanghai.

    Being a regular on /. I've noticed that any negative comments about Huawei are always responded to with angry denial, accusations and even threats. They really don't like their inability to apply censorship outside of their own country.

    1. Re:Huawei: The story of a controversial company by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The newspaper, citing multiple sources, said that for five years, between the hours of midnight and 0200, data from the AU’s servers was transferred more than 8,000km away - to servers in Shanghai.

      Ha, yeah these days the accepted business case is to have all your crucial data hosted in "The Cloud" which could be in any goddamn country hosted by any goddamn assholes.

    2. Re:Huawei: The story of a controversial company by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are CRAZY! China's good will of African Union headquarter should not be slandered by smelly bad French warmongers!

      Take you medicine, conspiracy illuminaty tinfoil man.

  10. I have AIDS,,, apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yeah I slob trucker knob, I suck their dicks dry l, I HOST cocks and balls all day long at my shift and I have aids

    apk

  11. and that nationalism started Nazi Germany china by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

    and that nationalism started Nazi Germany and china is doing stuff that the Nazis did.

  12. subsidy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    where an American subsidy is located

    Subsidiary?

  13. Chine owns all Chinese companies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    China owns all Chinese people. How many Chinese has the US caught for espionage already and how many do they not even know about. Every year, thousands come in, steal tech, and go home with it.

  14. At least the Chinese gave them the building by cheesybagel · · Score: 1

    IIRC the Chinese bought and refurbished a Boeing for the Chinese president to use once. Then they found it was littered with bugs planted by US agents.
    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/ne...

    1. Re:At least the Chinese gave them the building by cheesybagel · · Score: 1

      Here's another later story on that by a more credible source.
      https://www.nytimes.com/2003/0...

    2. Re:At least the Chinese gave them the building by _merlin · · Score: 1

      Doesn't change the fact that the US bugged the hell out of it. All the superpowers and wannabe superpowers do this shit.

    3. Re:At least the Chinese gave them the building by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The NYT a credible source? Ha. One could write a book on how that is not the case, but suffice it to say: Iraq WMDs.

    4. Re:At least the Chinese gave them the building by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They all do it!!!1

    5. Re:At least the Chinese gave them the building by Local+ID10T · · Score: 1

      Doesn't change the fact that the US bugged the hell out of it. All the superpowers and wannabe superpowers do this shit.

      Which certainly does not imply that we should trust Huawei/China with our critical infrastructure.

      --
      "You want to know how to help your kids? Leave them the fuck alone." -George Carlin
    6. Re:At least the Chinese gave them the building by Aighearach · · Score: 1

      The existence of spies and spying does not seem to in any way suggest that concerns about spying are unfounded, though.

    7. Re:At least the Chinese gave them the building by _merlin · · Score: 1

      Not suggesting that at all. Just saying that, as someone outside both the US and China, I don't trust any of these cunts.

  15. Wow, 0/4 by Actually,+I+do+RTFA · · Score: 1, Insightful

    You are 0% correct.

    Non-citizens have human rights, but not constitutional rights.

    Constitutional rights protect everyone on US soil. One justice disagrees with that (Thomas), and it's news because it's not normal.

    No one has the inalienable right to do business in the US.

    All US citizens do, for sure. And, under international treaties and organizations (e.g. the WTO), so do the ones from many other countries.

    Any one's constitutional rights can be suspended for public safety or national security.

    Citation desperately needed.

    Huawei should be fined for wasting the court's time and their lawyers sanctioned.

    Since you've been wrong about everything else, I don't know why you think that they should be sanctioned.

    --
    Your ad here. Ask me how!
    1. Re:Wow, 0/4 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Constitutional rights protect everyone on US soil. One justice disagrees with that (Thomas), and it's news because it's not normal.

      Non-citizens on US soil do not have the constitutional right to own firearms nor vote.

      All US citizens do, for sure. And, under international treaties and organizations (e.g. the WTO), so do the ones from many other countries.

      An assertion does not make it true. No one has the right to do business in the US. We ban millions of people regularly. One common method of doing this is called legal sanctions. I'm sure you know what North Korea is and no one from that country can sell cheeseburgers in the US.

      Citation desperately needed.

      1. Felony convictions exist. Felony convictions suspend some constitutional rights for public safety.
      2. I have already given you more respect than you show others. I will not give you more.

      Since you've been wrong about everything else...

      Learn some logic. An assertion that someone else made an incorrect statement does not prove that statement is incorrect, let alone any other statement.

      Everything I have said is common knowledge to any educated person. Nothing you have said is true. You forgetting that felonies exist and non-citizens can't vote in US elections says a great deal about the quality of intellect you bring to the discussion.

    2. Re:Wow, 0/4 by Aighearach · · Score: 1

      WTO doesn't grant companies the right to do business here. That's nonsense. If that was true, American businesses could go to China and open local branches. Good luck with that.

      WTO says you have to treat imports the same regardless of which country they're from. That doesn't mean that foreign companies can also come here and be the importers.

      The reason foreign businesses can do business in the US so easily is merely because of US policy, not because of "rights."

    3. Re:Wow, 0/4 by Actually,+I+do+RTFA · · Score: 1

      Non-citizens on US soil do not have the constitutional right to own firearms nor vote.

      Sure they don't have the right to vote, because the constitution (specifically the 14th amendment) explicitly only vests that right to citizens. There are a couple of times the constitution does that, but it's explicit each time. Note, the 2nd amendment is not one of those cases. Even illegal immigrants (7th circuit ruled in 2015) have 2nd amendment rights.

      No one has the right to do business in the US.

      Again, you're confusing "no one" and "not everyone". They are very different constructs. Also, anyone who escapes from North Korea and makes it to US shores most certainly can sell cheeseburgers as a refugee.

      Now, North Korean companies cannot trade with the US, and it would be possible for national security sanctions to be put on China (or a specific Chinese company). But that's not what happened. In fact, Trump explicitly removed the sanctions on Huawei. Therefore they have the default behavior of being able to do business in the United States. Instead he is doing other things that they may be able to sue over.

      Felony convictions exist. Felony convictions suspend some constitutional rights for public safety.

      Actually, felony convictions allow for some freedoms to be curtailed. But your constitutional rights are not. For instance, the eighth, fifth, and sixth amendments are used fairly often to sue over prison situations. Now, in prison there is a far lower standard for what constituted a "reasonable" search or assembly for instance. Therefore, the freedom offered by your constitutional rights may be lessened, but you still have the right and the government still has to justify their actions as not violating those rights. You may be confused again by the 14th amendment, which spells out a specific loss of voting rights when convicted (again, voting has a lot of restrictions).

      As to your lack of respect, I'll try to sleep tonight. As to your claims about "logic", the clear dependency of your fourth claim on the clear absurdity of their case is dependent on any of your other claims being true. They aren't, so there is no need to explicitly refute it. Your closing ad hominem makes me believe that you are still in high school (or younger), hence I'll respond to your post in the effort you learn something.

      --
      Your ad here. Ask me how!
    4. Re:Wow, 0/4 by Actually,+I+do+RTFA · · Score: 1

      The WTO is not symmetric, and for some reason China still benefits from many exceptions to the rules allowing "developing nations" to protect their local companies. The WTO isn't just concerned with material goods anymore, poking their noses into flows of capital, services and intellectual property.

      --
      Your ad here. Ask me how!
  16. Re: and that nationalism started Nazi Germany chin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There's the America you have seen on television/internet which you base your ridiculous diatribe on, and then there's reality.

    The two are about as similar as an astronaut is to your mom.

    Nice try though. Please try harder in future to be more aware of the world you live in instead of vomitting nonsense and hoping something sticks.

  17. Re: and that nationalism started Nazi Germany chin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Lol airports make me so hard, it's like a tripod walking through that motherfucker.

  18. Just ask the NSA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    https://gearburn.com/2018/01/u...

  19. That you WindBourne? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    All companies in China are, by definition, state-owned and completely entangled with the Chinese military BY DEFINITION.

    The level of ignorance around here is getting worse by the month. Are you WindBourne by any chance?

  20. Love my ZTE smartphone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Thanks, the Donald, for telling people *not* to buy ZTE products...I got the motherfucker for pennies-on-the-dollar sale afterwards.

    1. Re:Love my ZTE smartphone by f16c · · Score: 1

      Thanks but I'll stick to using LG Samsung or Sony hardware for personal use. I don't like the idea of my life being sifted through by the Chinese. My company doesn't allow ZTE or other Chinese phones to be given out for corporate use, ether. Secrets are best kept secret.

      --
      bob@Osprey:~>
  21. Retarded bitch APK is posting more of his lies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sorry retarded bitch Alexander Peter Kowalski, you are just a loser who is too dumb to realize you got stomped long ago.
    Here is a chronicle of your bitch ass getting beaten on your port filtering statements.
    Here is another one where your got beaten hard because you can't back up anything you say. This was about how you claim your shitware can block all hosts in a domain, which it can't.
    Then there is your claim that the Chinese copied you but you admit that at best all you have is wild ass speculation and can't offer any real proof or even actual evidence to support yourself.
    How about the list of experts you claim support your statements, none of which actually support your work and have been shown to actually be saying things different from what you stated they were.
    Maybe instead you can tell us about your "success" where a project rejected your stupid simplistic idea or maybe threaten to sue someone again because you are a insecure little man who is washed up and never amounted to anything.
    Better yet you can prove how defective you are by continuing to repeat your debunked BS some more.
    Why don't you get your pretend friend to post some fake support and then throw a fit when you get caught.

  22. Using Courts to Commit Espionage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    China is fucking brilliant. They're going to use our own courts to commit espionage against us, and we're going to let them do it because we've become a nation of self-loathing social justice warriors that hate our own country and want to see it fail.

  23. China=thieves (vs. DNS down/redirected)... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Who did it 1st: China or me? I did - dates are my proof https://theregister.co.uk/2017... w/ the FACT China rampantly STEALS U.S. Intellectual properties & military secrets https://www.theregister.co.uk/...

    * IMITATION truly IS the SINCEREST FORM of FLATTERY!!!

    (... & proves hosts work vs. DNS faults in tracking you via dns request logs (since you avoid it & resolve FASTER locally using hosts) + DNS being downed OR Kaminsky REDIRECT security flaw misdirected poisoned (or vs. DNSChanger))

    US DHS issues DNS redirect is HUGE danger (not w/ hosts vs.) https://threatpost.com/gov-war... & ICANN ISSUES SAME WARNING https://tech.slashdot.org/stor...

    APK

    P.S.=> Folks, It's NOT EASY being "World-Class" like me (lol - & 200,000++ users prove it for me + SO DOES CHINA) - enjoy the fruits of my labors for FREE + going FASTER/SAFER/MORE RELIABLY online (w/ a bit more anonymity too via my program)... apk

  24. You lose vs. verifiable FACTS... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    1.) My program stops portfilter errs in hosts https://news.slashdot.org/comm...

    2.) Wildcards CREATE FALSE POSITIVES (try wildcard myftp.org, not all sites in it = bad). Hosts specifics don't cause that. Proof = https://tech.slashdot.org/comm...

    3.) CHINA did hardcodes LONG AFTER I DID "Time is on MY SIDE" (Rolling Stones) https://theregister.co.uk/2017...

    4.) /. users state the value of hosts for getting users more speed/security/reliability/anonymity listed here (enumerated as "Registered /.ers reviews") https://it.slashdot.org/commen...

    5.) Security pros galore + /.ers praise the layered security efficacy of hosts quoted here https://it.slashdot.org/commen...

    6.) I never had to sue Thor SCHMUCK - CA rescinded their FALSE POSITIVE error, sold off their shitty antivirus & I said I'd speak to an attorney & I did who advised I go thru their removal process & I won.

    APK

    P.S.=> You can't even STAND BEHIND YOUR WORDS (lies) you UNIDENTIFIABLE anonymous STALKER of me... apk

  25. Not possible for me & why... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I found out 36 yrs. ago (+ over time) I can't. I'm 1 of the lucky ones that lack CC5 receptor "hooks" it needs to get to your cells. IF I didn't, I'd be DEAD by now!

    Some of us are just BORN LUCKY I guess...

    * :)

    APK

    P.S.=> Grow up & QUIT PROJECTING your own faults/shortcomings onto me, lol... apk

    1. Re:Not possible for me & why... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I found out 36 yrs. ago (+ over time) I can't. I'm 1 of the lucky ones that lack CC5 receptor "hooks" it needs to get to your cells. IF I didn't, I'd be DEAD by now!

      We know because you take so much dick that your viral load of HIV would be able to drop an elephant if you weren't immune. You are lucky because you live in a a $1 house within walking distance of the truck stop glory hole where you work as a self employed individual.

  26. Re:China=thieves (vs. DNS down/redirected)... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Folks, It's NOT EASY being "World-Class" like me (lol - 200,000++ users prove it for me) - enjoy the fruits of my labors for FREE

    We know it is hard being the number 1 slobber of trucker dick in the world. It takes practice and real effort to smoke over 200,000 poles a year and to do it for free is a testament to your commitment to the cause.

  27. You obviously do what you say - I don't... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See subject: You try PROJECT your issues onto me & heterosexual/straight here & since I'm good looking, from 1994-present I've slept w/ ~ 1,000 women & still healthy (lol, except for what women can put you thru which you learn to be "immune" to also (yes girls, we do the same to you too)).

    So you know - it's HARDER for straight guys who don't do "analsex" or "shootup drugs" like heroin to catch AIDS/be HIV postive anyway (provided they don't get a dose of bad blood in a transfusion too that is).

    * NOW - again, quit PROJECTING your "job" BOY along w/ you not owning anything & being WORTHLESS, lol!

    APK

    P.S.=> It's bad enough you STALK me by UNIDENTIFIABLE anonymous posts proving you're a lying worm who won't stand behind his words but I love my home (for the most part, it's a happy one) but I don't live in walking distance of truckstops either NOR do I work in "glory holes" lol - it's obvious YOU DO & don't own your own home as I do, fully paid off (prove otherwise for yourself - oh, that's right - YOU? CAN'T - you live under a bridge like ALL TROLLS DO, lol, w/ junkies & winos)... apk

  28. Re:China=thieves (vs. DNS down/redirected)... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Not hard being worthless you sucking cock @ truckstops you project you do stalking apk by unidentifiable anon. You won't accomplish good things APK does though.

  29. grokparsefailure by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    APK prease2lrn2engrish k.

    1. Re:grokparsefailure by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      110010001000 you're a liar https://science.slashdot.org/c... Learn to read\write. Proving you're illiterate isn't helping you.

    2. Re:grokparsefailure by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Correct. 110010001000 does do that which my google fu hunted up as proof https://slashdot.org/comments....

  30. CALLING ALL TRAITOR HACKINGBEARS! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    HACKINGBEAR! Your mother is SOUP!

  31. Traitors by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What about all the us companies that built up China buy outsourcing ?

    Surely giving that much tech and capacity is treason ?

  32. huh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What's "WindBourne" in this context? If that's a "thing", then no I am not familiar with it, and if it's an online ID then, nope.

    Please explain what you think is "ignorance" in that post. China proudly self-identifies as a Communist nation, which means there are no private companies and all "businesses" are actually state-owned and state-controlled. Additionally, the state and the party (that being the Communist party) are one thing (which by definition also means that the state and the party and all businesses and the military are all part of one thing), and they have made their leader into a leader-for-life.

    Now, if you want to claim that the government exercises control over those "businesses" without actually "owning" them, then you are more close to my personal view which is that they are lying about being communist and China has in fact become the largest, richest, most-powerful and most-dangerous fascist nation in the history of the planet --- and unlike the NAZIs, the Chinese have nukes. Oh, and they are all one race (if you believe there are "races") and extremely bigoted against all other ethnic groups.

    Your response was a typical hit-and-run which claims something was wrong with the post but makes no actual cogent argument at all. I presume you were the one who down-voted it while offereing absolurely no rational argumet. Is it just that you were propagandized at college into thinking all forms or Marxism are good by some idiot professor who advocates for that crap but is unwilling to permanently relocate to such a place? I find lots of propagandized fanboys for leftist systems have no rational arguments for those schemes, other than that they've been programmed to think highly of them.

  33. Better than your first troll, but not by much by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    WindBourne is the ID of an ignorant anti-China troll.
    So even though you didn't realise it, you tick all 3 boxes and are in fact a "WindBourne"

  34. Re: and that nationalism started Nazi Germany chi by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My mom is an astronaut, smarty-pants.

  35. What you are failing to see is that everybody can by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    see that you have yet to make any argument at all. You just did not like the truth and lashed out.

    You've had plenty of opportunity to make a rational fact-based agrument, but all you do is insult.

    You lose the argument - you clearly have nothing to add but your hatred for the truth. Sometimes people are critical of evil Maxist dictatorships because they are indeed evil, Marxist, and dictatorships.

  36. No argument is necessary. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Your claim is so absurd on the face of it. The only kind of people who would believe it are those who couldn't possibly be persuaded by mere arguments or facts.

    Anyway, didn't you learn not to engage silly trolls on their terms?
    I did.
    Just string them along, waste their time and laugh at them. Much more fun.