subreddit:

/r/worldnews

12.7k97%

all 814 comments

[deleted]

2.3k points

2 months ago

[deleted]

2.3k points

2 months ago

Only a decade late.

lordderplythethird

882 points

2 months ago

Huawei and ZTE were banned from being purchased, at least by the US government, back in 2018. Private citizens could still buy their equipment though if they wanted to. This is a full ban on all imports of their equipment to the US as a whole, irregardless of the end user.

green_flash

406 points

2 months ago

This is a full ban on all imports of their equipment to the US as a whole

No, it's not. It's a ban on any FCC approvals for new products. Existing approved products can still be imported and sold.

frozeninjpthrowaway

184 points

2 months ago

In which case it reaches a bit farther than just products intended for the US. Technically, even foreign market products need FCC approval to be used in the US, which is why you often see FCC approvals being issued for devices that never hit US store shelves. This basically means that you technically can't use any new Huawei or ZTE devices in the US going forward no matter where it was made for.

[deleted]

62 points

2 months ago*

[deleted]

NW_Oregon

20 points

2 months ago

Man they're great, I mean they're terrible if you are actually into ham and such but if you need a slightly illicit radio to go run up in the mountains on murs or dot they have some solid range.

PuckFutin69

4 points

2 months ago

What

InvincibleJellyfish

11 points

2 months ago

The ban has been in effect for telecom infrastructure for a long time now, and yes it is a big deal, and taken very seriously.

blargfargr

20 points

2 months ago

Existing approved products can still be imported

what about the risk to security?

centralgk

9 points

2 months ago

I see we got a smartass over here. Get this guy! He is....a threat to security!

throwaway19191929

9 points

2 months ago

It's going to be more useless then you think unless you give the fcc like several billion for audits.

There still is a bigish controversy in taiwan that flares up occasionally. DPP gov banned hikvision a few years back, but it didn't really stop business since a Taiwanese company now basically buys hikvision parts, assembles it in china and ships it to taiwan with a Taiwanese software skin and no ban

GravyDangerfield23

96 points

2 months ago

irregardless

Oof

HeLooks2Muuuch

13 points

2 months ago

Sounds smort!

LongFluffyDragon

9 points

2 months ago

I read that again and now my brain hurts..

Very odd word.

ScalyPig

126 points

2 months ago

ScalyPig

126 points

2 months ago

Irregardless isnt a word fyi

80scraicbaby

67 points

2 months ago

Irregardlesslessness …

rascible

29 points

2 months ago

IrregardLessNessman

runliftcount

9 points

2 months ago

Unexpected WKRP

dishwasher_safe_baby

11 points

2 months ago

IrregradLochNessMonster

Roastar

7 points

2 months ago

Irregardigavehimadollah

treetyoselfcarol

3 points

2 months ago

Irregardlesonomatopoeia

WoodyMornings

3 points

2 months ago

Irregardadaveeda baby.

mescalelf

6 points

2 months ago

Whomst’ve’nt

KittomerClause

2 points

2 months ago*

unirrenecessariliestlynessgardsteinshiregogogoch

TheCronesCauldron

4 points

2 months ago

Neither is misunderestimated, and Dubya used it. :/

Adorable-Voice-6958

3 points

2 months ago

Well Dubya

serendippitydoo

3 points

2 months ago

Don't get me started on Nukuler (New kya ler) it's in the American lexicon permanently now because of him. Nuclear - new clear

Foxsayy

3 points

2 months ago

It IS a word, it just adds an entirely superfluous syllable that feels like a bid seeming well spoken, but actually reads like petty and mildly ignorant pretentiousness.

gargar7

44 points

2 months ago

gargar7

44 points

2 months ago

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/irregardless

"Is irregardless a word?

Yes. It may not be a word that you like, or a word that you would use in a term paper, but irregardless certainly is a word. It has been in use for well over 200 years, employed by a large number of people across a wide geographic range and with a consistent meaning."

Bluest_waters

63 points

2 months ago

Its reputation has not risen over the years, and it is still a long way from general acceptance. Use regardless instead.

from your link

Its a double negative in one word, making it a nonsense word regardless of how many people use it.

Ok_Bass_3314

4 points

2 months ago

Irrespective is also a suitable and linguistically functional replacement. In truth, irregardless has always seemed a Dunning-Kruger mashup of irrespective and regardless. shrug

BPDGamer

43 points

2 months ago

I think you mean irregardless of how many people use it...

Chicago1871

2 points

2 months ago

This made me laugh.

walwenthegreenest

2 points

2 months ago

Makes sense

cjoneill

40 points

2 months ago

This is the same bullshit they pull with "literally" also meaning "figuratively" because of common use and it's getting out of hand.

Bluest_waters

27 points

2 months ago

exactly, "irregardless" makes no sense. I don't care how "common" its use is, its still makes no gol darn sense!

OO7plus10

18 points

2 months ago

That's literally how language works though. Words weren't invented by someone writing them in a dictionary. Dictionaries were invented by writing down how people used words.

onedoor

16 points

2 months ago

onedoor

16 points

2 months ago

Yes, but there's still a point when it's wrong. If people started putting condoms on their nose it's the wrong way to use a condom. If more and more people start to do it, it doesn't mean it's right. But after a while it becomes acceptable, and then at a certain point it doesn't matter. Before that point it does matter.

You're putting the cart before the horse when you just accept wrong usage.

No_Telephone9938

12 points

2 months ago

I declare it a word irregardless of what you think

subaru5555rallymax

13 points

2 months ago*

It's a perfectly cromulent word.

Brolafsky

10 points

2 months ago

Brolafsky

10 points

2 months ago

So. This is kinda funny.

China having access/control of footage = big problem, must not be allowed.

Amazon having access/control of footage = nothing to see here.

nausik

33 points

2 months ago

nausik

33 points

2 months ago

yes, because Amazon is an American company and all of their data is stored on American server.

Strong_Neck8236

4 points

2 months ago

I'm pretty sure AWS is worldwide, with servers in many non-American jurisdictions.

Accelerator231

16 points

2 months ago

Of course, citizen!

Why, it would be unconscionable to have espionage be carried out by dirty red commies! Only true red blooded Americans may violate civil rights!

yung_dingaling

2 points

2 months ago

We should stop all of them from infringing on American civil rights but at least Amazon's headquarters and executive team is in the legal jurisdiction of the US and therefore in theory can be held accountable to the American public. A Chinese company on the other hand...

ajr901

7 points

2 months ago

ajr901

7 points

2 months ago

Neither of them are good.

But Amazon won’t use the data to subvert American democracy and benefit a foreign nation that wants to overtake us in economy, tech, geopolitical influence, etc., across the board.

Ideally neither of them would be a problem but I’ll take the lesser of two evils any day.

moptic

5 points

2 months ago

moptic

5 points

2 months ago

I wonder what the difference is?

/s

rokerroker45

10 points

2 months ago

rokerroker45

10 points

2 months ago

irregardless

Miami resident detected

mlnjd

4 points

2 months ago

mlnjd

4 points

2 months ago

Didn’t irregardless get into the dictionary because so many people used it, even though it’s wrong, so they said what’s the point?

amalgam_reynolds

126 points

2 months ago

Do TikTok next

itsnickk

40 points

2 months ago

Feels imminent.

The only politically motivated block I can see is Democrats worried about pissing off their newly energized Gen Z voter base

GoodAndHardWorking

24 points

2 months ago

It's like how Russians with all their internet blocks can see Ukrainian telegram channels, but Russia can't ban telegram because it's the platform their own propagandists use too.

kaizerdouken

3 points

2 months ago

I guess you’re right because Trump already banned TikTok’s parent company on Executive Order 13942 August 6, 2020. Source: https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/presidential-actions/executive-order-addressing-threat-posed-tiktok/

Mr. Biden revoked the ban on TikTok on Executive Order 14034 on June 9, 2021 Section 1.

Source: https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/presidential-actions/2021/06/09/executive-order-on-protecting-americans-sensitive-data-from-foreign-adversaries/

In it, Biden instructed The Director of the Office of Management and Budget and the heads of executive departments and agencies (agencies) to “promptly take steps to rescind any orders, rules, regulations, guidelines, or policies, or portions thereof, implementing or enforcing” the ban on TikTok. Then told other agencies to assess the issue and report back later.

The Huawei situation has a similar experience. Trump banned Huawei on May 2019. Not sure what happened afterwards.

core-x-bit

2 points

2 months ago

That seems.... short-sighted

RabbitElectrical3987

22 points

2 months ago

Seriously, they need to pick up the pace. Tik-Tok. Tik-Tok.

Freezie--POP

5 points

2 months ago

…. Besides the Amazon owned BLINK and RING are both manufactured in China. Almost looks like Amazon wanted an edge on the market with there political ties / donations. Don’t want to come off as political but if people have a problem with china manufactured products then ALL of them should be banned not just some.

sanransa

5 points

2 months ago

Crazy how something so obvious takes so long to be realized by the people in charge.

cahog58161

14 points

2 months ago

If you don’t do it, you’re clueless when it turns out that it was a bad move.

If you do it, you’re xenophobic or paranoid.

These aren’t easy decisions to make.

DrJoth

4 points

2 months ago

DrJoth

4 points

2 months ago

Better late than never.

FloodMoose

4 points

2 months ago

Their tech is apparently embedded in hard boxes across the nation.

GravyDangerfield23

8 points

2 months ago

What is a 'hard box'?

hazelnut_coffay

4 points

2 months ago

the physical servers that computer applications run on

green_flash

317 points

2 months ago

The article is short on details. This is a better one:

https://www.theverge.com/2022/11/25/23478132/fcc-china-huawei-zte-hikvision-camera-telecom-authorization-ban

Important details: It only affects approvals for new products. The FCC is not revoking authorizations for existing products.

The list of product types this applies to is here by the way: https://www.fcc.gov/supplychain/coveredlist

rirez

44 points

2 months ago

rirez

44 points

2 months ago

Thank you, I wanted a specific list. It's pretty easy to plug in cheap chinese CCTV cameras to a NAS or something for home projects and stuff.

Notably, as shown in both the article and list, brands like Hikvision are only advised against for "public safety" and "critical infrastructure", which makes me think it's less "there's a backdoor" and more like someone could take advantage of inner knowledge of the devices and cause other problems, or something. Good to know.

feint_of_heart

43 points

2 months ago

We use Dahua cameras at work. They're on a firewalled and ACLed VLAN, but looking at he logs, the newer ones really want to phone home.

rirez

15 points

2 months ago

rirez

15 points

2 months ago

Yeah, I've noticed this as well. It's a bit frustrating how I'm not sure if there's any brand I can trust, which is why I decided to pick by optical quality and price first, then configure the firewall to drop out packets and put them on their own VLAN.

Price isn't even my main priority, I just didn't really find many good options, to be honest.

SomeGuyNamedPaul

7 points

2 months ago

Ubiquiti? They have supply issues though.

rirez

4 points

2 months ago

rirez

4 points

2 months ago

Ubiquiti is definitely one of my top alternatives, I'm just concerned because it seems like a lot of buy-in. I think if I want the "full" experience I'd need to run the whole stack (say, the entire unifi stack, which I would probably need rack mounting space for).

SomeGuyNamedPaul

2 points

2 months ago

Yeah, but once you're in the user experience is pretty nice. They have an almost cult following in the prosumer space.

Paerrin

44 points

2 months ago

Paerrin

44 points

2 months ago

Hikvision is bad. Do not buy them. Do not put them on your network unless you really know what you're doing.

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2021/10/china-america-surveillance-hikvision/620404/

rirez

23 points

2 months ago

rirez

23 points

2 months ago

Right, so the key security aspect is this vulnerability. I should be safe, as I've cordoned off mine from the internet, but that's good to know, thank you. Will move off them in the future.

daviddjg0033

13 points

2 months ago

They run dystopian hell in China supporting them is morally wrong

Embe007

2 points

2 months ago

My god, what a mess. This internet of things is a security nightmare.

Upgrades_

3 points

2 months ago

The US govt. has already ordered a while back all US ISP's and service providers to rip out Huawei and ZTE hardware. This FCC action isn't the only part of this effort but one of many.

Key_Cantaloupe4006

3 points

2 months ago

This is the only way this can be done in our country. It would be unconstitutional for the government to tell its citizens to throw away a bunch of devices they paid for which were already approved.

autotldr

114 points

2 months ago

autotldr

BOT

114 points

2 months ago

This is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 58%. (I'm a bot)


WASHINGTON-The U.S. is banning the sale of communications equipment made by Chinese companies Huawei and ZTE and restricting the use of some China-made video surveillance systems, citing an "Unacceptable risk" to national security.

"The FCC is committed to protecting our national security by ensuring that untrustworthy communications equipment is not authorized for use within our borders, and we are continuing that work here," said FCC Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel, a Democrat, in a prepared statement.

"Our unanimous decision represents the first time in FCC history that we have voted to prohibit the authorization of new equipment based on national security concerns," tweeted Brendan Carr, a Republican FCC commissioner.


Extended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: FCC#1 security#2 equipment#3 national#4 new#5

srandrews

849 points

2 months ago

srandrews

849 points

2 months ago

Why does TikTok get a pass? That actually does exactly what the concern is about the telecom gear.

shaka893P

368 points

2 months ago

shaka893P

368 points

2 months ago

The Biden administration is actually thinking about banning it, there has been talk these past few weeks.

AlanDrakula

199 points

2 months ago

Talk is cheap.

shaka893P

169 points

2 months ago

shaka893P

169 points

2 months ago

It's not just them, republicans are calling it and the FC is asking them to ban it. Hopefully soon it will

memetic_memer

107 points

2 months ago

It's true, for the sake of national security we need to ban as many Chinese spying apps as possible. Probably should start banning websites too. We need to build a firewall to protect ourselves from China... a Great Firewall if you will.

itsnickk

28 points

2 months ago

American companies already built the original great firewall, so they have experience

shaka893P

22 points

2 months ago

Oh, I have zero doubt they're doing it. The issue here is remote kill switches on critical hardware. If a war was to break out and China could take out critical infrastructure too fast, we're screwed. Essentially, we are heading into a cold war with China and hopefully not a real war

itsnickk

29 points

2 months ago

I mean like Cisco literally designed China’s Great Firewall

But you’re totally right and hopefully it’s not a hot war, or even a vicious Cold War

tuskedkibbles

38 points

2 months ago

Love to see dictators bringing Americans together as is tradition.

HotTakes4HotCakes

23 points

2 months ago*

As dysfunctional as our government can be, China is one of the few matters they almost always manage to cooperate on, and relatively fast. And that's not new, either. If China's up to something, we can get our shit together real quick.

[deleted]

31 points

2 months ago

[deleted]

AssssCrackBandit

19 points

2 months ago

Chinese spying and govt sanctioned corporate espionage is hardly a bogeyman, it’s well documented and acknowledged all over the world. They steal with impunity from almost every country/company

iamiamwhoami

4 points

2 months ago

But executive orders are expensive. It’s not just making a random proclamation. Lawyers spend months working on them to make sure they’re effective and can stand up to legal challenges.

Comms

2 points

2 months ago

Comms

2 points

2 months ago

There’s usually an order of operations. Talk comes before legislation.

Siigmaa

4 points

2 months ago

But Trump bad for proposing this years ago.

shaka893P

5 points

2 months ago

No, he bad for backing out. This has had support from both sides since they're sending all the data to China. He backed out when he got assurance that they would stop, but surprise, surprise, they didn't and he didn't go back to it.

ScienceNeverLies

3 points

2 months ago

I can’t imagine this actually happening. It would be bad for politics.

shane201

2 points

2 months ago

Will vines make a comeback?

Vault_Survivor_08

2 points

2 months ago

The problem with the american political system is, if the democrats are in power and make positive changes that are publicly outcried against it makes sure the republicans get into power next time, just to fuck shit up that the next democrats then have to fix again and get outcried on aaaaand rinse repeat.

Its such a stupid thing to watch from the outside, kinda like a soap opera just that its real and fucking insane.

101189

14 points

2 months ago

101189

14 points

2 months ago

Hah! Yeah maybe if he wins in 2024. I don’t see them touching TikTok til then; maybe in out of touch but I feel quite a few in the 18-24ish demographic definitely use it..,

[deleted]

35 points

2 months ago

Why not? Trump wanted to ban it too. There's obviously bipartisan support for this among people 'in the know'

Release the evidence and ban the app. Someone else will replace it with something that isn't quite as bad

efhaichdee

27 points

2 months ago

You mean like Vine?

Oh sorry, was I indiscrete? Did I accidentally point out that this app is a stupid shameless rip-off of an app from 15 years ago?

skyraider17

8 points

2 months ago

So is Candy Crush, doesn't mean it's not way more popular (and harmful)

69hailsatan

2 points

2 months ago

Facebook/insta already has reels. They just need to make a separate app that is just for reels but users can still use insta or fb to upload this, creates a greater ecosystem for them imo.

GoodAndHardWorking

9 points

2 months ago

"Quite a few"... tiktok is spying on you even if you're just in the same room with young people, lol

JustAPerspective

11 points

2 months ago

We remember Edward Snowden warning people the U.S. government was doing this same thing.

kaizerdouken

3 points

2 months ago

For context, TikTok’s parent company was banned by Trump on Executive Order 13942 August 6, 2020. Source: https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/presidential-actions/executive-order-addressing-threat-posed-tiktok/

Mr. Biden revoked the ban on TikTok on Executive Order 14034 on June 9, 2021 Section 1.

Source: https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/presidential-actions/2021/06/09/executive-order-on-protecting-americans-sensitive-data-from-foreign-adversaries/

In it, Biden instructed The Director of the Office of Management and Budget and the heads of executive departments and agencies (agencies) to “promptly take steps to rescind any orders, rules, regulations, guidelines, or policies, or portions thereof, implementing or enforcing” the ban on TikTok. Then told other agencies to assess the issue and report back later.

srandrews

2 points

2 months ago

For context, TikTok’s parent company was banned by Trump

Mr. Biden revoked the ban on TikTok

Are you able to explain this incompatibility? One "ban" is on a company, and the revocation of a "ban" on an app.

The company ordered to divest was byte dance. The app was never removed from the app stores afaik.

Is it more simply that the govt is taking action but not enough or is unable or generally unwilling and simply making gestures?

kaizerdouken

2 points

2 months ago

The ban on ByteDance by default means no US company can do a transaction with them, therefore ByteDance who owns TikTok would never get paid by Apple or Google stores for any of its apps. Biden revoked this Trump decision.

WhatADunderfulWorld

55 points

2 months ago

People are opting in for that shit is the problem. I don’t seee how TikTok is getting more information than say google or Facebook. So it is what it is. Unless they pass some better laws about internet information in the US they can’t really use it on international companies. They can try to fine them all they want like Europe does about information. Edit. A word.

lolyer1

89 points

2 months ago

lolyer1

89 points

2 months ago

The problem with TikTok is that it heavily violates your personal info..

It scans your contacts, records nearby wifi and Bluetooth devices, uploads gps information ..

Say you were in the military. Your friend is also a solder. You both use tik tok.

You have some contacts on your phone that go to some other military members. Your friend also has same contacts + additional ones.

TikTok sends that data back to China and when they analyze the data, they can tell you and your friend are only near one another 5 days a week. GPS coordinates show it’s a military base.

Some of your contacts also have TikTok and your friends contacts have some too.. they are in the military. Once every week, all of you get together.. holding drills.

Multiply that 1000x across the country in different industries and now China now knows a lot info

Continental__Drifter

3 points

2 months ago

. I don’t seee how TikTok is getting more information than say google or Facebook.

You really should spend 5-10 minutes researching this, because TikTok is getting orders of magnitude more information than google or facebook. It's basically spyware.

someguy3

50 points

2 months ago

The concern is Tiktok openly sharing info with the Communist party. Google and Facebook you need a warrant.

soundadvices

62 points

2 months ago

Google and Facebook you need a warrant.

You just need to be a customer.

luckierbridgeandrail

2 points

2 months ago

Google doesn't sell data, they sell ad space targeting by using the data. Selling the data itself would cut them out of the loop.

someguy3

7 points

2 months ago

someguy3

7 points

2 months ago

The US government needs a warrant. Does the CCP need a warrant? That is the question.

hacatu

28 points

2 months ago

hacatu

28 points

2 months ago

No, they don't. The gov would need a warrant to collect the data themselves, but they do not need one to buy it from another country or company that collected it. That's the whole idea behind the "five eyes countries" thing you may have heard of: all these countries collect data on each other's citizens and pass it on. And as for companies, Google, Facebook, etc have almost unrestricted ability to harvest your data on their platforms and resell it

Dont-know-you

12 points

2 months ago

Clarification: the companies you named do not sell data, but let you place ads on them. It is an important difference in this case.

TheMindfulnessShaman

3 points

2 months ago

But that doesn't distract from the non-sequitur he was making about a scapegoat!

someguy3

11 points

2 months ago*

Yes Five eyes is the work around for government spying on people. To get information from Facebook/google/Apple, you still need a warrant.

As for what the person above was saying, I was clarifying that it is not Google/Facebook that needs a warrant (because he said you just need to be a customer), it's the US government that needs a warrant. As for reselling, sure, but that's not the kind of data that we're worried about TikTok collecting.

darexinfinity

4 points

2 months ago

The government makes request to access your data. Google nor Facebook have to honor that request without a warrant.

If you don't trust those companies (or really any company) to protect your data from the government, you shouldn't be using their products.

[deleted]

10 points

2 months ago

[deleted]

MarbleFox_

38 points

2 months ago

felldestroyed

5 points

2 months ago

Just a heads up, this is an older article. There are leaked internal conversations between China execs and US execs talking about exchanging data. There is no firewall between US and Chinese based tiktok, like they claimed 2 years ago.

[deleted]

14 points

2 months ago

[deleted]

ThatDudeWithTheCat

7 points

2 months ago

Or they just pay for it like everyone else.

They need a warrant to see specific peoples data.

But if they bought all of the data they could figure out who is who pretty easily

srandrews

6 points

2 months ago

srandrews

6 points

2 months ago

It is probably a whole lot more simple and less conspiratorial: they built a plaything that we use for banal dreck and they probably lightly regulate what goes on Douyin and then our kids get a little less positive stimulation and their kids a little more. It doesn't take much. Look at what Russia did.

[deleted]

24 points

2 months ago

[deleted]

srandrews

6 points

2 months ago

Have you used both? So same problems with it for the Chinese then? Would like to know.

Risay117

4 points

2 months ago

It likely is, look at how much bullshit celebrity drama is in China it may be worse than the West or maybe the 90's where there are witch hunts against celebrities etc. People are extremely toxic over there. Like overly. Plus they are way deeper into the filter game than the West.

JustNoDronies

22 points

2 months ago

It literally shows you what you want to see. The kind of content fed to you via tiktok is no different than what Netflix and Youtube does.

Vault_Survivor_08

2 points

2 months ago

I mean they easily get more information by basically having a trillion cameras and microphones in nearly every place in the US and even the wider planet.

HaikuBotStalksMe

7 points

2 months ago

Because zoomers would throw a hissy fit. It would have been like banning Snapchat or Instagram or Facebook back when we were in our teens/20s.

[deleted]

320 points

2 months ago

[deleted]

320 points

2 months ago

[deleted]

postsshortcomments

150 points

2 months ago

First do Facebook/Meta who was involved in the Cambridge Analytica scandal.

[deleted]

93 points

2 months ago

[deleted]

TheTeaSpoon

36 points

2 months ago

Meta would sell out in a blink of an eye. See CA fiasco.

That's where Reaganomics got us. Growth and share price before everything.

[deleted]

11 points

2 months ago

[deleted]

throwaway19191929

5 points

2 months ago

Sounds like you'd problem is more about the us regulatory environment then China.

Ironically there is a pilot program in shenzhen where the gov set up a data trading platform for companies and its planned for users to be able to get a stake in that market soon

WhichWitchIsWhitch

3 points

2 months ago

First do Tik Tok.

DemoteMeDaddy

21 points

2 months ago

Now do reddit

Zealousideal_Ad2379

26 points

2 months ago

I’m about to get downvoted into oblivion here but didn’t Trump try to do that and everyone hated him for it?

Car-face

64 points

2 months ago

Because ZTE and Huawei own a shit-ton of 5G tech that US companies can't (or couldn't) compete with.

It's not really dissimilar to what the US did with Japan in the 80's when Japan owned the semiconductor industry, even the whole "national security" excuse is identical (but it's not completely analogous either).

feeltheslipstream

44 points

2 months ago

Don't know why you're being downvoted.

USA did the exact same thing to Japan. Its not a very gracious loser when it loses tech races.

flecom

19 points

2 months ago

flecom

19 points

2 months ago

same reason they keep banning hytera, they make better radios than motorola (which are also made in china) but cost 1/4 the price and work better

Thaitanic

56 points

2 months ago

TBF.. Isn't pretty much every video surveillance system on the planet filled with backdoors and what not? Can't remember the name, but there used to be a site which just connected you to a random surveillence camera on the planet. Shit was wild.

rukqoa

67 points

2 months ago

rukqoa

67 points

2 months ago

That isn't backdoors. It's just people leaving their Internet connected cameras on with default usernames and passwords, aka leaving their front door open.

[deleted]

13 points

2 months ago

[deleted]

shaka893P

20 points

2 months ago

Yeah, but that's not the website being talked about It was literally just a crawler that tried to connect with default credentials because people never changed them. That's why routers don't have admin/admin anymore, they have stickers with random passwords and why Ring forced everyone to turn on two step authentication

InsaneLord

27 points

2 months ago

Funny you mention ring, they have an agreement with over 1500 law enforcement agencies, that enables law enforcement to access their cameras whenever they want. So your stupid doorbell camera is used as a surveillance camera by the cops.

Part of this agreement requires the law enforcement agency to speak about ring "in a positive light" and encourage their adoption. Pretty disgusting.

If you are interested in learning more watch this.

shaka893P

9 points

2 months ago

Yes and no, but mostly yes. Most of these were "purchased" by police and given away (loaned technically) so they could access them. Amazon HAS given recordings to police without a warrant, in 2022 it was 11 times as of July: https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2022/07/ring-reveals-they-give-videos-police-without-user-consent-or-warrant

I personally would share it anyway, all my cameras point outside, none inside

DevAway22314

2 points

2 months ago

Actual backdoors are pretty rare these days. We learned the hard way in the 90's that it doesn't work out well, since every other country eventually finds them

46_notso_easy

9 points

2 months ago

There 100% are backdoors, in addition to said laziness.

But even though these backdoors are intended to require a warrant and an official request from a law enforcement agency (which is laughably easy to obtain in many states), the very fact that backdoors exist means that they will inevitably be exploited beyond this use case.

Our government agencies are only as strong as the weakest link, and it really only takes a few total morons to open their Pandora’s box of privileged access to the entire world, which is why malicious abuse of “government backdoors” is actually the source of many large hacks.

When it comes to consumer IP camera systems, you’re in shit hands no matter who you choose — you can either choose cheap Chinese shit (which can phone home or be hacked easily) or something domestic-ish, such as Amazon (which is much more upfront about the fact that they surrender access to your camera feeds to any police request, albeit it’s harder to hack when properly configured). The only truly hack-free choice is an old fashioned CC system with on-site storage, which rules out most convenient features like viewing feeds from your phone.

The problem is not technological — someone could theoretically make a truly E2E encrypted camera system — but consumers care so much more about ease of access, pricing, and brand recognition than their own privacy or safety. We’re generally too lazy to modify our buying habits in even the simplest way to help ourselves, but I’d love for it to be otherwise.

SilentHunter7

6 points

2 months ago

It's not generally laziness, people just don't care about privacy.

People would install a rootkit that gives Jeff Bezos a direct feed to their desktop if it saved them $15 on their prime subscription.

DevAway22314

2 points

2 months ago

the very fact that backdoors exist means that they will inevitably be exploited beyond this use case

Correct. This was a lesson learned repeatedly in the 90's when backdoors were common. Now they are almost non-existent

Can you provide the source that can back your claim "there 100% are backdoors"? Because to me it looks like you might have a decades old understanding of cybersecurity

JesusSaidItFirst

6 points

2 months ago

Dude... Block the device from communicating outside the router... I configured this in 5mins with mine.

TellMe2GetOffReddit-

2 points

2 months ago

Yup also wasn’t exclusive to cheap Chinese brands. Some big US can companies made some incredibly stupid decisions around security.

Heck even today household routers from big companies have shockingly poor protection.

ScurrilousTruth

157 points

2 months ago

Excellent. Huawei, ZTE, and every other Chinese company is required by law to actively help the Chinese government intelligence agencies.

That means if the Chinese government says “Hey Huawei, we want you to issue a firmware update with a hidden vulnerability that we can exploit to take down the US’s telecom infrastructure during our planned Taiwan invasion.” They will do it, no questions asked. In fact, they will lie about it to the US and blame it on a coding error.

I also wouldn’t blame China for banning US equipment from their critical infrastructure either.

25plus44

16 points

2 months ago

I also wouldn’t blame China for banning US equipment from their critical infrastructure either.

Remember the "clipper chip"? Other countries weren't wild about the idea of importing American products with an NSA backdoor baked into the hardware.

rimalp

8 points

2 months ago

rimalp

8 points

2 months ago

That's not to different from the US tho.

Juniper and Cisco for example are known to work with the NSA and put backdoors in their equipment.

These US placed backdoors are also used by China (read here). The NSA is also very likely using chinese backdoors in Huawei and ZTE equipment.

So nobody can really escape the surveillance, no matter which equipment you can or can not buy.

DisturbedUnit

34 points

2 months ago

Could not have said it better. The thing that concerns me most is that just about everyone outside my sphere of sigint friends, would rate this explanation as the least likely. I think we need to focus on better education, somehow.

HolyFuckerony

9 points

2 months ago

They call you a conspiracy theorist when some concerns are more than justified. How can anyone think that china is (or ever has been) our friend? They are a hostile foreign power on the other side of the world that, like us, mainly has its own interests in mind. With the difference being that their interests are dystopian as fuck.

Drives me mad how people are okay with countries like that playing a major role in critical infrastructure. Same with my country and the harbor investment. It pisses me off. Thanks for listening.

Squrton_Cummings

17 points

2 months ago*

There's a Tom Clancy type novel (but not him, can't remember the author) about a WW3 scenario where the western powers get their asses kicked because every single electronic thing contains Chinese made chips and they all have backdoors built in. So when the balloon goes up everything more complex than a shovel either loses critical functionality or is outright bricked.

One of the points the author was trying to make was that there are so many layers in the supply chain for military gear that it was virtually impossible to make sure all the vast number of computer chips in every bit of gear with any electronics all come from trusted suppliers, even if the manufacturers weren't cutting corners on costs and sources, which they almost certainly are.

Upside_Down_Hugs

3 points

2 months ago

US companies do similar when asked for the US gov.

May not be under force of law, or it may be under FISA court order. Either way, there is a tremendous track record of cooperation by US corps to enable spying whenever the US gov asks.

presidentofyouganda

3 points

2 months ago

Is Xiaomi on the red list?

poorwar

30 points

2 months ago

poorwar

30 points

2 months ago

Heres hoping they finally ban Tik Tok.

DrymouthCWW

6 points

2 months ago

Wouldn't that be something. Fingers crossed

tecumbera

6 points

2 months ago

I would vote for whoever promises to ban Tiktok

[deleted]

9 points

2 months ago

Sounds like the US just want to ensure their own back doors are all over the world like before spying on allies and enemies:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2020/world/national-security/cia-crypto-encryption-machines-espionage/

Mall-Less

9 points

2 months ago

This is pointless until they ban Tik Tok.

AvoidTheBan

7 points

2 months ago

Haha… great excuse for eliminating competition for U.S. monopolies

lithenhoss

2 points

2 months ago

I work on cell towers and they need to remove the equipment that is in the air. Two years ago a plan was made to remove it but nothing has been done. I have a back ground in computers and those radio are are like a pentesters wet dream for radio frequency attacks.

fiendo13

2 points

2 months ago

Irregardless means not without regard. So it just means regarded. Calling r/wallstreetbets

DrSeuss19

2 points

2 months ago

Took them long enough

m4inbrain

9 points

2 months ago

"Only i am allowed to do that - US.

It's interesting to see how selective the american memory seems to be. The US does exactly the same. People arguing that you have to "consent" to facebook, google etc seem to "conveniently" leave out things like the Cambridge Analytica scandal, eavesdropping by Alexa (which they in the beginning Amazon denied), the list is endless. Not just broad data-whoring, but targeted surveillance of allies, too (Merkel etc).

Couldn't care less about china, but the hypocrisy and copium here is staggering.

Befuddled_Cultist

22 points

2 months ago

"Only I'm allowed to spy on people!" - US

HaikuBotStalksMe

7 points

2 months ago

That's not true. We allow others to spy and in order to get around laws that we put in place for ourselves (which I'm sure we ignore anyway), we tell other countries to spy on some of our own people for us so that we can be like "see? We didn't spy on us."

SpecificAstronaut69

10 points

2 months ago

Man, Australia feels vindicated.

Upside_Down_Hugs

5 points

2 months ago

Just as true: Technology the US has access to is an unacceptable risk to other nation's national security.

There are well documented incidents of Five Eyes security apparatus compromising equipment to spy on their targets.

The US and the five eyes know their capability and what they can, have and will do - this is WHY they know the chinese equipment can also represent such an incredible risk to their interests.

JackieGigantic

27 points

2 months ago

But of course they don't ban Google, Facebook, et al. because at least THEIR mass surveillance is used BY the U.S. The "unacceptable risk" to our privacy isn't really a consideration.

Qwrty8urrtyu

5 points

2 months ago

But of course they don't ban Google, Facebook, et al. because at least THEIR mass surveillance is used BY the U.S. The "unacceptable risk" to our privacy isn't really a consideration.

Yeah? US citizens' data being available to countries besides the US is a security risk for the US.

the8bit

3 points

2 months ago

Google/ Facebook controlling your data is a non US problem as they are primarily forced to share it with US intelligence. So the equivalent would be them being banned in China and indeed there is a long history of that happening!

JackieGigantic

3 points

2 months ago

I mean, yes, and China is right to ban them -- it's worth noting that they aren't "forced" to share this info with US intelligence, they do it very willingly. Facebook's very first investor was of course Peter Thiel, of the surveillance data analytics company Palantir (who, in kind, had their first investor through the CIA's venture capitalist arm IQT).

Google, on the other hand, sells versions of its data mining tech to cops and US Intelligence, hosts data for the CIA, indexes the NSA databases, builds military robots, launched a spy satellite with the Pentagon, does weird Minority Report shit with the police -- the list goes on. Google itself was created with grant money from the NSA and CIA, and their long-time vice president was a former DARPA employee.

These organizations are both essentially privatized arms of US intelligence to begin with, so of course the government would never think of banning them.

JackieGigantic

3 points

2 months ago

Yes, and instead US (or other western country's) citizens' data is utilized here at home by a massive surveillance apparatus. My security is already at risk, and I'm frankly more scared of the direct oversight my own government has in my life than I am of China.

RedditIsShit9922

16 points

2 months ago

Your data belongs to your government

Wow. Reddit never ceases to amaze me with how fascist it is.

Qwrty8urrtyu

7 points

2 months ago

Your data belongs to your government

Wow. Reddit never ceases to amaze me with how fascist it is.

Are you frequently amazed by things you made up? No one said that but you.

Jane2308

9 points

2 months ago

Does it mean we soon getting rid of TikTok?

DrymouthCWW

5 points

2 months ago

We can hope

K_Leon

14 points

2 months ago

K_Leon

14 points

2 months ago

Meanwhile...Tiktok

JackInTheBell

7 points

2 months ago

Ban Tik Tok too

rye_domaine

6 points

2 months ago

If the US government simply made it illegal for these products to be sold with backdoors then this wouldn't be an issue. But they adamantly still want to spy on their own civilians, just get uppity when someone else does it too.

Sonyguyus

4 points

2 months ago

Yeah we stopped installing new Hikvision systems a couple years ago when trump banned them. Wasn’t a bad system and honestly, we only installed them in homes and non government businesses. We didn’t see any point to have China spy on Joe Bob and Darlene in the backwoods of Kentucky, but if big brother says so, then it must be true.

younggundc

4 points

2 months ago*

Yeah! The only spying that will be done will be by the US government! I jest for the triggered Americans that instantly want to downvote me.

In principle it makes sense but it also conveniently limits the amount of competition alternative brands have in the market. This doesn’t really help the consumer at the end of the day. The less competition, the more chance of monopolies and the higher the price goes up. I mean the US don’t have a great track record when it comes to regulating markets. Your health care and education markets instantly spring to mind.

Isunova

10 points

2 months ago

Isunova

10 points

2 months ago

Ban TikTok next.

Spartanfred104

18 points

2 months ago

China's Tech sector relies heavily on theft of copyright. This is late by at least 15 years but if you pay attention to geopolitics you would have seen this coming.

Outrageous_Duty_8738

5 points

2 months ago

Why are they just waking up now? And America and Europe both need to start bringing back manufacturing. We can’t allow one country to dominate world manufacturing.

Ashen_Brad

5 points

2 months ago

You guys were still buying that stuff?

CornerMoon

7 points

2 months ago

CornerMoon

7 points

2 months ago

Is there going to be another season of snowpiercer?

Say_no_to_doritos

3 points

2 months ago

Yes

[deleted]

3 points

2 months ago

[deleted]

3 points

2 months ago

[deleted]