Despite full access to Huawei’s headquarters in Shenzhen and her executives (including Chen Lifan, a board member and a senior vice president), CNET continues to report with astounding accusations and insinuations. At the heart of the issue is American and Australian press accusing Huawei of potentially assisting the Chinese government of hacking into American and Australian computers. The CNET report is wrapped up by a segment where writer Jay Greene (who along with Roger Cheng wrote the article) is interviewed by CNET’s Editor, Bridget Carey, titled, “The espionage anxiety over Huawei.” Now, how do you prove that you are not a spy when your accuser merely accuse you of spying? Isn’t the accuser obligated to present evidence? How does a person prove that he is not a savage to a racist who accuses him of such? The video segment below shows what’s wrong with CNET and the American (and Australian) media in general when they lose faculty in judging how ludicrous their own narratives are.
According to this hacking study done by the NCC Group, in Q2 of 2012:
The research tracks the origins of unauthorised network access attempts across the world. From April-June 2012, 22.5% of all monitored attempts originated in the US, 49 million more than January-March, when the nation was responsible for 17.4% of global hacks. China was responsible for 15.8% of the monitored global total, and Russia for 13.3%, up on 13.7% and 12.4% respectively.
The United States is in fact the largest source of hacks on this planet. If we apply the same logic CNET Editor, Bridget Carey, used in the line of questioning she had for Jay Greene, the narrative should be that the United States government is the largest source of hacks in our world. Therefore, Cisco and all American network equipment companies are suspect. It would then be up to Cisco and the likes to prove that they are not under American government control. Until then, Cisco products are not to be sold anywhere outside America.
But, why do markets around the world not block Cisco products? That is because if Cisco is ever caught giving a backdoor to the U.S. government allowing for future sabotage, that’d be the end of the company. Likewise, for Huawei.
One may say, well, the Chinese government is hacking. But, so far, American media or the U.S. government have not produced any evidence.
What about the phishing attacks against Google’s Gmail?
In Google’s latest accusations about phishing attacks originating from China, in fact, Cisco’s very own security expert has discredited the claims. Venture Beat’s Matt Marshall wrote:
Here’s what we know: Mila Parkour, the Washington-based IT specialist at the security specialists Contagio Malware Dump who first spotted the attacks three months ago, and wrote about it here, documented a series of attacks from various locations. These also included Korea and New York.
This has some other experts asking questions, including Mary Landesman, a respected senior security researcher at Cisco. I called her up to ask her point of view of the attacks, and she pointed out that the Contagio documentation alone is not enough to pinpoint Jinan as the source.
“The Jinan, China connection seems to be coming from fact that some phishing emails were sent through 163.com,” she says, “but if that’s evidence, then I think it’s worth questioning. That’s a funny email for cyber [activity].” The domain 163.com may be based in Jinan, but that doesn’t mean that’s where the attack really originated.
By way of explanation, if someone sends a phishing attack through a Gmail account, that doesn’t mean that the attack originated from Mountain View, California (the home of Google, which owns Gmail), she said.
Now, look at how Google planted the insinuations into the American press:
Through the strength of our cloud-based security and abuse detection systems*, we recently uncovered a campaign to collect user passwords, likely through phishing. This campaign, which appears to originate from Jinan, China, affected what seem to be the personal Gmail accounts of hundreds of users including, among others, senior U.S. government officials, Chinese political activists, officials in several Asian countries (predominantly South Korea), military personnel and journalists.
Bingo, American press runs with it, accusing the Chinese government of hacking Google. Remember, Google to date has not offered any evidence!
For whatever reason, Huawei is now mired in this supposed Chinese government hacking of American computers.
If we look at the following chart of the world’s largest telecom equipment providers by revenue broken up by the four markets, Huawei in fact beats Cisco to a pulp everywhere else except in the U.S.. Huawei’s revenue within the U.S. market is almost non-existent. That is because of the accusations thrown at the company and American IT managers are afraid to purchase Huawei products fearing backlash. As the CNET article reports, American politicians in fact personally call American telcos to block Huawei’s deals.
The smearing against China and Huawei as a Chinese company is part of this grander collective defamation. Unlike iPhones and iPads allowed through where China only adds a little bit of value via assembling them, Huawei’s products in fact can fully displace Cisco’s in totality. Perhaps a more apt “proof” to be undertaken is why this isn’t American protectionism.
For those of us who see rampant jingoism in the American press, that CNET article misses no beat in delivering that nonsense:
For all its efforts to become a more Western-style technology power, Huawei continues to struggle to address the concerns of governments and businesses in the United States and elsewhere.
Since when is a Chinese-style technology power not acceptable? Why must it be Western-style? CNET wants to equate “Western-style” to “successful and trust-worthy.” How else might an American reader interpret that?
Huawei might need the Chinese media’s help in doing some defamation against Cisco before that American protectionism truly drops. It’s hard to imagine any other way. Huawei’s Chen Lifan is asking for ideas!