Britain announced today that it will not ban Huawei or other “high-risk vendors” from its 5G wireless network, though it will exclude the firms from sensitive “core” parts of the network. The move comes despite over a year of intense lobbying by the United States government, which has been trying to discredit and ban Huawei to give US technology firms an unfair advantage.
“The National Cyber Security Centre (NCSC) carried out a technical and security analysis that offers the most detailed assessment in the world of what is needed to protect the UK’s digital infrastructure,” the announcement notes. “The guidance sets out the practical steps operators should take to implement the government’s decision on how to best mitigate the risks of high-risk vendors in 5G and gigabit-capable networks.”
Sign up for our new free newsletter to get three time-saving tips each Friday — and get free copies of Paul Thurrott's Windows 11 and Windows 10 Field Guides (normally $9.99) as a special welcome gift!
"*" indicates required fields
That guidance, available on the NCSC website, recommends that the UK exclude so-called “high-risk vendors”—mostly Chinese technology firms—from its critical national infrastructure, critical ‘core’ functions (the most sensitive parts of the network), sensitive geographic locations including nuclear sites and military bases, and be limited to “a minority presence of no more than 35 percent in the periphery of the network, known as the access network, which connect devices and equipment to mobile phone masts.”
According to the NCSC, “Huawei has always been considered higher risk by the UK government and a risk mitigation strategy has been in place since they first began to supply into the UK.” But the biggest problem with Huawei isn’t that it’s Chinese, as in the U.S, but it’s the company’s products have always had quality and reliability issues. It feels that Huawei provides “low” cybersecurity and engineering quality and finds that its processes are “opaque.”
While this is a “UK-specific solution for UK-specific reasons,” as the report notes, it does impact other countries as well since the UK is part of the “five eyes” intelligence-sharing group that also includes Australia, Canada, New Zealand, and the United States. The NCSC notes that Huawei’s US ban—it’s on the US Entity List—could “impact the future availability and reliability of Huawei’s products” in the UK.
t-b.c
<p>The reason the US avoids Huawei isn't because it's electronics are unreliable, but because it is run by the former head of the MSS (the Chinese intelligence service, like our CIA). The belief is that Huawei will build back doors into their switches and routers and monitoring gear on cell phones. Would you want their gear installed on our battle cruisers and military bases, knowing that it could possibly be compromised by America's greatest threat, China? I'm not for every conspiracy theory, but sometimes a little paranoia is a good thing.</p>
t-b.c
<blockquote><a href="#516285"><em>In reply to paul-thurrott:</em></a><em> Good point. It's completely valid to put the shoe on the other foot. Only (to my knowledge) Jeff Bezos never headed the CIA. And yes, I wouldn't blame other countries avoiding US products for the same reason. I mean, I'm an American and even I would avoid buying tech from John Brennan!</em></blockquote><p><br></p>
t-b.c
<blockquote><a href="#516553"><em>In reply to paul-thurrott:</em></a><em> Sure, I agree, and I'm not trying to be argumentative or trying to get the last word I'm simply pointing out that Huawei is banned because of the one thing that makes it different from every Chinese company that isn't banned, that their top spy is running the company. While every tech company may have ties to their respective governments, I don't know of any other that can make that claim.And, if pushed, I would also point out that the Chinese government owns the large Chinese companies — at least in part — which is very different than any Western nation. Would I ban Huawei if I were in charge? I'm not certain, but I understand the case for the ban. </em></blockquote><p><br></p>
PeterC
<blockquote><em><a href="#516447">In reply to ponsaelius:</a></em></blockquote><p>Yup. It’s all playing politics and political click bait. Networks the world over are and have always been, chock a block full of buggy, compromised and just plain rubbish kit from US, Chinese, Israeli, Nordic and other suppliers. Everyone’s fighting over backdoor access… nothing new and yet it gets sooooo much coverage. Totally tedious in my opinion. Let’s face it, if the US had invested as much in 5g kit as heavily and intensely as the Chinese did we’d all be using and installing US kit. They didn’t, the Chinese did and here we are. </p>