Huawei row: Spy chiefs to discuss cyber threats amid UK 5G controversy

ChrisK....._3

The only thing you can absolutely guarantee about all this !!!!!in about Huawei is that they will definitely be building UKs 5G network. Is they're no other company the UK gov could work with on this because national security is more important than a faster mobile network. Should be anyway

Huawei row: Spy chiefs to discuss cyber threats amid UK 5G controversy

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-48032286

[Deleted User]

Apparently a number of cabinet ministers voiced concerns but May has given it the ok regardless.

Sapphire

venison wrote: »

Apparently a number of cabinet ministers voiced concerns but May has given it the ok regardless.

How very wise of her. :mad:

Our lovely 'representatives' sure play loose with the security of our country's citizens.

ruperts

We should let GCHQ make these decisions because they never spy on anyone and everything they do is above board.

(Just joking GCHQ please don't delete me)

Muttleythefrog

Perhaps it's not all bad news.... government contractors often go belly up.

Li0nhead

Muttleythefrog wrote: »

Perhaps it's not all bad news.... government contractors often go belly up.

We could always nationalise them....:rotfl::rotfl:

dividendhero

Here's my tuppence worth.

(1) Huawei is the most watched high tech company in the world, they've even shared their source code with the UK Govt. Thus far no back doors have been found.

(2) UK tech industry is going nowhere, the two biggest companies in the sector are now foreign owned. Says it all that the biggest UK internet company seems to be a portal for High Street Fast food joints.

wymondham

The number one priority of a Government is security and protection of its people. If there is any concern over this then they should use someone else. If we go ahead then other countries rightfully will assume we are insecure and we wont be privy to info.

PM May seems to dislike the UK - more so as the days progress... is she a covert operative?

DCodd

To be fair, all this has to be viewed within the current US stance of American Corporate protectionism. Trump has openly told the world that he will do all he can to put American Companies and workers first and Huawei do threaten that.


Due diligence is required but from what I have seen GCHQ or more accurately The National Cyber Security Centre part of GCHQ don't seem to be overly concerned by any perceived threat.

worldtraveller

Government ministers are calling for a "full and proper" investigation after high-level discussions about the UK using Huawei technology were leaked.

The government has approved the supply of equipment by the Chinese telecoms firm for the UK's new 5G data network - despite warnings of a security risk.

It is believed the decision was taken at a meeting of the government's National Security Council on Tuesday.
One minister said leaking from the council was "simply not acceptable".

The senior minister told BBC political editor Laura Kuenssberg that leaking the conversations was "extraordinary...the security council is the holy of holies". There were "huge concerns" over "getting into bed" with the telecoms giant, the minister said.

BBC News

As far as I can see this leak from a member of the NSC is unprecedented. The NSC is given highly sensitive information by all of the security services, much of it gained by agents around the world. They have to trust the members to keep it secure, all of who have signed the Official Secrets Act. I'm staggered to think that someone has leaked information from such a meeting and IMHO there must be a thorough investigation and serious criminal charges brought for any offence committed.

Uxb1

dividendhero wrote: »

Here's my tuppence worth.

(1) Huawei is the most watched high tech company in the world, they've even shared their source code with the UK Govt. Thus far no back doors have been found.

Do you really think that they shared the real source code -ROTFL!
Hint
When I worked in industry where my job included writing software programs I always wrote in undeclared backdoors to them which opened when a special set of header sequences were input as part of the data stream.
...and no the executable file was not complied from the declared source code.