UK Defence Secretary Gavin Williamson Sacked over Huawei Leak

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-48126974

by jmsflknr • 7 years ago

66 58 7 years ago

bbc.com

insomniacity• 7 years ago

I'd love to know how he was caught. Not enough security on his phone - or old school interviews and sources?

NeedMoreTea• 7 years ago

With his almost glorious ability to insert foot in mouth, I would put money on self-incrimination.

TheOtherHobbes2• 7 years ago

It's also possible he didn't do it. He hasn't exactly impressed anyone - except himself - during his brief but very exciting tenure, and it's possible May was looking for an excuse to get rid of him while also pointing the finger at a convenient scapegoat.

We'll see if this proceeds to a criminal investigation. My guess is it won't.

tonyedgecombe• 7 years ago

I think the first indication was when he refused to cooperate with the investigation.

Or perhaps he had a Huawei phone.

mtgx• 7 years ago

They probably couldn't even tell him how they caught him, because then they'd have to admit that GCHQ is spying on most government members, too.

jsty• 7 years ago

Given the technical aptitude of most politicians in the UK, he may equally likely have used a government-issued device

sethhochberg• 7 years ago

This is part of the reason why governments make info-sharing pacts between their spy agencies, right? You might have a policy of constitution preventing you from spying on your own citizens, but your allies certainly don't play by those same rules.

KaiserPro3• 7 years ago

I doubt it was that. From what I have heard he was the only one trying to blame it on civil servants.

Plus as its a criminal matter they would have been able to get warrants to get call records. As the journalist that broke the story is known, its not hard to figure out from there.

DanBC• 7 years ago

He's a fucking idiot.

Here's the letter May sent, which makes it sound like regular interviewing and discussions: https://twitter.com/BBCBreaking/status/1123635838523465729

(But, obviously, the security services aren't going to say "we know it was him").

This, from Buzzfeed, about him is telling: https://www.buzzfeed.com/emilyashton/britains-new-defence-se...

adwww• 7 years ago

Honestly leaks are such a common part of the current UK government he is probably just suprised that THIS TIME people are taking it seriously.

expressrunning• 7 years ago

Relevant discussion a day ago:

Vodafone Found Hidden Backdoors in Huawei Equipment

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19786102

gnode4• 7 years ago

While this is being touted as a smoking gun, calling it a "backdoor" may be reaching:

https://www.theregister.co.uk/2019/04/30/huawei_enterprise_r...

sp332• 7 years ago

I think this article is disingenuous. It's telnet on a nonstandard port with hardcoded credentials, that was added back in after being removed when it was spotted in previous security testing.

Edit: this according to one of the sources in the Bloomberg article, who claims to have read internal Vodaphone documents https://twitter.com/raistolo/status/1123283199348621312

ssnistfajen• 7 years ago

Huawei's reputation has never been completely stellar, but I'm getting more and more skeptical of these "reports" and the motivation behind them. Rehashed old news fromm 2012 about a telnet port? Really? As always, rehashed old news is great for clicks when it's the correct boogeyman.

13415• 7 years ago

In general, this is one of the news threads that I persistently don't understand. There is too much information missing. Why are European countries so keen on allowing Huawei to build some critical infrastructure? Do they face threats from China? If so, how are these made? And then there is the other side of the coin, that the US allegations look credible overall, but it is also known that the NSA and GCHQ built spying tools into existing European infrastructure. Is the US trying to do this again but this wouldn't work if Huawei was involved?

Which companies can actually build these kind of networks? Couldn't e.g. France and Germany build them on their own? Or would that be too expensive?

Questions over questions...

jonathankoren• 7 years ago

Why are European countries so keen on allowing Huawei to build some critical infrastructure?

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/22/technology/huawei-europe-...

gnode4• 7 years ago

The desire to use Huawei is that they're a major player in the telecommunications infrastructure market.

The governmental advice / requirements not to use Huawei equipment is because China is not trusted, and diplomatic relations with China are bad. There appears to be no hard evidence that Huawei have abused their trust, yet at the same time, that doesn't mean they couldn't. It's not possible to differentiate innocent security vulnerabilities with underhandedly engineered ones. Ultimately it doesn't matter whether Huawei are abusing their position of trust or not, but whether they could be used as a weapon by their host country, to which the answer is that they could be, as for any such company anywhere. So ultimately it's a diplomatic issue.

hacker_9• 7 years ago

It's cheap, and there is not enough conclusive evidence about the allegations. The US-led artificial trade war with China also gives pause when they are the accusers. If a credible EU country brought something up I'd expect it'd be taken much more seriously.

user5994461• 7 years ago

It's geopolitics. In short, when there is only a choice between US and Chinese manufacturers, whichever doesn't matter because they're both considered equally hostile. Chinese is cheaper though.

pkaye• 7 years ago

There is a third option... the EU countries develop its own technology.

eznoonze• 7 years ago

Intel is joining the 5G infrastructure game.

https://newsroom.intel.com/news-releases/intel-modem-stateme...

Someone1234• 7 years ago

It is really quite simple: The US has yet to provide their evidence to European countries, or has and their evidence is so unconvincing nobody actioned it.

That's what this entire situation boils down to. The US has been making claims, now it is time to back those claims, until they do nobody should do anything. A lot of people suspect this is more about geopolitics than security for legitimate reasons.

rb8082• 7 years ago

If all computers, networking and cell phones come from China, I dont see why local 5G transmitters should be any different. If Europeans save a lot of money choosing Huawei over Qualcomm its a good choice. Its not like Qualcomm is nice to Europeans.

Also Europe is less insular and doesn't have the cold war mentality that our current government seems driven by.

KaiserPro3• 7 years ago

1) there are always holes in network gear. They are either deliberately put in, or in there because network firmware is difficult time short and buggy as hell. or SS7.

2) allowing Huawei to bid brings the price down. There aren't many major players, so a lack of competition means comedy quotes. (https://www.greyb.com/companies-working-on-5g-technology/)

3) france and germany can build them on their own, see above.

I suspect there are some specific flaws that are exploitable, perhaps. But, it depends on where the kit is. If its part of the core routing fabric, then yes, thats possibly a problem. However most networks have total oversight, because thats how GCHQ et al operate. At the very least keep a connetion record of every event that happens on the network

make3• 7 years ago

isn't the fact that she was trying to have Huawei participate to the infrastructure without people knowing it the actual scandal worth being sacked for? that's crazy

emilfihlman• 7 years ago

I wonder, if Huawei is really spying for China and May (and other politicians) know about this and endorse that, shouldn't that be treason?

lucozade• 7 years ago

Shouldn’t what be treason?

M2Ys4U2• 7 years ago

I'm not sure it qualifies under the Treason Act 1351:

When a Man doth compass or imagine the Death of our Lord the King, or of our Lady his Queen or of their eldest Son and Heir; or if a Man do violate the King’s Companion, or the King’s eldest Daughter unmarried, or the Wife of the King’s eldest Son and Heir; or if a Man do levy War against our Lord the King in his Realm, or be adherent to the King’s Enemies in his Realm, giving to them Aid and Comfort in the Realm, or elsewhere, and thereof be probably attainted of open Deed by the People of their Condition, and if a Man slea the Chancellor,Treasurer, or the King’s Justices of the one Bench or the other, Justices in Eyre, or Justices of Assise, and all other Justices assigned to hear and determine, being in their Places, doing their Offices: And it is to be understood, that in the Cases above rehearsed, that ought to be judged Treason which extends to our Lord the King,and his Royal Majesty.

or the Treason Felony Act 1848:

If any person whatsoever shall, within the United Kingdom or without, compass, imagine, invent, devise, or intend to deprive or depose our Most Gracious Lady the Queen, from the style, honour, or royal name of the imperial crown of the United Kingdom, or of any other of her Majesty’s dominions and countries, or to levy war against her Majesty, within any part of the United Kingdom, in order by force or constraint to compel her to change her measures or counsels, or in order to put any force or constraint upon or in order to intimidate or overawe both Houses or either House of Parliament, or to move or stir any foreigner or stranger with force to invade the United Kingdom or any other of her Majesty’s dominions or countries under the obeisance of her Majesty, and such compassings, imaginations, inventions, devices, or intentions, or any of them, shall express, utter, or declare, by publishing any printing or writing or by any overt act or deed, every person so offending shall be guilty of felony, and being convicted thereof shall be liable to be transported beyond the seas for the term or his or her natural life

rb8082• 7 years ago

The concern I dont understand. If all traffic is encrypted, what is the risk of Huawei equipment handling traffic? Are people worried about spying or being able to switch interrupt service?

CharlesColeman• 7 years ago

There's still metadata. Also I'd think that lawful-intercept features mean that telecom traffic is not end-to-end encrypted, so unencrypted streams might be accessible to telecom equipment like this unless the customer is using a nonstandard encrypted phone.

rwmj• 7 years ago

One worry is that in a war situation (cyber or shooting) the Chinese govt might be able to disable UK networks, for example by sending an obscure sequence of plaintext bytes which is understood by the routers.

stiffnovigrad• 7 years ago

I love that people are rationalizing for a dictatorship-lead China with concentration camps in the west (xinjiang), religious oppression in the south (tibet), democratic oppression in the east (hong kong), and aggression in the east (artificial islands in south china sea, nearly crashing into US battleships, massive buildup in warships), that is seeking to invade Europe with spy technologies from its state firm is:

huawei doesn't have backdoors => the backdoors are (easily?) found by security audits. nothing to see here.

dang• 7 years ago

Please don't take HN threads into nationalistic flamewar. It's not what this site is for. Please read the guidelines: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html.

We detached this comment from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19800040 and marked it off-topic.

supergirl• 7 years ago

maybe conspiracy but I have a feeling this is part of US strategy to kick Huawei out of Europe, from the last few countries that didn't already ban them, UK and Italy. I can't imagine any way for UK to allow Huawei to build 5G once US said it is forbidden

te_chris• 7 years ago

The same Gavin Williamson who threatened China with military action while the Chancellor of the Exchequer was there trying to hold trade talks? I’m shocked.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/feb/16/gavin-willi...

UK Defence Secretary Gavin Williamson Sacked over Huawei Leak

Related Stories