UK & EU Agree Post-Brexit Trade Deal

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by Sephiroth

In addition to trade deal sensitivity, maybe also the 5 eyses relationship.

Good point. Huawei is a hard situation to navigate but the Hong Kong situation has already meant that Chinese relations are far worse than back in David Cameron's day.

[jfman]

Originally Posted by Pierre

Whatever the reason. It is ultimately the right decision.

Any proof? Or is this another “following the science”?

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by jfman

Any proof? Or is this another “following the science”?

Having worked in Telecoms for 26 years, I know all about Huawei from when they first Appeared on the scene With cheap facsimiles of Cisco kit they had ripped off to where they are now.

Security concerns about Huawei is nothing new, and precedes Trump. The Obama administration banned their use.

https://www.telecomramblings.com/201...s-us-problems/

And I remember discussing them with the CPNI around 2008, they had serious concerns
back then.

The risks to U.K. infrastructure were highlighted many years ago

https://www.parliament.uk/documents/...ure-Report.pdf


So do one.

[jfman]

“Working in telecoms” covers a wide range of roles, not all of which require any knowledge of Huawei.

You’re first article is speculative.

Huawei has been under fire in the USA in regards to possible security risks that might derive from its relationships with the Chinese military.

Your second is from 2013 and the concerns obviously not significant enough to stop our mobile networks investing in it in their infrastructure.

“Do one”, for someone who has been in telecoms for 26 years you debate like a child.

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by jfman

“Working in telecoms” covers a wide range of roles, not all of which require any knowledge of Huawei.

Listen, I don’t know what your profession is, if indeed you have one, but I am an incorporated Engineer that has worked in the transmission and fibre engineering sector for a long time. If I was lying the mods on here Could easily ascertain my identity and do a quick LinkedIn search and call me out, but they won’t because I’m not

I don’t have to certify my credentials to you.

You’re first article is speculative.

It’s not, Hibernia Atlantic announced to the world they were going to build a new a trans-Atlantic cable that would be partially funded By Huawei and using Huawei equipment.

They were refused permission to build that system by the US government, and instead had to find alternative funding and use US supplier TESubcom, it put the project back years.

Your second is from 2013 and the concerns obviously not significant enough to stop our mobile networks investing in it in their infrastructure

The risks were highlighted and continued to be closely monitored, hence the course of action taken.

“Do one”, for someone who has been in telecoms for 26 years you debate like a child.

Because I am clearly debating with one, or someone with the mental capacity of one.

https://www.ispreview.co.uk/index.ph...dband-kit.html

Not Huawei but another Chinese vendor, like Huawei, ZTE etc. They are ultimately Chinese state owned, there are no private companies in China.

[jfman]

An “engineer” sounds more like manual labour than stakeholder relationship to me. That said I’m sure, behind your keyboard, you will prove me wrong as ever.

I don’t need the mods on here to prove your Conservative credentials, your post history is sufficient.

You’ve linked to a company other than Huawei. Which is fantastic because it makes you look to be clutching at straws.

This is a trade war. Your low level knowledge of the politics of the telecoms sector, being likely on the manual labour side, is irrelevant.

Engineer is not manual labour, it is a skilled technical position in Telecomms.

Before retiring, I worked at a number of Universities, and used to attend RUGIT (Russell Group IT Directors Group) meetings, and we often had "off agenda" briefings from representatives from the National Cyber Security Centre (which is part of GCHQ) - there were often warnings about how Chinese students were actively copying/taking back to China proprietary research findings, and how we should be mitigating this (difficult in Universities, who believe knowledge should be shared), and how they had concerns about any Chinese manufacturers tech being embedded in our networks (pro’s were it was cheaper, con’s were it was often built with stolen copyrighted technologies, and concerns about backdoor security potential breaches).

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by jfman

An “engineer” sounds more like manual labour than stakeholder relationship to me. That said I’m sure, behind your keyboard, you will prove me wrong as ever.

I have to prove nothing, that very statement proves you have no idea whatsoever what you are talking about in this field.

I would quit now if I were you on this particular matter should you look more foolish.

I don’t need the mods on here to prove your Conservative credentials, your post history is sufficient.

?????? A bizarre and confusing statement. I was Talking about my credentials in the telecoms industry, that you questioned, nothing else. My profession has nothing to do with any political thinking I may have.

You’ve linked to a company other than Huawei. Which is fantastic because it makes you look to be clutching at straws.

wrong again, I was just picking up on a very recent story about A Chinese state owned Telco company....as they’re all state owned.....That has been caught with security issues. Huawei, ZTE etc are of the same ilk.

Huawei’s history in counterfeiting Cisco kit and security issues are well documented.

https://news.hitb.org/content/counte...-cisco-exploit

https://www.e-ir.info/2013/03/13/hua...onal-security/

This is a trade war. Your low level knowledge of the politics of the telecoms sector, being likely on the manual labour side, is irrelevant.

The difference here is I have a “high” knowledge of the telecoms sector and you have “no” knowledge of the sector, you look foolish ( I would say stupid but that would be an insult), If you want to continue looking foolish, I look forward to your reply.

[jfman]

Originally Posted by Pierre

Listen, I don’t know what your profession is, if indeed you have one, but I am an incorporated Engineer that has worked in the transmission and fibre engineering sector for a long time. If I was lying the mods on here Could easily ascertain my identity and do a quick LinkedIn search and call me out, but they won’t because I’m not

I don’t have to certify my credentials to you.



It’s not, Hibernia Atlantic announced to the world they were going to build a new a trans-Atlantic cable that would be partially funded By Huawei and using Huawei equipment.

They were refused permission to build that system by the US government, and instead had to find alternative funding and use US supplier TESubcom, it put the project back years.



The risks were highlighted and continued to be closely monitored, hence the course of action taken.

Because I am clearly debating with one, or someone with the mental capacity of one.

https://www.ispreview.co.uk/index.ph...dband-kit.html

Not Huawei but another Chinese vendor, like Huawei, ZTE etc. They are ultimately Chinese state owned, there are no private companies in China.

You have no right to know me, nor my occupation, however if you claim to use your “expertise” in commenting on a sector it may be helpful if you offered an evidence base. Which in your original post you did not.

If/when Biden wins I’ll be genuinely intrigued to read your climb down.

---------- Post added at 20:45 ---------- Previous post was at 20:40 ----------

Originally Posted by Pierre

I have to prove nothing

Such extraordinary, although not unexpected, arrogance.

---------- Post added at 20:51 ---------- Previous post was at 20:45 ----------

Originally Posted by Hugh

Engineer is not manual labour, it is a skilled technical position in Telecomms.

Before retiring, I worked at a number of Universities, and used to attend RUGIT (Russell Group IT Directors Group) meetings, and we often had "off agenda" briefings from representatives from the National Cyber Security Centre (which is part of GCHQ) - there were often warnings about how Chinese students were actively copying/taking back to China proprietary research findings, and how we should be mitigating this (difficult in Universities, who believe knowledge should be shared), and how they had concerns about any Chinese manufacturers tech being embedded in our networks (pro’s were it was cheaper, con’s were it was often built with stolen copyrighted technologies, and concerns about backdoor security potential breaches).

Grateful if Pierre could present such credentials, although equally indifferent if he/she could not.

[1andrew1]

Chinese telecoms have different kinds of ownership. If Three, for example, was state-owned, I doubt we'd allow it to operate a UK mobile network. But I think we're wondering off topic so I won't post further on this.

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by jfman

You have no right to know me, nor my occupation, however if you claim to use your “expertise” in commenting on a sector it may be helpful if you offered an evidence base. Which in your original post you did not.

I’m not putting CV up.

But I have worked for a major telecoms company for over 25 years in Managerial and consultancy positions. I am an Incorporated Engineer, registered with the engineering Council UK and a member of the IET, and yes in regards to layer 0, layer 1 telecoms I am considered an expert.

If/when Biden wins I’ll be genuinely intrigued to read your climb down.

On the contrary, I believe Chinese companies a security risk, the Obama administration banned them, I don’t see why Biden would suddenly embrace them.

[jfman]

Are you evidencing these claims or asking the forum to take them at face value.

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by jfman

Are you evidencing these claims or asking the forum to take them at face value.

What “claims?” I have Provided evidence, the fact you are out of your depth And trying to argue on a subject you know nothing about is painful to behold.

But let it continue, if you find self flagellation enjoyable.

[jfman]

Originally Posted by Pierre

What “claims?” I have Provided evidence, the fact you are out of your depth And trying to argue on a subject you know nothing about is painful to behold.

But let it continue, if you find self flagellation enjoyable.

You have provided a link to a claim. Unless you have further evidence to post then I’ll consider your rhetoric to be irrelevant. As ever you offer no insight so it may be worth offering an opinion first before dismissing everyone else...

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by jfman

You have provided a link to a claim. Unless you have further evidence to post then I’ll consider your rhetoric to be irrelevant. As ever you offer no insight so it may be worth offering an opinion first before dismissing everyone else...

I’ve provided more than enough evidence on this particular issue.

So in light of all the evidence you wish to ignore, I’ll dismiss you again, on this matter, you Know nothing, you’re coming across as an idiot.

If you carry on, you’ll only be confirming the proposition.