Cybersecurity and Cyberwarfare

The US government has been too slow to respond to China’s technological rise and aggression in cyberspace — and it could pay a big price. That's according to Sen Mark Warner (D-VaA), who blasted congressional dysfunction and mismanagement by both the Trump and Obama administrations for a complacency that allowed Chinese companies to get ahead in next-generation 5G wireless networks. The risks are big: Intelligence officials fret Beijing could use that position to spy on Americans or sabotage US companies.

The Kremlin warned that reported American hacking into Russia’s electric power grid could escalate into a cyberwar with the United States, but insisted that it was confident in the system’s ability to repel electronic attacks. Dmitri S. Peskov,  Russian President Vladimir V. Putin’s spokesman, also raised concerns that President Donald Trump was reportedly not informed about the effort, which was the subject of a New York Times report on June 15 that detailed an elaborate system of cybertools deployed by the United States inside Russia’s energy system and other targets.

Sens Marco Rubio (R-FL) and Mark Warner (D-VA) warned the Trump Administration not to concede on important national security matters related to countering Huawei, a Chinese state-directed telecommunications company recently added to the US Commerce Department’s banned Entity List, and the development of fifth-generation wireless telecommunications technology (5G) in order to achieve a favorable outcome on trade negotiations with China.

Huawei, perhaps buoyed by Trump Administration reported easing-up on potential sanctions on the Chinese telecommunication company, has "supplemented the record" in its fight against a Federal Communications Commission proposal banning telecoms with "suspect" tech from broadband deployment subsidies in the Universal Service Fund (USF) program.

Apparently, some of the world’s biggest tech companies have told their employees to stop talking about technology and technical standards with counterparts at Huawei in response to the recent US blacklisting of the Chinese tech firm. Chipmakers Intel and Qualcomm, mobile research firm InterDigital Wireless, and South Korean carrier LG Uplus have restricted employees from informal conversations with Huawei, the world’s largest telecommunications equipment maker. Such discussions are a routine part of international meetings where engineers gather to set technical standards for communications

Google has warned the Trump Administration it risks compromising US national security if it pushes ahead with sweeping export restrictions on Huawei, as the technology group seeks to continue doing business with the blacklisted Chinese company. Senior executives at Google are pushing US officials to exempt it from a ban on exports to Huawei without a licence approved by Washington. Google is concerned it would not be allowed to update its Android operating system on Huawei’s smartphones, which it argues would prompt the Chinese company to develop its own version of the software.

Joe Franell is a fan of Huawei’s equipment. As the CEO of Eastern Oregon Telecom, he’s responsible for providing internet to about 4,000 customers, many in small communities or remote farmland. He’s been lucky: the Huawei equipment he uses has never failed, which he hasn’t been able to say about everything else in the company’s network.

The recent presidential executive order barred US companies from buying foreign-made telecommunications equipment deemed a national security risk. Although the order does not name Huawei, Congress and our intelligence agencies have voiced concern that the company’s equipment contains vulnerabilities that the Chinese government and others could exploit to spy on or harm US networks. But the executive order misses a critical problem: our networks already contain equipment from Huawei — lots of it.

Plans to upgrade wireless service in some rural areas is being halted abruptly since President Donald Trump issued an executive order that banned the purchase of equipment from companies posing a national security threat. That includes gear from Huawei, the Chinese telecommunications giant, a major supplier of equipment to rural wireless companies.

The Federal Election Commission gave the go-ahead to a nonprofit organization seeking to offer free cybersecurity services to political campaigns, upending rules that typically consider such free services illegal campaign contributions. The FEC’s reasoning, in a nutshell, was that it ordinarily bans such services due to the possibility people might try to cash in on political favors later. But in this case, the risk of Russian and Chinese hackers running roughshod over the 2020 elections is far worse.