Posts by Russell Brown
-
Hard News: The Huawei Question, in reply to Rich of Observationz,
Look at Telecom’s failures with CDMA and then XT. The root cause of those was having dumped almost all technical skill and knowledge in favour of picking a solution ready rolled from overseas.
In the case of XT, the problem was poor decisions within Telecom, at executive and board level. The RNCs from Alcatel Lucent worked fine, the network basically didn’t have enough of them. Management didn’t forecast demand, went too early with marketing, etc. As Peter Griffin summarized the independent report, Telecom wasn’t ready for showtime.
-
Hard News: The Huawei Question, in reply to Rich of Observationz,
firstly, there has been evidence of government linked hacking from China, which is antisocial at the least. If the Chinese governments sees this resulting in it’s exporters losing business, they might start playing more nicely.
There's no doubt that the Chinese government is behind the hacking attacks by individuals. The question is whether there is any link to Huawei's technology.
secondly, I think it’s a general problem that NZ telcos are basically marketing operations with the smart stuff contracted to overseas systems providers and the digging of holes done by Aussie labour hire outfits. If they moved the line down a bit, we might get better results in a few areas – confidence in network security would be one of them.
It's not even faintly possible that NZ companies could build these networks on their own, without large, specialised international vendors.
-
Hard News: The Huawei Question, in reply to Geoff Lealand,
Got a note to say that high-speed broadband will be passing by our house within days.
Lucky bugger. Still no word on when it gets to my suburb in Auckland.
-
Hard News: The Huawei Question, in reply to Paul G. Buchanan,
There have been several reports done by US, UK and Australia security agencies outlining their concerns. These are not done out of anti-Chinese prejudice.
And yet the British government explicitly addressed those concerns and could find no impediment to Huawei becoming the primary vendor for Britain's national fibre network. It then granted permission for its former government CIO to become Huawei's global security chief. In the interim, Huawei opened a security test centre that's pretty much a glass box.
And still no one seems to have demonstrated a link between Huawei products and the well-known security intrusions. I think it's a given that the NSA has gone over the source code in Huawei hardware with a fine-toothed comb, but there doesn't seem to be anything there.
-
Hard News: The Huawei Question, in reply to HORansome,
Maybe it’s the sceptic in me, but the Intelligence and Security Committee aren’t exactly the most reliable of sources when it comes to justified true beliefs.
Especially if their beliefs have come from an agency dedicated to US economic interests.
-
Hard News: The Huawei Question, in reply to Craig Ranapia,
With all due respect, Russell, are you also expecting the Government to buy everyone a unicorn while they’re at it?
Nah. But Adams is really out of depth in her new portfolio. They need someone stronger to front this.
-
Hard News: Dirty deeds done by Digger?, in reply to Aidan,
This is huge. More evidence they have done the same thing elsewhere, specifically Australia:
Holy shit. I wonder what other dirty deeds are detailed in those emails?
-
Ah yes, this one:
AUCKLAND– Mondex International is running a public relations campaign to emphasise positive aspects of its security after acknowledging in a confidential document that customers may not be protected if its electronic cash scheme is “compromised”.
Holders of Mondex smartcards will not be protected by Mondex and will not necessarily be able to redeem the value held on their cards if the scheme is successfully attacked, according to an agenda item on security PR prepared for a Mondex board of directors’ meeting in July.
The document, leaked to Computerworld, describes a plan to counter “this obvious weakness” and cites the need to step up security PR in light of “recent events”, namely the series of articles in Computerworld (New Zealand).
Potential adverse impacts on Mondex of fears about its security are listed. These include attacks from consumer groups and pressure on governments “to act to protect the consumer against products like Mondex, either by insisting that Mondex accepts liability or that it is not allowed to be developed”. Mondex also fears adverse impacts on the other brands held by MasterCard, Mondex’s 51% owner.
Six New Zealand banks – ANZ, National, Westpac Trust, BNZ, Countrywide, and ASB – are also shareholders in Mondex and recently confirmed their intention to launch the smartcard-based system in October next year.
“Given our assertion that Mondex is ‘tamper resistant’ and not ‘tamper proof’, any stepping up of PR security must include clear statements of the basis upon which consumers will be protected in the event of a security breach”,” the document says.
“Without these statements, we are in danger of exposing the fact that the system is not tamper-proof, and should it be compromised, we will not protect cardholders."
Ah, good times.
Needless to say, Mondex never launched in New Zealand and the banks walked away from their investment.
-
Hard News: Dirty deeds done by Digger?, in reply to nzlemming,
Ah, Mondex! So much hope, so little delivery.
Aw, you got me going now:
Security expert claims e-cash system fatally flawed
Mondex marketing may mask the issues
Banks reassess Mondex after security doubts
Tbh, they read a bit better than I thought they would. I’ve always thought that with more experience I could have done better than I did with the material I got. Which was incredible.
I honestly think this is the most influential writing I ever did. Weirdly, it failed to even be a Qantas finalist that year.
-
Hard News: The real problem with the…, in reply to DexterX,
That Ambrose wasn’t interviewed is more than ridiculous – it shows how much of a fit up the whole saga was and is
To be fair, Ambrose did provide a detailed statement via his lawyers four months ago, so it wasn't as if the police didn't know his side of the story.
But ... given that Radio NZ was served with a search warrant merely because Ambrose was interviewed on the radio ... yeah. What the hell were the police thinking?