The EU wants to increase security around 5G networks, but it isn't banning Huawei

[midian182]

In brief: The European Commission has recommended that member states carry out their own risk assessments of 5G network infrastructures but didn’t suggest a blanket ban on Huawei’s equipment—something the US has been pushing for.

The recommendations give countries until the end of June 2019 to carry out the 5G assessments, which includes evaluating the risks linked “to the behavior of suppliers and operators.” It will be up to each nation whether they decide to exclude a company from their plans.

”5G technology will transform our economy and society and open massive opportunities for people and businesses,” said European digital chief Andrus Ansip in a statement. “But we cannot accept this happening without full security built in. It is therefore essential that 5G infrastructures in the EU are resilient and fully secure from technical or legal backdoors.”

The US has long accused Huawei of spying at the behest of the Chinese government, with intelligence chiefs warning that a telecoms device from the company could put users at risk of having their personal information stolen.

Following the signing of the Defense Authorization Act, US government agencies and contractors have been banned from using certain tech from Huawei. In response, the firm intends to sue the US government.

America has been asking its allies not to use Huawei’s equipment in their 5G networks. While Australia and New Zealand agree, others, including the UK, believe they can mitigate any potential risks. But ignoring the warnings could come at a cost: US officials said they would limit intelligence sharing with Germany if it used Huawei’s 5G technology.

The EU also asks that nations work together and exchange information with each other. The reports will be passed on to the European Union Agency for Network and Information Security (ENISA), which will deliver a coordinated risk assessment by 1 October 2019.

Permalink to story.

https://www.techspot.com/news/79378-eu-wants-increase-security-around-5g-networks-but.html

 

[netman]

EU showing some bravery for a change!

 

[TheDevopsGuy]

This sounds reasonable... I don't know about governments and their accusations and pointing fingers at each other of spying. I think personally at the end of the day both of them are doing some sort of spying are they not?

 

[Bp968]

Since the EU doesn't actually produce any tech hardware or software of any relevance I guess it makes sense to want to buy from the cheapest.

I'm not really sure why we care anymore. We should have stopped funding their free security a decade ago. Of course its never quite that simple in the world, but greater Europe has seen the USA as an annoying redneck cousin for far too long now. If that's how they feel thats fine, they can argue with Putin by themselves over what parts of eastern Europe belong in the Russian "umbrella".

Of course Russia is mainly their concern, the real concern for the rest of us is China who is clearly ready to play the long game to "win". And their not exactly world leaders in "tolerance" and "diversity".

 

[Underdog]

Since the EU doesn't actually produce any tech hardware or software of any relevance I guess it makes sense to want to buy from the cheapest.

I'm not really sure why we care anymore. We should have stopped funding their free security a decade ago. Of course its never quite that simple in the world, but greater Europe has seen the USA as an annoying redneck cousin for far too long now. If that's how they feel thats fine, they can argue with Putin by themselves over what parts of eastern Europe belong in the Russian "umbrella".

Of course Russia is mainly their concern, the real concern for the rest of us is China who is clearly ready to play the long game to "win". And their not exactly world leaders in "tolerance" and "diversity".

But on the plus side, China doesn't blatantly engage in "regime change" like the US in order to expand its economic empire.

 

[mailpup]

But on the plus side, China doesn't blatantly engage in "regime change" like the US in order to expand its economic empire.

Tibet might be one exception to that. Maybe not so much for economics but for political reasons but in the end does it really make any difference?

 

[Bp968]

But on the plus side, China doesn't blatantly engage in "regime change" like the US in order to expand its economic empire.

Only because their brand new at this whole "world power" thing. Their essentially right around where the USA was just post WWII. Their already working on playing that game in the Asia sphere and the USA (and big chunks of Asia) are not keen on letting it happen.

If you were expecting me to defend the whole "regime change" thing you'll be disappointed. I've long felt those actions were shortsighted and wasteful. For the money we spent on (and spend) in the middle east and dealing with the fallout from the area we could have modern advanced nuclear reactors, and been moving away from any need to rely on oil from the region. Just look at Iran. We decided to oust their leader and inexplicably ended up stuffing the place with lunatics.

As Ron Paul likes to say, it ends up causing plenty of unintended consequences.

Don't worry, China will get better at it. They also have plenty of other methods to help build their own economic empire.