"Could be made vulnerable", compared to what? "Additional", compared to what?
I answered questions asked by two posters here #11 and #17 politely.
I didn't define the question.
What are the increased risks from using Huawei hardware, compared to other sources?
A tray full of GOLD is not worth a moment in time.
^Must protect my local companies profits zzzzzzzzzzzzzzz........., even if their all made in China.
Your reply as usual makes no sense. ...could it be to obfuscate the fact you didn't read your own article?
Here is timeline so you can catch up with yourself:
1) You start a thread about phones
2) People start talking about phones
3) You go full retard and say the thread is not about phones
4) I reply, quoting your OP directly showing the thread is about phones and asking you to clarify.
5) You reply with the following non-sequitur: "That's already been reported, and the use of the word "already" should be a clue."
Since we've apparently grasped the meaning of the word "already", let's see if we can get our little head around the word "now", shall we?
And we'll throw in the word "networks" in the vague hope that you can stick your two vaguely functioning brain cells together and work out the difference between that and "phones".
[QUOTE]However, there are now fears that US military bases located overseas could be made vulnerable to hacking attempts if their internet traffic travels over commercial networks in other countries built using Huawei hardware. [/QUOTE]
Take as long as you need.
You left out the sentence before that from your OP:
So it appears the thread topic is about phones?Already this year the US has banned government use of Huawei-made equipment and refuses to let retail stores on military bases sell Huawei handsets.
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/...ectid=12168527 NZ buying Huawei no more.
Sure.
Rather look in from the outside and pick holes in yours and 'arrys propaganda posts.
I've invested some in the locality, to be sure,
As you well know they have concerns, as does anyone without their own development and production of any important items. They appear satisfied currently, as are the UK companies in the electronics/telecom arena. What they don't do is blindly obey the big handed man as Oceania countries do, so often.
We have a thread, once again, suggesting one companies telecoms is worse that others and hence should not be allowed to be purchased and benefit the countries citizens and telecoms companies.
The OP:
A second post:
The fact that both equipment and handsets (phones) are mentioned in the one or both, encourages posters to discus either or both. No puerile threats from some posters here should dissuade posters otherwise e.g. :
It would be useful if the posters here promoting the banning of a particular companies equipment and handsets, by posting such articles, could confirm how one particular company's equipment and handsets are demonstrably, allegedly, worse in terms of the any risks assessments, compared to any alternative company's equipment and handsets. If that was satisfactorily illustrated, the non technical amongst us might understand their issues.
Currently it seems to be another pure racist outburst, again.
'racist'. Oh FFS.
'racist'. Oh FFS.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)