This is just geopolitics. You should've seen what the US and Europe did during the Cold War.
hunter2_
If we set aside geopolitics and purely consider whether tightening the security of private networks is sensible whatsoever: are routers a substantially bigger threat than client devices such as the various IoT knickknacks (smart TVs, smart switches/outlets, smart appliances, etc.)? Controlling the NAT/firewall features is handy for opening ports and working around VLAN segmentation, but that isn't required for many scenarios; a compromised client device can often snoop on the rest of the network and exfiltrate what it discovers just fine even with an uncompromised router.
the ban covers all foreign-made consumer routers but practically every router is manufactured abroad, even the ones sold by American companies. the only domestic exception is Starlink, iirc
orwin
My company new installation now use Siemens routers. It seems a few will keep Cisco though, so we have yet another provider. More work for me I guess.
juliusceasar
Israel did the same in Netherlands with the biggest telecom KPN.
mikkupikku
> country which once exploited an attack vector is now trying to protect itself on that vector
I have no doubt that American efforts at security on this front are inadaquate, incompetent, etc. But hypocritical? Nah.
soumyaskartha
The audacity of banning others for doing exactly what you got caught doing. At least be subtle about
show comments
drivingmenuts
If I was more paranoid, I'd start thinking the ban is to make it easier to spy on us by limiting our choices to a few domestic vendors who can be coerced by regulatory capture and "for the kids" political rhetoric.
This is just geopolitics. You should've seen what the US and Europe did during the Cold War.
If we set aside geopolitics and purely consider whether tightening the security of private networks is sensible whatsoever: are routers a substantially bigger threat than client devices such as the various IoT knickknacks (smart TVs, smart switches/outlets, smart appliances, etc.)? Controlling the NAT/firewall features is handy for opening ports and working around VLAN segmentation, but that isn't required for many scenarios; a compromised client device can often snoop on the rest of the network and exfiltrate what it discovers just fine even with an uncompromised router.
Cisco been hiding this in plain sight since 2004: https://www.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/CSD4291.pdf
Love seeing pop up like it’s new or something.
the ban covers all foreign-made consumer routers but practically every router is manufactured abroad, even the ones sold by American companies. the only domestic exception is Starlink, iirc
My company new installation now use Siemens routers. It seems a few will keep Cisco though, so we have yet another provider. More work for me I guess.
Israel did the same in Netherlands with the biggest telecom KPN.
> country which once exploited an attack vector is now trying to protect itself on that vector
I have no doubt that American efforts at security on this front are inadaquate, incompetent, etc. But hypocritical? Nah.
The audacity of banning others for doing exactly what you got caught doing. At least be subtle about
If I was more paranoid, I'd start thinking the ban is to make it easier to spy on us by limiting our choices to a few domestic vendors who can be coerced by regulatory capture and "for the kids" political rhetoric.
[dupe] Discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47495344
A USA company bought an Indian OS to turn into it's SOHO router/firewall product. The results are exactly what you would have expected:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z4COrX9YHcU
Um, this is not an example of hypocrisy? If I punch you in the nose, I am not a hypocrite if I block your attempt to punch me back.
> Country that put backdoors into Cisco routers to spy on world bans foreign routers
Says the tech rag hailing from the 5-eyes nation known as the UK...