Huawei Australia’s government provides access to its source code and its equipment
A couple of weeks that the Research Committee of the Congress of the United States that sought to clarify the linkages of ZTE and Huawei with the Chinese government and assess whether these companies acted as “puppets” spying coursing communications teams presented their recommendations devastating : U.S. Government must not use equipment from these manufacturers. This veto, which could dangerously extended by operators in the country (and other countries such as Canada), Huawei and ZTE to let in a very complicated position that undoubtedly affects their reputation even though they tried to defend themselves and that one Government report alleged afirmase not finding evidence pointing to the existence of mechanisms backdoors or espionage. In Australia has something like what happened in Canada since the country has banned the use of Huawei equipment in the network that the government is deploying and in view of this block, the Chinese manufacturer has offered to deliver the source code their software to be audited.
The measure, framed within the actions being undertaken by Huawei to clear any doubt, been made public in a press conference by John Lord, head of Huawei in Australia with the idea of unlocking your participation in the macro-project that is holding the Australian government.
Huawei’s offer is clear: unrestricted access to the source code of its software and the equipment they manufacture with the idea that can be audited for any type of threat or vulnerability.
Huawei has not done a good job of communicating about the company or what we do and we take the consequences for it. [...] The company needs to be more open and Australian authorities offer full and unrestricted access to the source code and equipment
In my opinion, the initiative makes sense and, indeed, an audit is essential to clarify these facts beyond the company’s opacity when testifying before a commission in the U.S. policy. Teams Huawei and ZTE are present in many networks deployed worldwide, hence the suspicion must be supported by facts and solid evidence that, in the absence thereof, seems more a measure to protect the markets (and keep the traditional vendors) really a safety issue.
In fact, the idea of doubts, Huawei has also provided access to the security agencies in the UK to review their teams within a task, the security of communications, that the perspective of Huawei is something it is the responsibility of the entire value chain, ie authorities, manufacturers and operators (who must work in harmony)
Maybe someone can think that Huawei could deliver something biased or oriented to obtain a favorable audit but, in my humble opinion, should not they have something and have found it?Tags: Australia, Huawei, security