re: Huawei in Spying FlapIt is good to see that light reading places this company as part of its top ten. Anyone with industry credibility knows this company is of low morale standing.
Any US customer buying their equipment because its cheap is in for a tough time.
re: Huawei in Spying Flap My question is, what exactly is wrong with studying your competitor's products?
It isn't unusual for a company to purchase a competitor's gear from a third party and analyze it in and out. Vendors have done this for years to look for ways to better improve their own gear. Reverse engineering however, can be considered unlawful theft of IP.
I doubt that this chump was acting alone. No vendor sends an employee to a trade show without the need to gather competitive intelligence. This guy just happened to be doing something in public that vendors traditionally have done within their lab environments.
re: Huawei in Spying FlapComrades, Several people in this thread have used the phrase "crossing a line", and I think that's the nub of this incident.
Yi Bin Zhu crossed the line when he:
1. Walked onto a competitor's booth after the show had officially closed. Note that the rent-a-cop would not have been there if he'd visited within the recognised hours of business. I think this would be my answer to an earlier question..."how do you break into a booth"? Answer - it's a virtual break in :-)
2. He took photographs without the permission of the booth staff. Now this one is a bit of a grey area - I've certainly taken shots of old friends in groups with the booth as a background. But I guess I had the implicit permission of the booth "owner" because at least one of the the subjects in the photograph would be working on the booth. Also I took those photographs inside normal show hours. One poster asked if there are "no photography" signs at the show. I didn't look specifically, but I understand from discussions that photography is not allowed (maybe someone could confirm this point).
3. He took boards out of their racks, and the cases off of boxes. Now that there is a line that has most definitely been crossed. Big time.
Like many people on this thread I would be surprised if this was officially sanctioned by Huawei. But the definition of "official sanction" is often fuzzy. Whoever made the decision for this activity to take place clearly has no understanding of the risk/reward value of what was done.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The Pentagon's "Annual Report on the Military Power of the People's Republic of China" is a troubling document for a variety of reasons. Not the least of these is that the report makes clear that China, despite attempting a more tempered approach in recent years, is still committed to Communist ideology as it relates to foreign policy. Released in May, the report outlines how China's military buildup is in direct connection to its regional ambitions, which include challenging U.S. dominance in the Pacific. China's goal of regional hegemony is still many years off, though approaching at a pace that demands immediate attention. China reasons correctly that it must upgrade its military, the People's Liberation Army (PLA), to U.S. armed forces standards through a prolonged concentration on increasing investment and procurement of high-tech, "network-centric" systems. As the report notes, "China's military modernization is oriented on developing the capabilities to fight and win 'local wars under high-tech conditions.' Based largely on observations of U.S. and allied operations since Operation Desert Storm [in 1991], PLA modernization envisions seeking precision-strike munitions, modern command and control systems, and state-of-the-art [intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance (ISR)] platforms. Beijing sees its potential future adversaries, particularly the U.S. Armed Forces, acquiring these advanced systems, and this is the driver in PLA defensive and offensive force modernization." According to the report, China's military spending will increase 11.6 percent to $25 billion this year. The amount in real terms is actually higher, the report cautions, when research and foreign purchases are added, which would bring it between $50 billion to $70 billion. Such spending makes China the third-largest defense spender after the United States and Russia. China's military imports also rose 7 percent from last year, 90 percent of which come from Russia alone. With its ISR advancements, the PLA expects to "provide a regional, and potentially hemispheric, continuous surveillance capability," according to the report. This would include land, air, sea and space systems comparable to U.S. systems. Also included in the PLA's modernization program are space-based systems with military and intelligence potential, antisatellite systems capable of disabling enemy satellites and electronic warfare systems capable of concealing PLA movement and operations, weakening enemy air-defense early-warning systems and disrupting integrated air-defense systems. In short, these are not only the high-tech systems that the U.S. military has employed with such deadly efficiency upon lesser enemies, but they are the sort that a military would need to defeat the United States. The balance of power in Eastern Asia is quickly shifting in China's favor, especially in regards to Taiwan. Even if high-tech nations restrict arms trade with China, it is committing more resources toward modernizing its military than any other nation in the region. It is only a matter of time. As such, it is clear that the Bush administration's security strategy of ensuring U.S. military preeminence in the world applies to both fighting terror as well as guaranteeing peace.
re: Huawei in Spying FlapI've worked with a number of Chinese engineers. When they are new to a project/product/system, they will suck up everything in sight.
Example: we had a couple of these guys come over from the China office for 6 months. They would copy everything - documents, notes, presentation material, logs of test runs in the lab, younameit.
Exasperated, I once asked them to stop making notes of a PPT as I would give them the damn thing in softcopy if they asked for it.
I've said it before and I'll say it again. The Chinese spy using vacuum cleaners.
re: Huawei in Spying FlapThe Huawei company is not stupid, and they have money. They can hire engineers from their competitors...it's unlikely they tell one guy to do stupid thing like this...
Which competitor's engineer will join the company paying so low salaries? Some of my friends in silicon valley have a special name: "chinese salaries"...
I agree that Huwaei is not stupid. What they do is normal for them, since, again, it is a part of the culture. There are a few other countries where it is perfectly OK to do reverse engineering including the one where I used to live.
info from their indian ops is mid-level+ employees frustrated and deserting en masse. very high attrition, no respect or prospects, no flextime, late hrs - weekends common.
I think they try to run a hi-tech co as a shenzhen factory...there's only so much engineers will take, esp if there are many other options outside.
>>..."how do you break into a booth"? Answer - it's a virtual break in :-)
Thanks for the explanation. Suffice to say, itGÇÖs a stretch.
WhatGÇÖs obvious is that people have different levels of outrage. Consider what happens when you go grocery shopping. Ever encounter any of this?
-Open the egg carton to see if none are cracked. -Taste the cherries or grapes to see if they are ripe. -Squeeze the peaches or tomatoes to see if they are firm. -Spray the air freshener to smell the scent. -Let your child eat the cookie before you pay for it. -Open a flip open box to read the instructions inside. -Read from the magazine before buying it.
BTW, I know of one U.S. auto manufacturer that purchases its competitorGÇÖs vehicles. They put it in a lab to do extensive analysis including breaking down the consistency of the paint.
I think the nub is when you infringe on intellectual property.
re: Huawei in Spying FlapOn Geoff's 3rd point, I should point out that it's yet to be proven whether Yi Bin Zhu took boards out of racks.
When I interviewed Yi Bin Zhu, I asked him twice whether he'd done this and he twice denied it. This appears to contradict evidence cited by the vendor that caught him -- finding him photographing equipment with the cover off, having pictures of circuit boards on his camera memory stick.
I should also point out that Huawei invited me to talk to Yi Bin Zhu. When we heard about the incident, I tracked down the most senior person from Huawei at Supercomm and asked him whether the story we'd heard was true. He was clearly very surprised and told me he knew nothing about it. I went away, and some time later, he phoned me to say he'd done some internal investigation and asked me to come back and talk to Yi Bin Zhu.
In other words, I got the impression that Huawei was being open and honest with me.
Any US customer buying their equipment because its cheap is in for a tough time.