A note for LTE/4G Operators, from the eNB, it’s quite easily to hack into EPC nodes. Once got into the S-GW/P-GW nodes, all data can be tapped. Selected important data from EPC nodes can also be collected and embedded into various logs through hidden backdoor code and be sent via the e-UTRAN access.
In the open letter, it mentioned about the army (PLA), but the fact is, in China, the Communist Party of China (CPC) controls everything. PLA is only an apparatus of the CPC. If one ever lived in China, one would know that most political/business deals and decision making process are opaque and shrouded in secrecy mode.
Other interesting links and articles about CPC, Huawei might be worth reading are shown below.
http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/china/2007-07/10/content_6142022.htm“Primary Party organizations are formed in China's mainland enterprises, rural areas, government departments, schools, scientific research institutes, communities, mass organizations, intermediaries, companies of the People's Liberation Army and other basic units, where there are at least three full Party members.”
------<h1 style="margin: auto 0in;">ACG Research on Huawei, Chinese business culture and the Art of War</h1><h1 style="margin: auto 0in;">http://searchtelecom.techtarget.com/feature/ACG-Research-on-Huawei-Chinese-business-culture-and-the-Art-of-War?asrc=EM_USC_13048542&track=NL-854&ad=804294</h1><h1 style="margin: auto 0in;"> </h1><h1 style="margin: auto 0in;">ACG Research on Huawei vs. network equipment vendors </h1><h1 style="margin: auto 0in;">http://searchtelecom.techtarget.com/feature/ACG-Research-on-Huawei-vs-network-equipment-vendors</h1><h1 style="margin: auto 0in;"> </h1>
Governments are entitled to their concerns, whatever they may be. Under a democratic system, there is nothing more sacred than a citizen's right to expect that their security will never be knowingly compromised by those they elected.
The interesting question for me is when you have a company like Huawei which is increasingly leading and defining the telecom industry’s future technology roadmap, at what point does a country’s global competitiveness start to be hindered by denying its service providers access to a major technology leader? And at what point does throttling back on competitiveness actually become a greater national security risk than the risk supposedly posed by the presence in the network of a Chinese vendor?
You might argue that Verizon's networks seems to be doing perfectly well in delivering leading wireline and wireless services without Huawei, thank you very much. In wireless, for example, Verizon is the world leader in 4G LTE deployment as well as in ARPU projections, for goodness sake.
But project that five or ten years further out and how competitive will Verizon remain if it only sticks with its current suppliers? Just as importantly, how can Sprint, AT&T and T-Mobile be expected to stay competitive in the interests of American businesses and consumers unless they’re able to have access to all the best network technology?
However legitimate the motivations of the politicians and the spooks, it seems to me that the balance of risk is bound to shift over time. Last October Heavy Reading published a report looking at the lengths to which the world's largest vendors, most notably Huawei and NSN, are going to demonstrate their security credentials. http://www.heavyreading.com/details.asp?sku_id=2613&skuitem_itemid=1288&promo_code=&aff_code=&next_url=%2Flist%2Easp%3Fpage%5Ftype%3Dall%5Freports. Interestingly, the only major vendor that refused to contribute to the report was Cisco, citing reasons of, ahem, "security". Go figure. It's a funny thing this security business….