Spying for which they do not ban (history from the 80s)
American companies, such as Google, have been led by the US government and began to break off relations with Huawei because of suspicion of espionage.
In the 1980s, American semiconductor manufacturers also experienced problems with foreign competing companies in connection with espionage.
The game was held according to much softer rules and there was no talk of any other participants in the industry each other.
I wonder if the high-tech industry is degrading if it comes from politicians?
')
The reason for this note was the news that Google (and several other companies) interrupts cooperation with Huawei, disabling their smartphones from Android updates and access to other services.
This happened because the US government earlier accused Huawei of having their equipment used by Chinese hackers to spy. (UPD: For more details on the facts, see the part “UPD1. After emotions. Facts” at the very end of the note)
At the moment I am preparing several articles about the 80s, therefore, in connection with the Huawei ban, I remembered the following story ...
In the late 70s - early 80s, manufacturers of microelectronics from Silicon Valley had a serious competitor in the form of a conglomerate of Japanese firms.
In contrast to the uncoordinated firms of the Valley, the Japanese spoke together, and their actions were guided by a program of a special ministry - MITI (The Ministry of International Trade and Industry). Joint actions of the ministry and corporations led to rapid growth in the field of microelectronics. So, by the year 1984, the Japanese had become leaders in terms of the volume and quality of 64-kilobit (yes, then it was a lot!) Chips produced.
This is how the 64K chip looked, made specifically for Apple’s personal computers.
Silicon Valley could counterpose its informal, decentralized information exchange network to the centralized Japanese policy. Information circulation in the network was provided by frequent contacts between developers of different companies among themselves, the relative frequency of changing their jobs and the possibility of creating new teams and start-up firms.
Japanese coherence could not give them what was at that moment abundant in Silicon Valley - the free flow of new ideas and people ready to implement them. To compensate for the lack of their own ideas, the Japanese did not shun technological espionage.
In the middle of 1982, two giant Japanese computer companies, Hitachi and Mitsubishi, and 18 of their employees were convicted of conspiring to steal IBM's secrets, and in particular project documentation for the newest and most powerful IBM 3081K mainframe at that time. Hitachi and Mitsubishi were willing to pay up to $ 2 million for this information.
This is how the IBM 3081K computer looked at the press release. The price is about 8 million dollars.
The FBI arranged a special operation in Santa Clara (the very center of Silicon Valley), setting up a fake consulting firm Glenmar Associates, which offered to sell IBM secrets to Hitachi and Mitsubishi. In 1982, the FBI covered officials from the Japanese who came to Glenmar to collect confidential information from IBM.
At first, the Japanese denied any involvement in this transaction. But, in the course of the trial, they did recognize her, “sanctions” were imposed on them: they were fined a small amount of 10 thousand dollars.
One of the official representatives of the Japanese computer industry then, in defense of Hitachi and Mitsubishi, indicated that they did only what most Silicon Valley firms do on a regular basis: looking for ways to be part of a technical information exchange network.
Why then did the FBI intervene? Some modern commentators suggest that the main goal was not to stop, but to shame the Japanese who were looking for such a straightforward way of extracting the information they needed - bribing. [Rogers84] More sensitive to the life of the Valley companies, such as NEC, acted more gracefully, buying small companies in the Valley, which, apart from their direct responsibilities, also acted as "eyes and ears" of the Japanese in the Valley.
The problem of competition with Japan was greatly disturbed by the high-tech business of the Valley. Thanks to her, a special association of manufacturers of microelectronics was created, lobbying the interests of American manufacturers. The activities of this organization have brought some benefits, for example, in the form of reducing the tax burden.
However, in the long run, the threat to Silicon Valley from Japan passed away for another reason. The competition in the field of microelectronics remained, but the focus of entrepreneurs and investors of Silicon Valley over the past 80 years has consistently shifted towards computers, networks, the Internet and so on.
Robo dogs They look impressive, but sales figures are quite modest.
Silicon Valley and still remains the main supplier of ideas, products and technologies. The Japanese hi-tech, as well as earlier, actively supported at the state level, does not please with anything fundamentally new, except for (useless) robo-dogs.
The story told is certainly not identical to today's one that happened with Huawei. However, you can learn a few lessons.
In the long run, the lack of government regulation proved more productive than its existence.
Modern networks for the exchange of technical information are not limited to the Valley. Everything is included in the general information exchange. Therefore, first of all, everyone is spying with everyone, and any espionage is not a direct threat. And, secondly, no one can have any responsibility or authority as to what is happening in the networks (and where there are backdoors), whether you are Trump, Xi or anyone else.
One backdoor can be everywhere
Huawei is accused not of having stolen any technology, but of having (!) A code in its equipment that can be used by Chinese hackers to facilitate their cyber attacks. In such a case, you could suspect any hardware or software manufacturer, just as you could previously suspect anyone of technological espionage (and most likely to be right in one way or another - modern software is difficult enough to intentionally or unintentionally leave one or another backdoor or at least easy for an experienced hacker vulnerability).
Punishing a “bad game” is definitely necessary, for example, in case a specially left “backdoor” is really found - real evidence and a court case can ruin any player's reputation. However, the use of unsubstantiated accusations by politicians as a reason for a ban strongly undermines trust within the industry. If today you can blame one manufacturer, then tomorrow you can blame anyone.
The fact that officials of the Russian state may not understand these simple truths doesn’t surprise me or even annoy me, and certainly doesn’t induce me to write an article as stupid as the idea of ​​a “sovereign Internet”. This is not surprising - people are accustomed to living in a different, "sovkovy" world.
Also, I am not very surprised by the fact that the current American president wants to build a wall or impose any sanctions.
However, today's news about the fact that Google fell for all this hype will block devices Huawei, which are only suspected of the hypothetical presence of backdoors in their network equipment, I was alerted.
I would like to ask Google: well, why are you being led by politicians and bureaucrats? Do you not destroy thereby the hi-tech, its spirit, not measured by money and devices, for the sake of meeting momentary opportunistic needs?
And I want to ask a general question to readers. Does the industry degenerate, if it comes in the wake of politics? Has IT become old, or has geopolitics changed so much that everything has "twisted"?
Few dry facts that were learned after the emotions subsided.
Under normal conditions, the US government can tightly control only government purchases. Contacts of ordinary companies, such as Google, are not controlled.
But there is a special act of the Act of 1977 (International Emergency Economic Powers Act), which gives the president the authority to regulate the commercial activities of ordinary firms in the period of "emergency situations". Since 1977, the act has been applied about 30 times, introducing various sanctions, mandatory for all American companies. The enforcement of these sanctions is controlled by the US Department of Commerce.
Actually, on May 15, 2019, Trump introduced an “emergency”, which allowed Huawei to be banned for all American companies. The official reason for the introduction of a “black-eyed situation”, through which it was possible to impose sanctions against Huawei - “combating the threat from the use of telecommunications ...”.
The news went relatively unnoticed. The whole ban on Google from Google was generated by a small article on Reuters on May 19, 2019 . This material is almost without any official information and explanations. In it, the unnamed contact from Google says that “we follow order and we will have to work with the consequences of [including Huawei in the sanction list]” and “Huawei will be able to use only the public open source version of Android and will not be able to access proprietary applications and Google’s services. ”
After this news, various articles began to appear in both Western and domestic publications. Many began to finish and think out (like me on emotions), driving up the HYIP. There was not so much official information (basically the answers of the press services of companies in the style of “we will resolve the situation, do not worry”).
Indeed, the very same Google can now have little to do - the 1977 act, which is painfully severe, is called Most likely, in the coming months, their Huawei lawyers will come up with how to bypass bans without violating the laws or straining the Ministry of Commerce.
I naturally rented my claims to Google, described parts of “A Little Emotion”. However, the general theme of high-tech suffering from all sorts of trade wars, it seems to me, is relevant anyway.
1. Rogers, EM, & Larsen, JK (1984). Silicon Valley fever: Growth of high technology culture. New York: Basic Books.
2. Huawei, sanctions and software: everything you need to know (Dec 2018), Guardian .
3. An original article on Reuters that spawned the entire hype www.reuters.com/article/us-huawei-tech-alphabet-exclusive/exclusive-google-suspends-some-business-with-huawei-after-trump-blacklist-source- idUSKCN1SP0NB
4. Trump declares national protection from foreign espionage @ Techcrunch
PS I apologize in advance for ochepyatki. The article was written on emotions. You will see ochepyatku or slip of the pen - write pliz in PM :)
In the 1980s, American semiconductor manufacturers also experienced problems with foreign competing companies in connection with espionage.
The game was held according to much softer rules and there was no talk of any other participants in the industry each other.
I wonder if the high-tech industry is degrading if it comes from politicians?
')
The reason for this note was the news that Google (and several other companies) interrupts cooperation with Huawei, disabling their smartphones from Android updates and access to other services.
This happened because the US government earlier accused Huawei of having their equipment used by Chinese hackers to spy. (UPD: For more details on the facts, see the part “UPD1. After emotions. Facts” at the very end of the note)
At the moment I am preparing several articles about the 80s, therefore, in connection with the Huawei ban, I remembered the following story ...
Japanese competition
In the late 70s - early 80s, manufacturers of microelectronics from Silicon Valley had a serious competitor in the form of a conglomerate of Japanese firms.
In contrast to the uncoordinated firms of the Valley, the Japanese spoke together, and their actions were guided by a program of a special ministry - MITI (The Ministry of International Trade and Industry). Joint actions of the ministry and corporations led to rapid growth in the field of microelectronics. So, by the year 1984, the Japanese had become leaders in terms of the volume and quality of 64-kilobit (yes, then it was a lot!) Chips produced.
This is how the 64K chip looked, made specifically for Apple’s personal computers.
Silicon Valley could counterpose its informal, decentralized information exchange network to the centralized Japanese policy. Information circulation in the network was provided by frequent contacts between developers of different companies among themselves, the relative frequency of changing their jobs and the possibility of creating new teams and start-up firms.
Japanese coherence could not give them what was at that moment abundant in Silicon Valley - the free flow of new ideas and people ready to implement them. To compensate for the lack of their own ideas, the Japanese did not shun technological espionage.
The story of espionage
In the middle of 1982, two giant Japanese computer companies, Hitachi and Mitsubishi, and 18 of their employees were convicted of conspiring to steal IBM's secrets, and in particular project documentation for the newest and most powerful IBM 3081K mainframe at that time. Hitachi and Mitsubishi were willing to pay up to $ 2 million for this information.
This is how the IBM 3081K computer looked at the press release. The price is about 8 million dollars.
The FBI arranged a special operation in Santa Clara (the very center of Silicon Valley), setting up a fake consulting firm Glenmar Associates, which offered to sell IBM secrets to Hitachi and Mitsubishi. In 1982, the FBI covered officials from the Japanese who came to Glenmar to collect confidential information from IBM.
At first, the Japanese denied any involvement in this transaction. But, in the course of the trial, they did recognize her, “sanctions” were imposed on them: they were fined a small amount of 10 thousand dollars.
One of the official representatives of the Japanese computer industry then, in defense of Hitachi and Mitsubishi, indicated that they did only what most Silicon Valley firms do on a regular basis: looking for ways to be part of a technical information exchange network.
Why then did the FBI intervene? Some modern commentators suggest that the main goal was not to stop, but to shame the Japanese who were looking for such a straightforward way of extracting the information they needed - bribing. [Rogers84] More sensitive to the life of the Valley companies, such as NEC, acted more gracefully, buying small companies in the Valley, which, apart from their direct responsibilities, also acted as "eyes and ears" of the Japanese in the Valley.
Results
The problem of competition with Japan was greatly disturbed by the high-tech business of the Valley. Thanks to her, a special association of manufacturers of microelectronics was created, lobbying the interests of American manufacturers. The activities of this organization have brought some benefits, for example, in the form of reducing the tax burden.
However, in the long run, the threat to Silicon Valley from Japan passed away for another reason. The competition in the field of microelectronics remained, but the focus of entrepreneurs and investors of Silicon Valley over the past 80 years has consistently shifted towards computers, networks, the Internet and so on.
Robo dogs They look impressive, but sales figures are quite modest.
Silicon Valley and still remains the main supplier of ideas, products and technologies. The Japanese hi-tech, as well as earlier, actively supported at the state level, does not please with anything fundamentally new, except for (useless) robo-dogs.
Morality
The story told is certainly not identical to today's one that happened with Huawei. However, you can learn a few lessons.
In the long run, the lack of government regulation proved more productive than its existence.
Modern networks for the exchange of technical information are not limited to the Valley. Everything is included in the general information exchange. Therefore, first of all, everyone is spying with everyone, and any espionage is not a direct threat. And, secondly, no one can have any responsibility or authority as to what is happening in the networks (and where there are backdoors), whether you are Trump, Xi or anyone else.
One backdoor can be everywhere
Huawei is accused not of having stolen any technology, but of having (!) A code in its equipment that can be used by Chinese hackers to facilitate their cyber attacks. In such a case, you could suspect any hardware or software manufacturer, just as you could previously suspect anyone of technological espionage (and most likely to be right in one way or another - modern software is difficult enough to intentionally or unintentionally leave one or another backdoor or at least easy for an experienced hacker vulnerability).
Punishing a “bad game” is definitely necessary, for example, in case a specially left “backdoor” is really found - real evidence and a court case can ruin any player's reputation. However, the use of unsubstantiated accusations by politicians as a reason for a ban strongly undermines trust within the industry. If today you can blame one manufacturer, then tomorrow you can blame anyone.
Little emotion
The fact that officials of the Russian state may not understand these simple truths doesn’t surprise me or even annoy me, and certainly doesn’t induce me to write an article as stupid as the idea of ​​a “sovereign Internet”. This is not surprising - people are accustomed to living in a different, "sovkovy" world.
Also, I am not very surprised by the fact that the current American president wants to build a wall or impose any sanctions.
However, today's news about the fact that Google fell for all this hype will block devices Huawei, which are only suspected of the hypothetical presence of backdoors in their network equipment, I was alerted.
I would like to ask Google: well, why are you being led by politicians and bureaucrats? Do you not destroy thereby the hi-tech, its spirit, not measured by money and devices, for the sake of meeting momentary opportunistic needs?
And I want to ask a general question to readers. Does the industry degenerate, if it comes in the wake of politics? Has IT become old, or has geopolitics changed so much that everything has "twisted"?
UPD1. After emotions. Data
Few dry facts that were learned after the emotions subsided.
Under normal conditions, the US government can tightly control only government purchases. Contacts of ordinary companies, such as Google, are not controlled.
But there is a special act of the Act of 1977 (International Emergency Economic Powers Act), which gives the president the authority to regulate the commercial activities of ordinary firms in the period of "emergency situations". Since 1977, the act has been applied about 30 times, introducing various sanctions, mandatory for all American companies. The enforcement of these sanctions is controlled by the US Department of Commerce.
Actually, on May 15, 2019, Trump introduced an “emergency”, which allowed Huawei to be banned for all American companies. The official reason for the introduction of a “black-eyed situation”, through which it was possible to impose sanctions against Huawei - “combating the threat from the use of telecommunications ...”.
The news went relatively unnoticed. The whole ban on Google from Google was generated by a small article on Reuters on May 19, 2019 . This material is almost without any official information and explanations. In it, the unnamed contact from Google says that “we follow order and we will have to work with the consequences of [including Huawei in the sanction list]” and “Huawei will be able to use only the public open source version of Android and will not be able to access proprietary applications and Google’s services. ”
After this news, various articles began to appear in both Western and domestic publications. Many began to finish and think out (like me on emotions), driving up the HYIP. There was not so much official information (basically the answers of the press services of companies in the style of “we will resolve the situation, do not worry”).
Indeed, the very same Google can now have little to do - the 1977 act, which is painfully severe, is called Most likely, in the coming months, their Huawei lawyers will come up with how to bypass bans without violating the laws or straining the Ministry of Commerce.
I naturally rented my claims to Google, described parts of “A Little Emotion”. However, the general theme of high-tech suffering from all sorts of trade wars, it seems to me, is relevant anyway.
Sources
1. Rogers, EM, & Larsen, JK (1984). Silicon Valley fever: Growth of high technology culture. New York: Basic Books.
2. Huawei, sanctions and software: everything you need to know (Dec 2018), Guardian .
3. An original article on Reuters that spawned the entire hype www.reuters.com/article/us-huawei-tech-alphabet-exclusive/exclusive-google-suspends-some-business-with-huawei-after-trump-blacklist-source- idUSKCN1SP0NB
4. Trump declares national protection from foreign espionage @ Techcrunch
PS I apologize in advance for ochepyatki. The article was written on emotions. You will see ochepyatku or slip of the pen - write pliz in PM :)
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/452686/
All Articles