Personal computing discussed
Moderators: renee, Steel, notfred
notfred wrote:They used to be direct Cisco copies, but when the typo mistakes in the command output was identical on the Huawei equipment with the Cisco equipment that got shut down pretty fast. I know they opened an office here in Ottawa and picked up a bunch of ASIC guys from Cisco.
NovusBogus wrote:I wouldn't trust Huawei or any other foreign OEM for critical infrastructure, but many made-in-America companies import a lot of ICs so verifying the provenance of a router can be extremely difficult and truly doing it right involves a lot of time and money. For normal use, it shouldn't matter as the infiltration risk is going to be about the same either way.
Chrispy_ wrote:"When I first heard of Huawei, they seemed to be the #1 patent-infringing copycat Chinese knock-off firm.
They still seem to lack original design but their kit seems reliable and well made. I have only used their phone-related stuff though (smartphones, mobile broadband, tablets)... *snip*
Hz so good wrote:Of course the fact that our CEO was the brother of one of Tasman's Senior VPs in no way played any part of that decision.
just brew it! wrote:Hz so good wrote:Of course the fact that our CEO was the brother of one of Tasman's Senior VPs in no way played any part of that decision.
You would be surprised (and/or disgusted) at how much of that kind of sh*t goes on.
Hz so good wrote:just brew it! wrote:Hz so good wrote:Of course the fact that our CEO was the brother of one of Tasman's Senior VPs in no way played any part of that decision.
You would be surprised (and/or disgusted) at how much of that kind of sh*t goes on.
I remember when my first CTO got kickbac... err, "revenue-share", from D-Link. Nothing says "fun" like unmanaged L2 Switches EVERYWHERE (even at the network core).
"Broadcast storms? What're those?"
just brew it! wrote:It's not just technology infrastructure either. How about being stuck in a facility that is physically ill-suited to the needs of the business because of "connections"? Meh.
NovusBogus wrote:I wouldn't trust Huawei or any other foreign OEM for critical infrastructure, but many made-in-America companies import a lot of ICs so verifying the provenance of a router can be extremely difficult and truly doing it right involves a lot of time and money. For normal use, it shouldn't matter as the infiltration risk is going to be about the same either way.
Flying Fox wrote:NovusBogus wrote:I wouldn't trust Huawei or any other foreign OEM for critical infrastructure, but many made-in-America companies import a lot of ICs so verifying the provenance of a router can be extremely difficult and truly doing it right involves a lot of time and money. For normal use, it shouldn't matter as the infiltration risk is going to be about the same either way.
And you think made-in-America equipment does not have NSA backdoors and planted stuff in them?
just brew it! wrote:Hz so good wrote:Of course the fact that our CEO was the brother of one of Tasman's Senior VPs in no way played any part of that decision.
You would be surprised (and/or disgusted) at how much of that kind of sh*t goes on.
Hz so good wrote:just brew it! wrote:/Literally, that's all that guy would do. Come in (suit and tie, no less), and watch porn all day. No one was brave enough to ever go into his office without knocking.
//As for the others, it was like "Do you even know what we do for a living? No? Ok, go back to sleep [REDACTED]. *pats gently on head* We'll wake you up before quitting time".
Flying Fox wrote:NovusBogus wrote:I wouldn't trust Huawei or any other foreign OEM for critical infrastructure, but many made-in-America companies import a lot of ICs so verifying the provenance of a router can be extremely difficult and truly doing it right involves a lot of time and money. For normal use, it shouldn't matter as the infiltration risk is going to be about the same either way.
And you think made-in-America equipment does not have NSA backdoors and planted stuff in them?
UnfriendlyFire wrote:
I know a relative that rocked the boat at their workplace when he/she discovered what the managers were doing.
Let's just say that the relative was asked to leave after blowing the whistle.
just brew it! wrote:At least these days you can build your own router using Open Source software and lock it down. Beyond that you're at the level of worrying about whether your BIOS or CPU chip has been compromised, or whether there's a back door or vulnerability in some admin interface. On the admin interface compromise front, you can minimize your exposure by requiring a SSH tunnel for all admin access.
Hz so good wrote:just brew it! wrote:At least these days you can build your own router using Open Source software and lock it down. Beyond that you're at the level of worrying about whether your BIOS or CPU chip has been compromised, or whether there's a back door or vulnerability in some admin interface. On the admin interface compromise front, you can minimize your exposure by requiring a SSH tunnel for all admin access.
The only issue I have with that is performance level. You won't hit wire-speed level routing/switching using a software-based solution.
just brew it! wrote:Hz so good wrote:just brew it! wrote:At least these days you can build your own router using Open Source software and lock it down. Beyond that you're at the level of worrying about whether your BIOS or CPU chip has been compromised, or whether there's a back door or vulnerability in some admin interface. On the admin interface compromise front, you can minimize your exposure by requiring a SSH tunnel for all admin access.
The only issue I have with that is performance level. You won't hit wire-speed level routing/switching using a software-based solution.
Agreed, you won't. But most companies don't have a wire-speed connection to the Internet anyway. I was thinking more in terms of gateway routers, not internal ones. If an internal router tries to "phone home" you'd see it at the point where your traffic hits the public Internet.
just brew it! wrote:Hz so good wrote:just brew it! wrote:At least these days you can build your own router using Open Source software and lock it down. Beyond that you're at the level of worrying about whether your BIOS or CPU chip has been compromised, or whether there's a back door or vulnerability in some admin interface. On the admin interface compromise front, you can minimize your exposure by requiring a SSH tunnel for all admin access.
The only issue I have with that is performance level. You won't hit wire-speed level routing/switching using a software-based solution.
Agreed, you won't. But most companies don't have a wire-speed connection to the Internet anyway. I was thinking more in terms of gateway routers, not internal ones. If an internal router tries to "phone home" you'd see it at the point where your traffic hits the public Internet.
Hz so good wrote:Sidebar: At least I'm not from the financial network sector. They measure acceptable latency in nanoseconds.
just brew it! wrote:Hz so good wrote:Sidebar: At least I'm not from the financial network sector. They measure acceptable latency in nanoseconds.
Yup. And roll their own custom FPGAs/ASICs to shave a few nanoseconds here and there. It's effectively an arms race in the HFT world...
JustAnEngineer wrote:When you're skimming billions from ordinary investors, milliseconds count.
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/201 ... all-street
JustAnEngineer wrote:When you're skimming billions from ordinary investors, milliseconds count.
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/201 ... all-street
UnfriendlyFire wrote:
EDIT: A few years ago a fiber optic line was laid through the Great Lakes to reduce the latency between traders living in the upper Midwest and the NYSE by a few milliseconds. Don't remember who paid for the cable installation
Laying cable through deep water is a bit pricy...
just brew it! wrote:Hz so good wrote:Of course the fact that our CEO was the brother of one of Tasman's Senior VPs in no way played any part of that decision.
You would be surprised (and/or disgusted) at how much of that kind of sh*t goes on.
NovusBogus wrote:Ah, HFT, what a lovely bunch. At least their existence is great for trolling people who whine about cryptocurrency.
UnfriendlyFire wrote:A while ago, a stock trading company said they wanted to launch a HFT that manages bitcoins, or at least participate in trading bitcoins...
I don't see how they could make a profit out of that, and if they could, that revenue has to come from someone's pocket.