jthompson Posted July 6, 2022 Posted July 6, 2022 Any half sensible people will reject this daft idea. Do those camps also use Windows to administer? Ban Microsoft products from school. Do they search with Google? Same applies. Do Hikvision run those camps? Why are they being targetted for this oddly far fetched reasoning? Might the argument be that Hikvision and Dahua have built up their businesses significantly off the back of such camps, and been more complicit in them than simply "hey, some people purchased our cameras. What they do with them is none of our concern"? If they were chasing contracts to supply systems to "re-education centres", that might be more problematic? I don't actually know, obvs, but that might be why these companies are being singled out from any other incedental tech suppliers that might be being used.
Davit2005 Posted July 6, 2022 Posted July 6, 2022 If the cameras/NVR have no connectivity to/from the Internet and are logically and/or physically separated from lateral movement internally then I cannot see what the big deal is with CCTV, Am I missing something.
CHiLL Posted July 6, 2022 Posted July 6, 2022 If the cameras/NVR have no connectivity to/from the Internet and are logically and/or physically separated from lateral movement internally then I cannot see what the big deal is with CCTV, Am I missing something. It doesn't seem to be coming from a security risk point of view, more of a political point of view regarding the Uighur population and possible complicitness from said companies. 1
Koldov Posted July 6, 2022 Posted July 6, 2022 So, not like the Huawei/Chinese Govt. is 'using this technology to spy on us and has possibly loaded something in the firmware to execute on a given day and take over all our systems' type thing then...
3s-gtech Posted July 6, 2022 Posted July 6, 2022 No. But it'd probably be wise to know what's coming and going from your NVR anyway... 1
Koldov Posted July 6, 2022 Posted July 6, 2022 I know, I know, but I have to wonder what Xi would want with thousands of hours of video of Year 3 running around the playground...
robslack Posted July 6, 2022 Posted July 6, 2022 We have just purchased a brand new Dahua system, is the government going to give funding to schools to replace with like for like solutions! If so they are going to have to dig deep and the Dahua and Hikvision systems are half the price of the others on the market.
jthompson Posted July 6, 2022 Posted July 6, 2022 I know, I know, but I have to wonder what Xi would want with thousands of hours of video of Year 3 running around the playground... He wants you to want it and to buy Chinese to get it.
Koldov Posted July 6, 2022 Posted July 6, 2022 He wants you to want it and to buy Chinese to get it. We do... and we did... but there would be no point ripping it all out now and buying something else, as it seems that it's not because of a Huawei type 'security' concern, or even a no 'profit for X regime' as such (broadly speaking*), then it's 'just' a moral question...? Because it's not so much just about it being 'Chinese' though is it? It's 2 companies so far (due to being allegedly complicit somehow in crimes by the state against a ethnic group of their population), but how far will that go...? Are we banning ALL products manufactured in China, are we banning ALL products manufactured in Russia...? Or just those that are deemed to benefit a particular regime? *Because if it is... as others have said, what does that mean for practically all other tech produced in any small part in China (not entirely sure on the % of equipment).
jthompson Posted July 6, 2022 Posted July 6, 2022 I think we're all in agreement that banning the use of already purchased and installed equipment without any security-related reasons for doing so would be... strange. So strange that I can't see that actually happening. 2
speakercon Posted July 6, 2022 Posted July 6, 2022 I think the government have got bigger issues to worry about today . Theoretically though what would be a good alternative? I've always used Hikvision myself and found it excellent. I've never used it personally but I've heard some good things about Reolink kit.
nicholab Posted July 7, 2022 Posted July 7, 2022 We should never have done business with China before they introduce democracy and human rights. I’am not sure what we do now? Also Twain is a country!
elsiegee40 Posted July 7, 2022 Posted July 7, 2022 Also Twain is a country! Twain was an author Taiwan is officially part of China 1
nicholab Posted July 7, 2022 Posted July 7, 2022 (edited) China has show to be untrustworthy county and has stopped the Hong Kong government being independent. Edited July 7, 2022 by nicholab
Andrew_C Posted July 7, 2022 Posted July 7, 2022 England has show to be untrustworthy county Fixed... So? I'd not trust ANY govt to be honest over anything.
Sonic007 Posted July 7, 2022 Posted July 7, 2022 We've been using Hikvision systems for a while and I find them well built. If you do have security concerns put them on a locked down isolated network.
Garacesh Posted July 13, 2022 Posted July 13, 2022 (edited) We've been using Hikvision systems for a while and I find them well built. If you do have security concerns put them on a locked down isolated network. This is my main issue with this proposal. TPTB could put as many backdoors into the kit as they like, but if the kit is VLAN'd and firewalled off so it isn't reachable from and can't talk to the great unwashed internet at large, risk is mitigated. I know there's been a large proponent in years since gone to start net connecting this stuff, and with CCTV it does make sense because why wouldn't you want site team to be able to look at the cameras if the alarm goes off? But at that point surely you're connecting your NVR/PVR/CCTV Server etc to the internet and not the cameras themselves. And if we're coming at it from the human rights standpoint, well okay, that's why economic sanctions exist. Ban people from reselling kit, but any current stock is bought and paid for, and banning it outright implies anybody currently using it needs to rip it out and buy a replacement setup for no good reason. The companies already have the money, why are we wasting more? Edited July 13, 2022 by Garacesh 2
FN-GM Posted July 13, 2022 Posted July 13, 2022 I believe Hikvision has been banned in South Australian hospitals and other state public services.
jthompson Posted July 13, 2022 Posted July 13, 2022 And if we're coming at it from the human rights standpoint, well okay, that's why economic sanctions exist. Ban people from reselling kit, but any current stock is bought and paid for, and banning it outright implies anybody currently using it needs to rip it out and buy a replacement setup for no good reason. The companies already have the money, why are we wasting more? Thinking about this, I suppose one argument might be that those companies have attained their market position through unfair (for want of a better term) means, and banning their use would then elevate competitors to redress that initial imbalance. It's no coincidence that that thought has come to me in the days following the Uber Files leak, and reading about how that particular company set out to unfairly achieve a dominant position in the market before then opining that the past is not the future.
Garacesh Posted July 13, 2022 Posted July 13, 2022 (edited) Thinking about this, I suppose one argument might be that those companies have attained their market position through unfair (for want of a better term) means, and banning their use would then elevate competitors to redress that initial imbalance. Valid point. We ban Chinese steel because it is 'unfair' (insofar as the Chinese government subsidise the production but other governments don't) so there's an argument for that. But having looked into it some more it definitely seems like they're gunning for the human rights angle. Now maybe, maybe the allegations against Dahua are true, and they've developed algorithms/AI/whatever specifically to identify Uyghur peoples then I get that. But has anybody leveraged such an accusation against Hikvision? How can we realistically hold a company responsible for how people use their products after they've left the factory? Are we banning Global because folks stab other folks? What if the 're-education' camps use Microsoft products? Are we gonna ban Windows? I don't see lorry's getting banned after the spate of terrorist attacks using them? Yes, slippery slope, logical fallacy, invalid argument, I know. My point isn't necessarily to use these as actual talking points, just to highlight the absurdity of banning surveillance kit because it's being used to surveil in a way we don't like. Edited July 13, 2022 by Garacesh
jthompson Posted July 13, 2022 Posted July 13, 2022 I suppose if there were demonstrable complicity from the companies in how their products were being used, or if they were actively pursuing contracts to supply, that might have a bearing on it. But yeah, feels a bit above my paygrade and not like other 'responsible consumer' issues like fast fashion or single-use plastic cups.
6Foot3 Posted August 5, 2022 Posted August 5, 2022 For political reasons not cyber security reasons Doesn't seem so friendly https://www.channel4.com/news/government-concerns-over-china-owned-cctv-company-embedded-in-uk
Jobos Posted November 24, 2022 Posted November 24, 2022 More developments here but I don’t think schools need to change anything just yet. https://news.sky.com/story/government-departments-ordered-to-stop-installing-cameras-made-by-chinese-firms-in-sensitive-sites-12754587
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now