Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Brite
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (Cyborg)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Brand Logo

CIRCLE WITH A DOT

  1. Home
  2. Uncategorized
  3. I've been thinking about the FCC's insane new ban on foreign-made routers.

I've been thinking about the FCC's insane new ban on foreign-made routers.

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Uncategorized
16 Posts 9 Posters 0 Views
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • stevebellovin@infosec.exchangeS This user is from outside of this forum
    stevebellovin@infosec.exchangeS This user is from outside of this forum
    stevebellovin@infosec.exchange
    wrote last edited by
    #1

    I've been thinking about the FCC's insane new ban on foreign-made routers. Note the end of the BBC story at https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c74787w149zo:
    "One exception to the general absence of US-made routers is the newer Starlink WiFi router. Starlink is part of Elon Musk's company SpaceX.

    "The company says the Starlink routers are made in Texas."

    And per the FCC's FAQ (https://www.fcc.gov/faqs-recent-updates-fcc-covered-list-regarding-routers-produced-foreign-countries), even US-written software (or, I assume, open source software like OpenWRT) won't exempt foreign-made routers from the ban.

    bms48@mastodon.socialB tock@corteximplant.comT charlvdwalt@infosec.exchangeC ricci@discuss.systemsR rootwyrm@weird.autosR 6 Replies Last reply
    1
    0
    • stevebellovin@infosec.exchangeS stevebellovin@infosec.exchange

      I've been thinking about the FCC's insane new ban on foreign-made routers. Note the end of the BBC story at https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c74787w149zo:
      "One exception to the general absence of US-made routers is the newer Starlink WiFi router. Starlink is part of Elon Musk's company SpaceX.

      "The company says the Starlink routers are made in Texas."

      And per the FCC's FAQ (https://www.fcc.gov/faqs-recent-updates-fcc-covered-list-regarding-routers-produced-foreign-countries), even US-written software (or, I assume, open source software like OpenWRT) won't exempt foreign-made routers from the ban.

      bms48@mastodon.socialB This user is from outside of this forum
      bms48@mastodon.socialB This user is from outside of this forum
      bms48@mastodon.social
      wrote last edited by
      #2

      @SteveBellovin Like I've said elsewhere, the current USA-nian administration is playing "Fantasy Supply Chain". TAANSTAFL as Robert Heinlein said

      1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • stevebellovin@infosec.exchangeS stevebellovin@infosec.exchange

        I've been thinking about the FCC's insane new ban on foreign-made routers. Note the end of the BBC story at https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c74787w149zo:
        "One exception to the general absence of US-made routers is the newer Starlink WiFi router. Starlink is part of Elon Musk's company SpaceX.

        "The company says the Starlink routers are made in Texas."

        And per the FCC's FAQ (https://www.fcc.gov/faqs-recent-updates-fcc-covered-list-regarding-routers-produced-foreign-countries), even US-written software (or, I assume, open source software like OpenWRT) won't exempt foreign-made routers from the ban.

        tock@corteximplant.comT This user is from outside of this forum
        tock@corteximplant.comT This user is from outside of this forum
        tock@corteximplant.com
        wrote last edited by
        #3

        @SteveBellovin Guessing foreign made computers and phones are next.

        Take care of your hardware, everybody. USA is about to embargo itself.

        1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • stevebellovin@infosec.exchangeS stevebellovin@infosec.exchange

          I've been thinking about the FCC's insane new ban on foreign-made routers. Note the end of the BBC story at https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c74787w149zo:
          "One exception to the general absence of US-made routers is the newer Starlink WiFi router. Starlink is part of Elon Musk's company SpaceX.

          "The company says the Starlink routers are made in Texas."

          And per the FCC's FAQ (https://www.fcc.gov/faqs-recent-updates-fcc-covered-list-regarding-routers-produced-foreign-countries), even US-written software (or, I assume, open source software like OpenWRT) won't exempt foreign-made routers from the ban.

          charlvdwalt@infosec.exchangeC This user is from outside of this forum
          charlvdwalt@infosec.exchangeC This user is from outside of this forum
          charlvdwalt@infosec.exchange
          wrote last edited by
          #4

          @SteveBellovin maybe they should ban security perimeter products if they really want to secure the supply chain.

          1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • stevebellovin@infosec.exchangeS stevebellovin@infosec.exchange

            I've been thinking about the FCC's insane new ban on foreign-made routers. Note the end of the BBC story at https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c74787w149zo:
            "One exception to the general absence of US-made routers is the newer Starlink WiFi router. Starlink is part of Elon Musk's company SpaceX.

            "The company says the Starlink routers are made in Texas."

            And per the FCC's FAQ (https://www.fcc.gov/faqs-recent-updates-fcc-covered-list-regarding-routers-produced-foreign-countries), even US-written software (or, I assume, open source software like OpenWRT) won't exempt foreign-made routers from the ban.

            ricci@discuss.systemsR This user is from outside of this forum
            ricci@discuss.systemsR This user is from outside of this forum
            ricci@discuss.systems
            wrote last edited by
            #5

            @SteveBellovin I'm also sure they will use this approval power to extract bribes and political concessions like they have with tiktok, CBS, etc.

            1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • R relay@relay.an.exchange shared this topic
            • stevebellovin@infosec.exchangeS stevebellovin@infosec.exchange

              I've been thinking about the FCC's insane new ban on foreign-made routers. Note the end of the BBC story at https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c74787w149zo:
              "One exception to the general absence of US-made routers is the newer Starlink WiFi router. Starlink is part of Elon Musk's company SpaceX.

              "The company says the Starlink routers are made in Texas."

              And per the FCC's FAQ (https://www.fcc.gov/faqs-recent-updates-fcc-covered-list-regarding-routers-produced-foreign-countries), even US-written software (or, I assume, open source software like OpenWRT) won't exempt foreign-made routers from the ban.

              rootwyrm@weird.autosR This user is from outside of this forum
              rootwyrm@weird.autosR This user is from outside of this forum
              rootwyrm@weird.autos
              wrote last edited by
              #6

              @SteveBellovin @fsinn correct.

              The way the order is written, they have effectively banned home Internet. There is no such thing as a DOCSIS modem that is not also capable of routing; every fiber ONT is foreign and capable of routing.

              stevebellovin@infosec.exchangeS fsinn@mas.toF 2 Replies Last reply
              0
              • rootwyrm@weird.autosR rootwyrm@weird.autos

                @SteveBellovin @fsinn correct.

                The way the order is written, they have effectively banned home Internet. There is no such thing as a DOCSIS modem that is not also capable of routing; every fiber ONT is foreign and capable of routing.

                stevebellovin@infosec.exchangeS This user is from outside of this forum
                stevebellovin@infosec.exchangeS This user is from outside of this forum
                stevebellovin@infosec.exchange
                wrote last edited by
                #7

                @rootwyrm @fsinn Yes. I expect that the big consumer ISPs will get waivers, which has its own implications. (Also note that currently approved models can continue to be manufactured and imported; it's merely that new ones won't get FCC approval, and hence will be banned.)

                A 1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • rootwyrm@weird.autosR rootwyrm@weird.autos

                  @SteveBellovin @fsinn correct.

                  The way the order is written, they have effectively banned home Internet. There is no such thing as a DOCSIS modem that is not also capable of routing; every fiber ONT is foreign and capable of routing.

                  fsinn@mas.toF This user is from outside of this forum
                  fsinn@mas.toF This user is from outside of this forum
                  fsinn@mas.to
                  wrote last edited by
                  #8

                  @rootwyrm @SteveBellovin

                  All the better for controlling media and impeding organized dissent. Iran has been dark, without internet, for how many weeks now?

                  1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • stevebellovin@infosec.exchangeS stevebellovin@infosec.exchange

                    @rootwyrm @fsinn Yes. I expect that the big consumer ISPs will get waivers, which has its own implications. (Also note that currently approved models can continue to be manufactured and imported; it's merely that new ones won't get FCC approval, and hence will be banned.)

                    A This user is from outside of this forum
                    A This user is from outside of this forum
                    astrashe@mas.to
                    wrote last edited by
                    #9

                    @SteveBellovin @rootwyrm @fsinn Wouldn't the need for waivers give the government a huge amount of leverage over ISPs? If you don't cut off people we don't like, we'll withhold your wavier, etc.

                    stevebellovin@infosec.exchangeS 2 Replies Last reply
                    0
                    • A astrashe@mas.to

                      @SteveBellovin @rootwyrm @fsinn Wouldn't the need for waivers give the government a huge amount of leverage over ISPs? If you don't cut off people we don't like, we'll withhold your wavier, etc.

                      stevebellovin@infosec.exchangeS This user is from outside of this forum
                      stevebellovin@infosec.exchangeS This user is from outside of this forum
                      stevebellovin@infosec.exchange
                      wrote last edited by
                      #10

                      @astrashe @rootwyrm @fsinn Precisely. I think there are other implications as well.

                      rootwyrm@weird.autosR 1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • A astrashe@mas.to

                        @SteveBellovin @rootwyrm @fsinn Wouldn't the need for waivers give the government a huge amount of leverage over ISPs? If you don't cut off people we don't like, we'll withhold your wavier, etc.

                        stevebellovin@infosec.exchangeS This user is from outside of this forum
                        stevebellovin@infosec.exchangeS This user is from outside of this forum
                        stevebellovin@infosec.exchange
                        wrote last edited by
                        #11

                        @astrashe @rootwyrm @fsinn Here are two slides from a course I taught a few years ago.

                        Link Preview ImageLink Preview Image
                        1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        • stevebellovin@infosec.exchangeS stevebellovin@infosec.exchange

                          I've been thinking about the FCC's insane new ban on foreign-made routers. Note the end of the BBC story at https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c74787w149zo:
                          "One exception to the general absence of US-made routers is the newer Starlink WiFi router. Starlink is part of Elon Musk's company SpaceX.

                          "The company says the Starlink routers are made in Texas."

                          And per the FCC's FAQ (https://www.fcc.gov/faqs-recent-updates-fcc-covered-list-regarding-routers-produced-foreign-countries), even US-written software (or, I assume, open source software like OpenWRT) won't exempt foreign-made routers from the ban.

                          mobidic@mastodon.socialM This user is from outside of this forum
                          mobidic@mastodon.socialM This user is from outside of this forum
                          mobidic@mastodon.social
                          wrote last edited by
                          #12

                          @SteveBellovin
                          Got it! Starlink will be the modern "Volksempfaenger" device for all US citizens. May the rule of proxy guide you - to your next ICE service point✌️

                          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volksempf%C3%A4nger

                          #musk #starlink #fcc #router #nazi #opensource #fascism #bigtech

                          Link Preview Image
                          1 Reply Last reply
                          0
                          • stevebellovin@infosec.exchangeS stevebellovin@infosec.exchange

                            @astrashe @rootwyrm @fsinn Precisely. I think there are other implications as well.

                            rootwyrm@weird.autosR This user is from outside of this forum
                            rootwyrm@weird.autosR This user is from outside of this forum
                            rootwyrm@weird.autos
                            wrote last edited by
                            #13

                            @SteveBellovin @astrashe @fsinn gimme a sec to catch up here; I was talking exactly this with some press folks and it goes MUCH deeper.

                            rootwyrm@weird.autosR 1 Reply Last reply
                            0
                            • rootwyrm@weird.autosR rootwyrm@weird.autos

                              @SteveBellovin @astrashe @fsinn gimme a sec to catch up here; I was talking exactly this with some press folks and it goes MUCH deeper.

                              rootwyrm@weird.autosR This user is from outside of this forum
                              rootwyrm@weird.autosR This user is from outside of this forum
                              rootwyrm@weird.autos
                              wrote last edited by
                              #14

                              @SteveBellovin @astrashe @fsinn basically, any company can apply for a 'conditional approval' from the DoD + DHS - it requires BOTH to approve. This is a bright red flag and a clear signal of intent.

                              That conditional approval is going to be dependent on one, a bribe. And two, doing whatever the government says. That could be censorship lists. But it could also be mandatory 'age verification' with ID to use the Internet, back doors, wire taps, etc.

                              rootwyrm@weird.autosR stevebellovin@infosec.exchangeS 2 Replies Last reply
                              0
                              • rootwyrm@weird.autosR rootwyrm@weird.autos

                                @SteveBellovin @astrashe @fsinn basically, any company can apply for a 'conditional approval' from the DoD + DHS - it requires BOTH to approve. This is a bright red flag and a clear signal of intent.

                                That conditional approval is going to be dependent on one, a bribe. And two, doing whatever the government says. That could be censorship lists. But it could also be mandatory 'age verification' with ID to use the Internet, back doors, wire taps, etc.

                                rootwyrm@weird.autosR This user is from outside of this forum
                                rootwyrm@weird.autosR This user is from outside of this forum
                                rootwyrm@weird.autos
                                wrote last edited by
                                #15

                                @SteveBellovin @astrashe @fsinn there is no upper bound to the kind of fuckery possible, nor is it possible to overstate the risks. Especially as government-mandated backdoors, stripping anonymity, and breaking encryption has been on the wishlist of every fucking president since Reagan. ESPECIALLY the supposed 'opposition' ones.

                                1 Reply Last reply
                                0
                                • rootwyrm@weird.autosR rootwyrm@weird.autos

                                  @SteveBellovin @astrashe @fsinn basically, any company can apply for a 'conditional approval' from the DoD + DHS - it requires BOTH to approve. This is a bright red flag and a clear signal of intent.

                                  That conditional approval is going to be dependent on one, a bribe. And two, doing whatever the government says. That could be censorship lists. But it could also be mandatory 'age verification' with ID to use the Internet, back doors, wire taps, etc.

                                  stevebellovin@infosec.exchangeS This user is from outside of this forum
                                  stevebellovin@infosec.exchangeS This user is from outside of this forum
                                  stevebellovin@infosec.exchange
                                  wrote last edited by
                                  #16

                                  @rootwyrm @astrashe @fsinn Up to a point. It is clearly unconstitutional for the government to require private companies to censor speech—but the trick will be proving it in court. Similarly, the Supreme Court has held that there is a constitutional right to anonymous speech—even Justice Thomas has said so. Again, though, you'd have to prove in court that the restrictions were at government request; private companies can do what they want.

                                  1 Reply Last reply
                                  1
                                  0
                                  • R relay@relay.infosec.exchange shared this topic
                                  Reply
                                  • Reply as topic
                                  Log in to reply
                                  • Oldest to Newest
                                  • Newest to Oldest
                                  • Most Votes


                                  • Login

                                  • Login or register to search.
                                  • First post
                                    Last post
                                  0
                                  • Categories
                                  • Recent
                                  • Tags
                                  • Popular
                                  • World
                                  • Users
                                  • Groups