News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:An ARM Server That Is Banned in the US by einarfd on Friday August 05, 2022 @03:25PM (#32360780)
Huawei and the USA has some history. The first Huawei product was a line of routers that had the same names (Cisco gave all their routers a numbers as their names), same features, ports, command interface, and even same bugs. As the corresponding Cisco routers.
Re:An ARM Server That Is Banned in the US by orbital-decay on Friday August 05, 2022 @07:16PM (#32363031)
Hold on, are we talking about the same Cisco that also outright stole its first product, with the founders narrowly avoiding jail time? [0]

Huawei vs Nortel (Canada) is a far more interesting story.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cisco#1984%E2%80%931995:_Origi...

>On July 11, 1986, Bosack and Lougheed were forced to resign from Stanford and the university contemplated filing criminal complaints against Cisco and its founders for the theft of its software, hardware designs, and other intellectual properties.[15]

Re:An ARM Server That Is Banned in the US by musicale on Tuesday August 09, 2022 @02:02AM (#32394671)
"But this was not exactly bad, because other things had happened like that at Stanford before."

Presumably Stanford eventually figured out that it was a tech incubator.

> The way royalties work, a third goes to the school, a third goes to the department and a third goes to the inventor. I gave my third back to my department because essentially all of this stuff is born out of a great research environment.

Presumably most of the royalties came from Cisco. Cisco's founders would certainly have known that Stanford owned the hardware design and software, as well as any copyrights or patents, and that licensing would be required.

It sounds like Yeager's biggest complaint was that Cisco didn't give him (and Bechtolsheim) credit for their work.

Re:An ARM Server That Is Banned in the US by count on Friday August 05, 2022 @04:38PM (#32361710)
Don't forget that was a joint effort by 3Com w/Huawei.

The debug messages even still said Cisco. It was ridiculous.

Re:An ARM Server That Is Banned in the US by CodeSgt on Friday August 05, 2022 @06:32PM (#32362733)
Wow! I've never heard of thus. How were the counterfeit servers eventually discovered to be counterfeits? Sounds like this went pretty deep.
Re:An ARM Server That Is Banned in the US by signa11 on Friday August 05, 2022 @07:26PM (#32363112)
you buy one, and ask your engineers to go to work on it. make sure it is air gapped…
Re:An ARM Server That Is Banned in the US by count on Sunday August 07, 2022 @04:11PM (#32379426)
LOL, more like, you take the factory manufacturing stuff, and the stolen source code for the OS that runs on it, you run a sed script to replace 'Cisco' with '3Com' and 'IOS' with '3OS' but make it not actually do so everywhere, and then just change the badge and ship to customers.

And for what it's worth, they were network switches/routers, not servers. Cisco didn't make 'servers' back in the day.

https://www.infoworld.com/article/2674627/3com-huawei-joint-...

Re:An ARM Server That Is Banned in the US by signa11 on Friday August 05, 2022 @07:25PM (#32363088)
yup, c10k (iirc) was one of the affected platforms.
Re:An ARM Server That Is Banned in the US by hulitu on Saturday August 06, 2022 @04:31AM (#32366168)
Did they have also the same backdoors ?