That's not proof, that's just an accusation. Huawei even offered up source access to customers as a way to prove that they didn't do that.

Not saying they don't do such things, but the evidence is lacking.

People who disagree with me must be paid actors! I don't even disagree with you, it's just really cringe-worthy.

I'd usually agree, except when it comes to saying anything critical of China on the Internet, my statement is very true. The wumao is a real thing, and they're pervasive within online tech.

Well your comment isn't greyed out or flagged, so they must be on vacation today :)

I wonder if you have enough self-awareness to notice why your behavior here might be considered bizarre. No, people who point out that your government routinely and brazenly backdoors equipment and software everyone uses (or rather, has forced upon them to use), while Chinese actions of this sort are evidenced to a lesser extent, and so the onus in justifying the use of that country's products is on the US at least as much as on China, are mostly not "wumao", nor whataboutists, nor anything of the sort. They're making an entirely sound argument an unbiased person would make given the context, you're just using those mind-killing political notions to dismiss a topic that offends your patriotic sensibilities.

Wumaos are low-paid grunts and sincere idiots who disingenuously downvote, report and post irrelevant nonsense regarding racist imperialist AmeriKKKa or legitimate Chinese clay/territorial waters/6000 years of peaceful history. This is very easy to see. You're free to suspect any interlocutor as being one, of course, but if that's your only retort, you'd do better not stooping to the level of an undeniable propagandist and instead conceding the object-level issue – or keeping silent.

"Don't feed egregious comments by replying; flag them instead."

a.k.a. please don't feed the trolls

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

The first link depends on the second. The second requires some sort of sign up to read, but archive.is works as proxy https://archive.ph/Dov1N

The proof amounts to essentially one sentence spoken by an unnamed source

> U.S. officials said Huawei has built equipment that secretly preserves its ability to access networks through [lawful intercept interfaces]

but I understand that source confidentiality is useful so if WSJ trusts that, perhaps so should I. Not sure I'd then go so far as to independently say it has been "proven" when all that I truly know is that someone else believes someone else who has a commercial interest in saying this. It's probably true but that's not the same thing

I would trust a proven security research group's analysis and evidence of backdoors rather than CNN or WSJ that has a track record of lies and biases. They always cite government sources or experts without provided a single shred of evidence. I have read a lot of articles in relations to the so called "Chinese backdoor" and the "evidence" was either the equipment contains default root or admin passwords or the software has vulnerabilities. Last time I checked, most if not all vendors have default admin accounts and passwords so you can configure the device and change the initial password. Similarly I have not come across any network equipment software without security vulnerabilities. If you can refer me to an article with conclusive evidence please send me the link. This would be much appreciated.

You can't take the WSJ as proof of anything, let alone in regards to China.

You broke more than one of the site guidelines quite badly here. Please don't do that, regardless of how right you are or feel you are. Those rules for good reasons.

If you'd please review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and stick to them when posting here, we'd appreciate it.