Bangkok Post » Poll
- Most recent
- Most viewed
- 12:47 AMFergie gets a 'crazy' goodbye
- 09:58 PMThaksin slams anti-Yingluck website
- 09:52 PMThongchai loses Match-Play final
- 08:40 PMS Korean PM meets Yingluck
- 08:15 PMFloods need bold action, big money
- 05:14 PMThongchai: Match-Play final live
- 02:27 PMSuranand: No cabinet reshuffle now
Share your thoughts
For more candid, lengthy, conversational and open discussion between one another, use our Forum
Report objectionable comments click here. Include: discussion #, commenter name, comment date / time as it looks on the page. Example: discussion 15: 09/01/2009 at 10:00 AM.
Discussion 15 : 19 Oct 2012 at 19.2115
Disc 13, ravbrat: You're 100% correct. If you read recent comments made by the Thai Finance Minister, or if you are fully aware of what's going on in Thailand, you have to agree with ravbrat, "Thailand, is aligned with China."
Discussion 14 : 19 Oct 2012 at 11.2014
The Chinese company Huawei was sued by Cisco for copyright infringement. Cisco accused Huawei copying one its its network routers right down to the design flaws and typing mistakes in the manuals. Motorola has accused Huawei of recruiting employees to steal its secrets. All Chinese companies work for the government. In this case I think protectionism is called for.
Discussion 13 : 19 Oct 2012 at 07.3413
Mathew Disc 12, Sorry to disappoint you but Thai is not 'part of USA', legally, geographically or politically. Thailand has made it clear that it is aligned with China when they stopped a civilian atmospheric study by NASA and instead sent every top Thai military person to China for a friendship meeting. The only thing Thailand wants from the USA is intellectual property and rich tourists.
Discussion 12 : 19 Oct 2012 at 05.0112
Of course thai is part of the USA so they support US findings. This is just another racist against china. Everyone is spying on everyone, it's not just China that is spying on the US. So I don't know what's the big deal with this case. But I know it's just case of bullying.
Discussion 11 : 19 Oct 2012 at 03.5111
D6- please practice your reading comprehension skills. Paragraph 15 states, "But suggestions that it is part of a cyber-attack by China, where the chip is made, have been discounted."
If there is no 'deliberate skulduggery', why does the 'back door' exist? Why take chances with systems related to national security? Why are you taking China's side in the dispute?
"Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me"Discussion 10 : 18 Oct 2012 at 18.3910
Disc 8, Khunbj: The United States, has the most-open free market in the entire world. These telecom firms were cited as a security threat based on intelligence informaiton not made public to those outside the government. The United States, has accepted trade deficits and has fought protectionism of world-markets, especially in Asia. Having said this, most Asian markets still continue to engage heavily, in trade and investment protectionism.
Discussion 9 : 18 Oct 2012 at 15.289
This is only a trade barrier set up by US companies by their cronies in the senate. This is what you get when companies owns the politicians.
Discussion 8 : 18 Oct 2012 at 14.238
The day that the americans produce irrevocable proof then I believe them ...until then I just see it as another trade barrier ...and who to say that the Yanks don't do the same thing...
Discussion 7 : 18 Oct 2012 at 14.057
China has had a long history of attempting cyber war on then US. Not too long ago a video was posted of Chinese generals training soldiers in cyber-warfare using software that clearly showed USA IP numbers. The US has routinely tracked Chinese probes of US systems. So banning Chinese hardware in sensitive spots is (I believe) a good idea. The next war will not be with men and tanks it will be kids and computers disabling the communications and finances of 'the enemy'.
Discussion 6 : 18 Oct 2012 at 12.356
D3 - The article clearly states that the chip inquestion was designed by Actel an American company and the backdoor was added by them and not the Chinese manufacturer. These US chips are used in many devices and the inclusion of the backdoor on a US chip indicates that maybe the US are doing what they (US) are saying the Chinese maybe doing. It will be easy enough for the US to reverse engineer the Chinese chips to see if there is a backdoor. Here is a quote from the Economist "Years of intense scrutiny by experts have not produced conclusive public evidence of deliberate skulduggery, as opposed to mistakes, in Huawei's wares. BT, a British telecoms company that buys products vetted in [the cyber-security center at] Banbury, says it has not had any security issues with them (though it rechecks everything itself, just to be sure"
