Connect with us

Security

No ban: IEEE gives Huawei employees the all-clear

Published

on

Is the Huawei ban an assault or simply just part of a trade war?
TechRepublic’s Karen Roby talks to David Gewirtz of ZDNet to gain his perspective on the latest happenings surrounding Huawei and the implications of a trade war. Read more: https://zd.net/2KlPYZ3

The latest on-again, off-again ban on Huawei and its workers has resolved itself with Huawei employees no longer banned by the IEEE.

Last week, the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) said it would adhere to US law by bringing the ban in.

“IEEE complies with US government regulations which restrict the ability of the listed Huawei companies and their employees to participate in certain activities that are not generally open to the public,” it said at the time.

“This includes certain aspects of the publication peer review and editorial process.”

However, on Sunday, the organisation said it had received clarification from the US Department of Commerce that it could lift the ban.

“Based on this new information, employees of Huawei and its affiliates may participate as peer reviewers and editors in our publication process. All IEEE members, regardless of employer, can continue to participate in all of the activities of the IEEE,” it said.

“Our initial, more restrictive approach was motivated solely by our desire to protect our volunteers and our members from legal risk. With the clarification received, this risk has been addressed.”

Huawei had faced a number of bans that were subsequently lifted after the US Department of Commerce added the Chinese giant to its Entity List, meaning US companies needed a licence to sell or transfer technology to it.

Last month, Google removed support for its Android mobile operating system, before a temporary licence was granted.

Last week, Huawei filed a motion seeking to have the section of the US National Defense Authorization Act 2019 (NDAA) affecting it be dismissed as unconstitutional. That section enforces a ban on US federal agencies and their contractors from using Huawei equipment due to security concerns.

In the motion, Huawei argues that section 889 of the NDAA specifically targets Huawei, saying the legislation disrupts the company’s existing contracts; stigmatises the company and its employees as supposed tools of the Chinese government; and seriously threatens the company’s ability to do business in the US.

“They are using every tool they have, including legislative, administrative, and diplomatic channels. They want to put us out of business,” Huawei chief legal officer Song Liuping said in a statement.

Related Coverage

How 5G network builders are competing with Huawei in Asia

Network builders say sales are not just about cost.

Alibaba Cloud touts Asian heritage and focus as competitive advantages

While coy over how the Huawei-US debacle may impact other Chinese technology vendors, Alibaba Cloud executives play up their “in Asia, for Asia” focus and investment in the region as a key competitive advantage over its US competitors, including AWS, Microsoft, and Google.

Huawei files motion against US declaring law as ‘unconstitutional’

The Chinese tech giant is looking to have the law thrown out.

Apple takes swipe at Samsung and Huawei

Apple is quick to take advantage of the mess that its rivals — Samsung and Huawei — have fond themselves in.

Huawei may not even be able to put microSD card slots in future smartphones

While this wouldn’t bother Apple, an Android smartphone without an microSD card slot would be pretty disadvantaged. But the company does seem to have planned for this day too, and has a backup in place.

Hardware and software vendors continue to flee Huawei following blacklisting (TechRepublic)

Just over one week after an executive order prohibiting US companies from selling products to Huawei, the world’s third largest smartphone manufacturer finds itself with few friends.

Source link

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Security

Managing Vulnerabilities in a Cloud Native World

Published

on

This free 1-hour webinar from GigaOm Research brings together experts in Cloud Native Vulnerability Management, featuring analyst Iben Rodriguez and special guest from Palo Alto Networks, John Morello. The discussion will focus on optimizing cloud security posture and integration with enterprise tool sets.

We will review platforms delivering Security Posture Management and Workload Protection for Microservice based and Hybrid Cloud Workloads.

Registrants will learn how new customers can benefit from Prisma Cloud to better secure their complex multi-cloud environments. Existing customers will learn about new features they can take advantage of and how to optimize their limited resources.

Register now to join GigaOm and Palo Alto Networks for this free expert webinar.

The post Managing Vulnerabilities in a Cloud Native World appeared first on Gigaom.

Continue Reading

Security

Security Tools Help Bring Dev and Security Teams Together

Published

on

Software development teams are increasingly focused on identifying and mitigating any issues as quickly and completely as possible. This relates not only to software quality but also software security. Different organizations are at different levels when it comes to having their development teams and security teams working in concert, but the simple fact remains that there are far more developers out there than security engineers.

Those factors are leading organizations to consider security tooling and automation to proactively discover and resolve any software security issues throughout the development process. In the recent report, “GigaOm Radar for Developer Security Tools,” Shea Stewart examines a roundup of security tools aimed at software development teams.

Stewart identified three critical criteria to bear in mind when evaluating developer security tools. These include:

  • Vendors providing tools to improve application security can and should also enhance an organization’s overall security posture.
  • The prevailing “shift-left” mindset doesn’t necessarily mean the responsibility for reducing risk should shift to development, but instead focusing on security earlier in the process and continuing to do so throughout the development process will reduce risk and the need for extensive rework.
  • Security throughout the entire software development lifecycle (SDLC) is critical for any organization focused on reducing risk.

Figure 1. How Cybersecurity Applies Across Each Stage of the Software Development Lifecycle *Note: This report focuses only on the Developer Security Tooling area

Individual vendors have made varying levels of progress and innovation toward enhancing developer security. Following several acquisitions, Red Hat, Palo Alto Networks, and Rapid7 have all added tooling for developer security to their platforms. Stewart sees a couple of the smaller vendors like JFrog and Sonatype as continuing to innovate to remain ahead of the market.

Vendors delving into this category and moving deeper into “DevSecOps” all seem to be taking different approaches to their enhanced security tooling. While they are involving security in every aspect of the development process, some tend to be moving more quickly to match the pace of the SDLC. Others are trying to shore up existing platforms by adding functionality through acquisition. Both infrastructure and software developers are now sharing toolsets and processes, so these development security tools must account for the requirements of both groups.

While none of the 12 vendors evaluated in this report can provide comprehensive security throughout the entire SDLC, they all have their particular strengths and areas of focus. It is therefore incumbent upon the organization to fully and accurately assess its SDLC, involve the development and security teams, and match the unique requirements with the functionality provided by these tools. Even if it involves using more than one at different points throughout the process, focus on striking a balance between stringent security and simplifying the development process.

Read more: Key Criteria for Evaluating Developer Security Tools, and the Gigaom Radar for Developer Security Tool Companies.

The post Security Tools Help Bring Dev and Security Teams Together appeared first on Gigaom.

Continue Reading

Security

Key Criteria for Evaluating User and Entity Behavior Analytics (UEBA)

Published

on

Cybersecurity is a multidisciplinary practice that not only grows in complexity annually but evolves nearly as quickly. A survey of the security landscape today would reveal concerns ranging from the classic compromised servers to the relatively new DevSecOps practices aimed at securing the rapid deployment of new code and infrastructure. However, some things remain constant no matter how much change is introduced. While technology evolves and complexity varies, there is almost always a human component in
risks presented to an organization.

User Behavior Analysis (UBA) was designed to analyze the actions of users in an organization and attempt to identify normal and abnormal behaviors. From this analysis, malicious or risky behaviors can be detected. UBA solutions identify events that are not detectable using other methods because, unlike classic security tools (an IDS or SIEM for example), UBA does not simply pattern match or apply rule sets to data to identify security events. Instead, it looks for any and all deviations from baseline user activity.

As technology advanced and evolved, and the scope of what is connected to the network grew, the need to analyze entities other than users emerged. In response, entity analysis has been added to UBA to create UEBA or User and Entity Behavior Analysis. The strategy remains the same, but the scope of analysis has expanded to include entities involving things like daemons, processes, infrastructure, and so on.

How to Read this Report

This GigaOm report is one of a series of documents that helps IT organizations assess competing solutions in the context of well-defined features and criteria. For a fuller understanding consider reviewing the following reports:

Key Criteria report: A detailed market sector analysis that assesses the impact that key product features and criteria have on top-line solution characteristics—such as scalability, performance, and TCO—that drive purchase decisions.

GigaOm Radar report: A forward-looking analysis that plots the relative value and progression of vendor solutions along multiple axes based on strategy and execution. The Radar report includes a breakdown of each vendor’s offering in the sector.

Solution Profile: An in-depth vendor analysis that builds on the framework developed in the Key Criteria and Radar reports to assess a company’s engagement within a technology sector. This analysis includes forward-looking guidance around both strategy and product.

The post Key Criteria for Evaluating User and Entity Behavior Analytics (UEBA) appeared first on Gigaom.

Continue Reading

Trending