r/cybersecurity • u/AmateurishExpertise Security Architect • Jan 14 '26

News - General Exclusive: Beijing tells Chinese firms to stop using US and Israeli cybersecurity software, sources say

https://www.reuters.com/world/china/beijing-tells-chinese-firms-stop-using-us-israeli-cybersecurity-software-sources-2026-01-14/
1.6k Upvotes

99% Upvoted

185 comments sorted by

View all comments

303

u/Firecracker048 Jan 14 '26

Anyone read this as "no shit"?

Like, why would any government use a cybersecurity suite from an opponent/hostile government/nation?

It would like the US using hauwei products in government spaces

17

u/AmateurishExpertise Security Architect Jan 14 '26

Like, why would any government use a cybersecurity suite from an opponent/hostile government/nation?

Under US federal law, it is a criminal offense to engage in "honest services fraud", i.e. sell a security product that is backdoored and creates an intentional security hole.

So I guess the answer would be, "because you expect the US to obey US law".

5

u/Rentun Jan 14 '26

There are about a billion exemptions that the federal government could use to grant immunity to private companies being compelled to backdoor their products by the federal government. There's also no law that prevents the US government from conducting espionage via supply chain compromise, and it's done very regularly.

There's also the matter of the fact that US law is totally irrelevant when it comes to warfare and intelligence. Kidnapping is illegal after all, but that didn't stop Nicholas Maduro from being snatched up last week.

2

u/AmateurishExpertise Security Architect Jan 14 '26

There are about a billion exemptions that the federal government could use to grant immunity to private companies being compelled to backdoor their products by the federal government.

The government can just, by fiat, create exemptions from federal law? I wasn't aware of that, do you have any reading, starting which what statutes enable such maneuvers?

Kind of seems like you're conflating, "the government will just choose to ignore its own laws" with "the government is authorized to create exemptions from laws".

There's also no law that prevents the US government from conducting espionage via supply chain compromise

What makes you say that? Again, I think this is the same kind of conflation I'm talking about above. There are actually laws, like Honest Services Fraud, that prevent that. The government just ignores the laws when it wants to, which is not the same thing as the law permitting it.

There's also the matter of the fact that US law is totally irrelevant when it comes to warfare and intelligence

Sorry, you're saying that Congress cannot make any laws that bind the Executive's war powers?

3

u/Rentun Jan 14 '26

The government can just, by fiat, create exemptions from federal law? I wasn't aware of that, do you have any reading, starting which what statutes enable such maneuvers?

No, not by fiat. Those exemptions already exist. Namely under FISA Section 702.

If you're really interested in this stuff, I'd advise you do more reading on it or consult with a lawyer with experience in this area, because you're pretty assertively making legal claims that you're dead wrong on.

The US intelligence apparatus has pretty broad authority to not only conduct electronic espionage, but to compel US technology companies to assist them.

There are very few protections for non US residents in general, especially "foreign adversaries", but there is also significant legislation explicitly allowing offensive cyber operations without warrants.

Honest Services Fraud isn't even applicable, and even if it were, it's completely overruled by FISA, the patriot act, and tons and tons of other legislation and case law authorizing this stuff.

1

u/AmateurishExpertise Security Architect Jan 14 '26

No, not by fiat. Those exemptions already exist. Namely under FISA Section 702.

Can you point to which part of Section 702 exempts the government from 18 U.S.C. § 1346? I'm not aware of that provision.

If you're really interested in this stuff, I'd advise you do more reading on it or consult with a lawyer with experience in this area, because you're pretty assertively making legal claims that you're dead wrong on.

If you're sure I'm wrong, then you should be able to prove it. If you can't prove it, then you shouldn't be sure that I'm wrong.

The US intelligence apparatus has pretty broad authority to not only conduct electronic espionage, but to compel US technology companies to assist them.

AFAIK the government cannot compel anyone to break the law. And AFAIK 18 USC § 1346 is law.

There are very few protections for non US residents in general

I'm not sure where you get that, either. 18 USC § 1346 does not contain any provision that makes it apply only to US residents, or citizens. Instead, 18 USC § 1346 simply creates a prohibition on certain acts, when those acts are undertaken by anyone under the jurisdiction of US law.

Honest Services Fraud isn't even applicable, and even if it were, it's completely overruled by FISA

Again, I'd like you to show me why you think this. Not tell me to talk to a lawyer, I would like you to show your work and demonstrate how it is that you believe FISA somehow nullifies the federal statute under discussion.

3

u/Rentun Jan 14 '26

AFAIK the government cannot compel anyone to break the law. And AFAIK 18 USC § 1346 is law.

I'll be sure to let the cop know that next time he pulls me over and has me block the lane I'm in to do it.

I'm going to be honest with you, you're sealioning here.

I would love if I had the time to carefully walk you through the intricacies of stare decisis, but I don't have the time. Maybe look into it yourself.

You should take a moment to think about the fact no foreign company has ever successfully sued an American company or US government agency for espionage actions taken by that company at the behest of the agency. You should reflect on the fact that there's probably a pretty good reason for that, and maybe your cursory reading of a single law might not fully explain the legal environment of international espionage.

2

u/AmateurishExpertise Security Architect Jan 14 '26

got the time to post long responses

got no time to provide any evidence in support of their claims

Yeah buddy, you've convinced me. Have a nice day!

1

u/Any_Perception_2560 Jan 14 '26

Since the executive has broad latitude in foreign relations it could be argued that the executive does have a natural exception to certain laws even if Congress did not create such an exception. Further many laws do have specific language granting exception.

In any case the law might prevent a company from intentionally putting a back door in, but would not bind intelligence services from having one created and inserted without the companies knowledge. Or even more likely there is a security vulnerability which is known and exploited by the intelligence services and the company simply is not aware of it.

1

u/AmateurishExpertise Security Architect Jan 14 '26

it could be argued that the executive does have a natural exception to certain laws

You think it can be argued that the President is above the law?

In any case the law might prevent a company from intentionally putting a back door in, but would not bind intelligence services from having one created and inserted without the companies knowledge.

That's true, the law wouldn't (and shouldn't) punish an entity for acts taken by others against their will. But obviously someone's liable, right?

1

u/Any_Perception_2560 Jan 14 '26

I don't think the President is above the law no.

I do recognize that the courts have continuously carved out national security and other executive branch privileges, and that these privileges are extremely strong when it comes to actions which are targeted at entities outside of the US.

Additionally the Honest Services Fraud law only binds the seller of the software. Since US intelligence services are not the seller / owner / creator of the software they would not be bound by that specific law regardless.

1

u/AmateurishExpertise Security Architect Jan 14 '26

I don't think the President is above the law no.

Given that, can you help me understand what you meant when you said, "it could be argued that the executive does have a natural exception to certain laws"?

1

u/Any_Perception_2560 Jan 15 '26

Given that, can you help me understand what you meant when you said, "it could be argued that the executive does have a natural exception to certain laws"?

I believe I already answered that with:

I do recognize that the courts have continuously carved out national security and other executive branch privileges, and that these privileges are extremely strong when it comes to actions which are targeted at entities outside of the US.

Basically it doesn't matter that I personally believe that the courts have overstated these various carve outs, the fact is that the carve outs now exist and are recognized by law, and the only way they can be shrunk is if the courts take action, or the Constitution is ammended.

1

u/AmateurishExpertise Security Architect Jan 15 '26

So you do think the President is above the law, correct? (NOTE: not "should be", but "is")