backtop


Print 75 comment(s) - last by cherrycoke.. on May 15 at 6:49 PM

U.S. military had counterfeit Cisco networking gear in its secure networks

For many in law enforcement and national security in the U.S. security concerns are very big after the FBI discovered that the U.S. military had bogus computer gear in use in its military networks. The fear is that counterfeit networking components could introduce Trojans and possible security breaches into secure networks in America.

According to The New York Times, the FBI ran an investigation called Operation Cisco Raider that has so far led to 15 criminal cases involving counterfeit products that were bought and in use by U.S. military agencies, military contractors and electric power companies in America.

Operation Cisco Raider uncovered 3,500 counterfeit Cisco network components, with an estimated value of $3.5 million. According to the FBI’s briefing of the Office of Management and Budget, the counterfeit equipment could allow the remote jamming of networks thought to be secure and possibly could allow access to networks remotely.

A Cisco spokesman told The New York Times, “We did not find any evidence of re-engineering in the manner that was described in the FBI presentation. We know what these counterfeiters are about."  Cisco believes that the counterfeiters weren’t attempting to get products into the market that would allow intrusion into secure networks. Rather Cisco feels that the counterfeiters were simply trying to produce copies of popular products to make fast money.

The threat of gaining access to secure systems via backdoors and exploits in hardware is real. Researchers at the University of Illinois were able to modify a Sun Microsystems SPARC processor by altering a data file on the chip. The chip altered was used in automated manufacturing systems and the modifications allowed the researchers to steal passwords from the system the processor was used in.

The issue of compromised hardware used in defense systems was highlighted with the bombing of the suspected Syrian nuclear plant by Israel. In that recent example, security analysts believe antiaircraft weapons were compromised and were turned off remotely prior to the attack.

Compromised hardware isn't the only source of security breaches for secure networks. A simple phishing attack on one of the countries most prestigious research laboratories allowed the breach of information from networks at Los Alamos.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

But...
By MrBlastman on 5/9/2008 11:48:40 AM , Rating: 5
I thought if you pay 40,000.00 for a router (which retails for 3000.00), you are guaranteed that it will be of highest grade materials, workmanship and most important, genuine product that is very secure.

In addition, if you spend 10,000 apiece for the replacement screws you will insure your device free from remote espionage manipulation...




RE: But...
By mvpx02 on 5/9/2008 11:55:05 AM , Rating: 5
You'd think so, but really almost all that extra money goes towards gold-plating the entire device.


RE: But...
By MrBlastman on 5/9/2008 12:06:35 PM , Rating: 2
I think the reality of things is the Cold War has never really died. It is still going strong to this day.

The only difference is our enemies are not as clearly defined and the layers of subterfuge have increased. I give credit to our enemies for perhaps coming up with this scheme but I'm also glad our government has caught some of the contraband.

The question remains though, how much other compromised equipment within our government remains? I'm sure there is something, somewhere that we don't know about which contains a backdoor or trojan that could be utilized in a devastating manner in the future.


RE: But...
By dickeywang on 5/9/2008 12:23:57 PM , Rating: 5
I think the reality is, even though the Cold War has ended, the CIA and all the arm dealers are still trying their best to create another one. Let's face it, the United states are spending about 600billion USD a year on military expenditures, which is about 50% of the military expenditures of the entire world and that's at least 8x as much as any other country in this world.

It will be a doom to those arm dealers and CIAs if we are in a situation where there is no opponent in this world.


RE: But...
By afkrotch on 5/9/08, Rating: 0
RE: But...
By dickeywang on 5/9/2008 3:17:28 PM , Rating: 5
You were talking about the 2007 numbers, the 2008 budget is $587 billion(according to the DoD website: http://www.gpoaccess.gov/usbudget/fy08/pdf/budget/... and the total budget for all the countries in the world is $1.2trillion. And for the money that was suppose to be spent on "rebuilding" countries, what they have done after 5 years into the war in Iraq?
You put it in a way sounds like involving in wars is a good thing for America, which is totally nonsense. Wars are only good for one kind of people -- arm dealers. Unfortunately, the U.S. government is also the biggest arm dealer in the world. Speaking of the war we are involving now, where did all those weapons used by Al Qaeda come from? Where did Sadam get all those weapons from? The all come from the U.S.. Speaking of stabling the middle east, have you seen that U.S. is selling weapons to both sides, Israel and Saudi Arabia?
It's all about money, and a war is only good for one particular kind of people, arm dealers.


RE: But...
By BladeVenom on 5/9/2008 3:30:49 PM , Rating: 1
The majority of Al Qaeda's and Saddam's weapons were Soviet weapons.


RE: But...
By Reclaimer77 on 5/9/08, Rating: -1
RE: But...
By jlips6 on 5/9/08, Rating: 0
RE: But...
By Reclaimer77 on 5/9/08, Rating: 0
RE: But...
By hashish2020 on 5/10/2008 2:41:43 AM , Rating: 1
Democracy is not mob rule.

It requires the preconditions of a free press (which we do not allow them) protection of minority rights (the only minorities that get rights in Iraq are those that kill and maim for it) and many other things

This so called democracy in Iraq WILL FAIL---name me one democracy that did not have such preconditions at one point in its history(Japan, Korea were not democracies, but one party states, for 50+ years after their respective wars, and Germany has a history of having SOME of these basic rights---Iraq HAS no history thereof, and we NEVER installed the structure in civil society to CREATE such conditions---we simply moved to elections and the mob rule, cronyism, and violence, state sponsered and otherwise, that we have up until today and we will have whether we stay or not)

Not to mention, if you want to sent my friends in the military for your little humanitarian democracy missions, ENLIST YOURSELF, because I'll tell you, they, and ESPECIALLY the marines, are sick of Iraq, whose ONE STANDING MOTIVATOR that has not changed is installing democracy and human rights

Curious how you accuse those above of being liberals, when the war YOU SUPPORT is nothing more than an interventionist Wilsonian BLEEDING HEART (should I say bleeding PURPLE heart) mission


RE: But...
By A5un on 5/10/2008 5:51:55 AM , Rating: 2
While I agree with your general statement, but I do want to point out that democracy should be defined solely as the "majority rule." It's neither good nor bad. It's just whatever the majority wants, which can be good or bad. The Salem witch-hunt was a result of democracy, and that can hardly be interpreted as anything good.


RE: But...
By Reclaimer77 on 5/10/2008 7:22:18 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Not to mention, if you want to sent my friends in the military for your little humanitarian democracy missions, ENLIST YOURSELF, because I'll tell you, they, and ESPECIALLY the marines, are sick of Iraq, whose ONE STANDING MOTIVATOR that has not changed is installing democracy and human rights


I have a reconstructed left knee with 50% strength and mobility and have had chronic back problems since I was 20. Knowing I would not be accepted, when the war started I still tried to enlist. Because I honestly believe that something can be more important than myself. Don't accuse me of being some internet air bag.

And how dare you speak for all those men and women and tell us they are " sick of being there ". They aren't " your friends " with all due respect. They made a choice knowing full well what it was. If they really were your friends you wouldn't disgrace them in this manner.


RE: But...
By hashish2020 on 5/11/2008 1:37:05 AM , Rating: 2
Ha, yea ok.

Did you even try to enlist? I'm guessing no.

Nope, my buddies are proud of me, they don't want to be sent to war for chairjockeys and chickhawks like you, and they like how I try to stop it from happening again.

I don't speak for all of them, just my buddies.

Though a lot of people tend to agree with them in the services

Military Times poll of active duty troops

Just as telling, only 41 percent of the military now say the United States should have gone to war in Iraq, down from 65 percent in 2003. That closely reflects beliefs of the general population — 45 percent agreed in a recent USA Today-Gallup poll.

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/...

Mouth, open. Put in foot.

Don't tell military people what to think, LISTEN TO THEM


RE: But...
By hashish2020 on 5/10/2008 3:28:55 AM , Rating: 4
"The fact that you believe a president could legally wage a war for his own personal pride alone is really depressing."

Not for his pride. For his popularity.

http://www.hist.umn.edu/~ruggles/Approval.htm

It has happened before. It may happen again. But with your shocking lack of historical and political knowledge, I ain't surprised you wouldn't know this.


RE: But...
By jlips6 on 5/11/2008 3:28:42 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
So the alternative is... do nothing? Yeah thats a great plan.

if doing nothing means helping our country out of national debt and saving hundreds and hundreds of soldiers lives, I'm all for it.

quote:
I can't agree with that. You don't have a crystal ball. You want to make a self fulfilling prophecy. Last time we stepped back and let the damn break, it spilled out onto our shores. The biggest mistake was pulling out after the first Gulf War. If we had done then what we are doing now, you and I would not be having this discussion.


you do realize you create your own little crystal ball when you say this, right?

quote:
I can't answer your questions satisfactory, because people like you simply don't believe there is ANY cause worth going to war to. At all. Ever. The fact that you believe a president could legally wage a war for his own personal pride alone is really depressing.

wrong. Wars are neccesary, and in many cases unavoidable. I do not however, believe it is the united states job to jump in to every damn war that occurs every decade often times in countries that don't affect us at all. I would prefer we send our troops to darfur instead of Iraq, where we could actually make a difference. If we go to war, it should be for a cause worth a war. Not at the drop of a political hat.
We have to have stable country of our own before we can make other countries stable. Thanks to this war, China owns the US. Great job W. Great job.

Do I believe George Bush would go to war for his own sake?... Halliburton and Katrina.
Uh, yeah I do. The fact that you still believe in him is depressing.


RE: But...
By SWAT Ninja on 5/12/2008 11:49:45 AM , Rating: 2
IDK where you wen to school or anything but the president doesn't decide on if we go to war all he can do is suggest for a declaration of war from congress and personally I know many soldiers in Iraq and Afgahnastan and they still believe we should be there and I plan to enlist after I graduate high school.


RE: But...
By EricMartello on 5/9/2008 8:00:21 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Wasn't their a bunch of news about how that election had a lot of problems with everybody rigging it? And a stable democratic middle east is within our best interests for national security, yes, However, just because we want it, doesn't mean we will get it.


Rigged elections...maybe, but I'd take what you hear in the news with a grain of salt. Remember, they're more concerned with ratings and ad revenue than presenting actual facts. Someone once made a good point that democracy isn't the best form of government, it's just less shitty than the other forms out there.

quote:
You seem to be quite the realist about wars. So am I. However, you seem to be under the illusion that this war will actually get anything done. So I won't hesitate to say this to you. that country needs a civil war, and it will have it regardless of whether we are there or not. We can spend billions on nothing, and waste countless soldiers, or we can let the dam break and at least get out of the way instead of delaying it. A stable, democratic Middle East Will. Not. Happen. For two reasons. 1. it must be democratic. 2. it must be stable.


This war is getting things done. If you are a realist about wars, then you'd be able to break it down to its fundamentals. Everything in nature follows a simple cycle of creation and destruction...microbes, plants, animals and of course humans. While this process of creating and destroying happens on different scales, for us, war is just natural process of destruction. It's not an issue of good or evil, right or wrong...nobody wants to be destroyed, and sometimes there is no grand reason for war, but it will always happen so long as humans are human.

quote:
democracy as we think of it will not exist there for awhile. and by awhile, I mean for a decade or two. The illusion of democracy we have their is pathetic. Stability. That's a good one. I don't even have to say anything about that. The middle east and stable haven't been used in the sentance since Saddam was dictator.


An oppressive government can maintain stability with the impending threat of doom to anyone who dares to against the system. Democracy seeks to maintain stability by fooling the general public into believing that they matter as an individual, and that the government serves them and their best interests. Given a choice between the two, I'd prefer having the wool pulled over my eyes in lieu of being tortured, maimed or executed at a dictator's whim. :)

quote:
You make me sick when you talk about this war. Like it actually might do something. You seem realistic in all sense but this. Name One thing that we are fighting there for beyond G dublya's pride that we will actually get. They don't want us there. We don't want us there. (those of us that have grey matter in their heads.) We won't accomplish anything there. Why are we fighting?


1) Oil
2) Possible corporate expansion i.e. Dubai
3) If the middle east was not war torn, it would be a great vacation destination
4) Great way to test new military technology in the field
5) Wars can stimulate a flailing economy...not so sure this one did that.
6) Human history is defined by the wars we fought - regardless of the reasons behind said wars.


RE: But...
By winterspan on 5/9/2008 4:34:46 PM , Rating: 5
Oh god, don't get me started... I swear to god it's like a prison sentence responding to all these ignorant morons...

[Iraq] have had free elections, for the first time ever. A citizen appointed government. They are without a doubt better off than they were before the " war ".


Afghanistan is a completely different situation than Iraq. There were ACTUAL terrorists and militants there -- it was the home base of Al-Qaeda and the Taliban -- most people agreed with the invasion. You cannot group the two.

Iraq, however, was certainly not a justified war. And you are saying the people are "better off"?? You have got to be kidding me... You mean "better off" in the sense that ~500,000 civilians have been shot to death, burned to death, tortured, blown up, or maimed permanently? Not to mention the tens of thousands including thousands of children who will suffer acute mental distress and PTSD for their entire lives. Yeah I'm sure all of them think they are "better off". This bullshit war had NOTHING TO DO WITH "SAVING" THE PEOPLE OF IRAQ. Don't remember the "WMDs", and all the Bush Admin propaganda do you? How convenient... How about Cheney and Rumsfeld and all the times they tried to link Iraq to Al-Qaeda or Iraq to 9/11. Or wait, are you one of the moronic "super-patriots" that believes that nonsense?

"Countries are born from blood, the blood of wars. Freedom isn't free."

That statement is a vast generalization intended to make people feel good about war. However, the truth is that "freedom" had NOTHING to do with the Iraq War.

The word " America " only EXISTS because of a war. The War for Independence idiot. So yes, in fact, war has done pretty damn good for America. You might recall the last big one too, where because of European idiocy we were pulled into a terrible conflict to stop dictators from taking over the entire world. I suppose now your going to tell me that was just for the arms dealers to make a buck too ? Come off it already. Your ignorance is insulting.


And you are calling THAT person ignorant??? The current Iraq War has absolutely no connection to the Revolutionary War or World War II, And comparing them is a disgrace of epic proportions. War is to be avoided at all costs if possible, however, certain situations require exceptions. Iraq was not one of them. And if idiots like yourself don't recognize the difference, nor don't give a damn about the constitution or are even capable of seeing how misled and manipulated you are by the government, there may just be another Revolutionary War.

Do you think the U.S is the only country that sells weapons on logistics to their allies ??

Certainly not, but we are indeed one of the largest. As the OP said, we spend nearly HALF of all defense spending in the world. This country has been taken over by the defense industry and at least 1/2 of the citizens don't seem to be mind, lest they be "unpatriotic".


RE: But...
By Ryanman on 5/9/08, Rating: 0
RE: But...
By Reclaimer77 on 5/9/08, Rating: -1
RE: But...
By hashish2020 on 5/10/2008 2:58:18 AM , Rating: 5
"People like you want it both ways. You want us to turtle and stay out of everything so we get sucker punched like 911. Then when it happens you want there to be no millitary response while at the same time blaming the president for not " doing something " to stop it. What exactly WOULD make you happy ?"

Going to war where there are terrorists that attacked us (Afghanistan) without going to war in another place that never had a terrorism problem (Iraq) because doing the latter increased the amount and support of terrorists.

http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/0925/dailyUpdate.htm...

Or do you believe some Connecticut and Cambridge educated, Maine vacationing pretendo-Texan politician with no military or intelligence experience more?

"Congress legally drafted the declaration of war which makes this war even more legitimate than the first gulf war and of course Vietnam. "

Are you simply retarded and do not know what a declaration of war is?
Because Congress unconstitutionally gave the executive powers of war and peace that would make every founding father sick to his stomach---you know, those that WENT TO WAR to divest executive power that was wielded over them?

"So we HAVEN'T arrested, captured, or killed dozens and dozens of Al Qaeda members in Iraq ? And not just footsoldiers, but high ranking members."

Trust a moron like you to think like this.
1-Al Queda in Iraq is not the Al Queda that attacked us---AT ALL
2-There were no Al-Queda members in Saddam-controlled Iraq before we showed up...the only ones were in Kurdish controlled Iraq WE PRTECTED against Saddam's intervention through (illegal) no fly zones NOT in the treaty after Gulf War I
3-You are an interventionist liberal, and no conservative

"Above all this there is one undisputed fact : We have not been attacked by terrorist since this country went to war and took it to the enemy."

This is a vacuous argument Bush neo-liberals love to parrot.
We HAVE been attacked by terrorists, actually, just not on our soil.
Our allies have been attacked by terrorists we promised our people we would destroy, though we underfund and understaff the REAL war in Afghanistan due to constraints from Iraq
And using that logic, Clinton must have done a TON to stop Islamic international terrorism, because we hadn't been attacked by Muslim terrorists in the US from 1993-2001...

"I'm just an ignorant Bush loving war mongering pro-evil capitalist pro-big oil racist muslim hating souther redneck god loving moron."

Nope, just an ignorant Bush loving war-mongering interventionist neo-liberal politically and militarily retarded moron from America who probably hasn't visited any non-developed country outside of a resort and who doesn't have the balls to enlist to serve


RE: But...
By A5un on 5/10/2008 5:40:56 AM , Rating: 5
I can't read any more of your crap. First of all, please understand the difference between Afghanistan and Iraq.

Afghanistan = terrorists hot spot
Iraq = the country that has absolutely nothing to do with 911

Now. Understand this as well. Most people don't have a problem at all with our invading of Afghanistan. Most people, however, do have a problem now with our invading of Iraq.

Why? Because there wasn't anything there to threaten out national security. CIA reports (published prior to the decision to invade Iraq) have shown that there are no WMD's in Iraq. So, you tell me why we're still there - in a country that poses no threat to us. And please spare us the "rebuilding democracy" BS. Oh, and as a side note, please also realize that there WERE NO Al-Qaeda's in Iraq prior to our invasion. I'm not talking about now. I'm talking about BEFORE we invaded Iraq. BEFORE...

I'll also tell you what democracy is. At the root of it, it's two wolves and a lamb discussing what's for dinner.


RE: But...
By Reclaimer77 on 5/10/08, Rating: -1
RE: But...
By audiomaniaca on 5/13/2008 2:00:58 AM , Rating: 1
Seems like you're a stupid person that cannot listen or understand others point of view.

Yes, terrorists in Afghanistan are the the same as the ones in Iraq and the US, although, it doesn't mean that everyone in the US, Iraq or Afghanistan are terrorists or Nazis, right?

Bad people is everywhere. Stupid people as well... like those who think governments are honest entities making the best for their people.

Yes, DEMOCRACY at its root is two wolves and a lamb discussing what's for dinner. That's true and intelligent is the person who created this metaphor.

Respect the intelligence of the guy posting above you. If you do this you'll be respecting him, everybody here and your own thinking limitations. Thanks.


RE: But...
By cleco on 5/9/2008 4:02:35 PM , Rating: 1
I think you seen too much Lord of War.....

I hope you know that Isreal and Saudi aren't hostile towards eachother ... and they are both strong allies of the U.S.

Have you even seen Afgan after 5 years? It is way better. Iraq is getting better. But nonetheless it is 100% better than before the invasions.


RE: But...
By AmazighQ on 5/10/2008 6:16:07 AM , Rating: 2
ya brainwashed American don't watch FOX and then think you know the world :/

Israel and Saudi are very hostile towards each other
the only thing that doesn't make them kill each other is money that is mostly contributed by the USA
Saudi doesn't give a **** about middle east it only cares about it oil money and did i already they only care about money.
In a time where religion if almost forbidden to be talk about in governments all over the world. you have this place where people are that use religion to justice then occupying a nation. and get support from those who are against religion interfering with governments.

Iraq is getting worse. i don't know which news source you use but really stop watching American TV-station when its about the war in Iraq and Afghanistan.


RE: But...
By Nik00117 on 5/10/2008 7:14:14 AM , Rating: 2
Everyones like "look at what happened in Iraq in the last 5 years" BS. Hey buddy guess what WW2 lasted longer then 5 years, (6 years) and we didn't finish rebuilding europe completely for a lot longer after that.

First step in a war zone is to make it safe, then you start building. +


RE: But...
By hashish2020 on 5/10/2008 2:33:25 AM , Rating: 3
You also tend to forget that VA healthcare is not included in that number, not to mention the fact that in a sweet accounting trick, all nukes are under the Department of Energy budget. And this doesn't include the massive classified budgets of military black ops, CIA budgets...or the states' individual costs in state National Guard units now used extensively in foreign wars.

And for the rebuilding (and destroying) of two countries being another factor, the funny thing is the useless war is the one sucking up nearly 200 billion a year right now, not to mention the fact that this means overall maintenance, training, and recruiting costs have gone up because of it.

To bring up the MINIMAL costs relative to the whole of our occasional, relatively cheap, humanitarian missions, is simply a red herring, not to mention, a significant portion of the OTHER 50% of the world's military budget is from our allies, who also invest and defray R&D costs for us.

Simply said, our military budget is of world conquest proportions.


RE: But...
By AraH on 5/9/2008 3:42:21 PM , Rating: 5
quote:
I'm sure there is something, somewhere that we don't know about which contains a backdoor or trojan that could be utilized in a devastating manner in the future.


windows?


RE: But...
By exploderator on 5/11/2008 3:13:12 PM , Rating: 2
Cisco thinks it's just simple hardware piracy for money. You would think Cisco would support all these wild endagered security claims if there was anything to them. They stand to gain all the more sympathy and credit, the more villanous be the pirates.

Seems like more FBI / govt. hype, and excuse to spend even more $$$.

If I were to speculate, I would be asking who in government got suckered so bad as to buy all this bogus gear? Were they in league with the sellers? Kickbacks? No, don't ask the realistic questions, just holler up a BIG SMOKESCREEN of TERRORISTS TERRORISTS TERRORISTS.


RE: But...
By cherrycoke on 5/15/2008 6:49:11 PM , Rating: 2
Isn't that Monster Cable's job?


RE: But...
By FITCamaro on 5/9/08, Rating: -1
RE: But...
By MrBlastman on 5/9/2008 12:21:16 PM , Rating: 2
Your humor meter must be malfunctioning today...


RE: But...
By theapparition on 5/9/2008 2:34:43 PM , Rating: 3
Just like buying anything else. For example, you can buy a HT receiver from an authorized site, for say $1K. Or you can get it from ebay from a non-authorized retailer for $600. You can also buy plenty of iPods that are advertised as iPods, but clearly are clones.
When you buy from a non-authorized retailer, the history and tracking of the product now becomes suspect. You also lose warranty support for exactly those same reasons.

Some equipment is purchased by surplus houses as excess inventory. When you buy from these places, exact history becomes obscured and counterfeiting becomes possible.

Unfortunately, our government does do a lot of business with surplus vendors, one of the main reasons is because technology equipment gets outdated so quickly. If the government procurement office has a requirement to buy brand "X" product "A", they are not legally allowed to purchase anything else, even if product "A" was replaced years ago and product "B" is it's replacement.

Most of the time, it costs more money to change the requirement, than to either pay more, or track down a surplus house that years ago purchased excess inventory at pennies on the dollar.


Cisco Fakes
By AlvinCool on 5/9/2008 12:21:07 PM , Rating: 2
Cisco's biggest charge isn't the hardware, it's the software that is licenced from Cisco. They don't say straight out that the hardware isn't Cisco, but that it's fake. A Cisco router with newer unlicensed software, that would also constitute a fake. Fake hardware, with unhacked Cisco sofware that isn't paid royalties to Cisco is also a fake. That could be why Cisco is saying it's not a problem, except to their pocketbook. Because when they scan it, they can't tell it's not Cisco cause it is.




RE: Cisco Fakes
By darkpaw on 5/9/2008 12:48:59 PM , Rating: 1
Their hardware prices are just as obscene as their software prices.

I don't know how anyone that can charge $2k for a single port NIC can sleep at night.

I worked in used hardware for a long time and actual fake hardware is a real concern, especially with big ticket items like Cisco. That said, this is going to be come more and more common in general as all the manufacturing gets outsourced to countries that don't care, the designs get jacked, and very good knock-offs get made in another factory just down the street.

The hardware manufacturers have no one to blame but themselves, but of course all the real damage will be done to the customers.


RE: Cisco Fakes
By VisionxOrb on 5/9/2008 1:07:08 PM , Rating: 5
quote:
I don't know how anyone that can charge $2k for a single port NIC can sleep at night.


2K!? Frack me, that should surely increase my frag count over my current Killer Nic.... Better go get my credit card, time to open some whoop-ass on CS tonight!


RE: Cisco Fakes
By Runiteshark on 5/9/2008 1:36:03 PM , Rating: 2
What on earth are you talking about? the 10Gb Ethernet ports? The 10gb fiber ports? Thats all I can think of that would cost that much, which is about the industry norm now.

I don't think you understand where Cisco and Juniper equipment gets applied, its where stuff has to be done and it cannot go down. Don't delude yourself and think that a Linksys WRT300N is any semblance to a Cisco 871W or a 1811 ISR.


RE: Cisco Fakes
By darkpaw on 5/9/2008 1:52:48 PM , Rating: 2
Honestly, I've been out of the hardware business all together for two years now so have no idea on current prices or even whats available.

I do know that single port 10/100 options for certain chassis were easily $2,000 for many systems a few years back new, because the company I worked for was selling them used for $1,000.

Sure, they've got to be more reliable then the $2.50 mass produced PCI NIC, but what they charge is still on the obscene side. That provides all of motive neceassary for some nefarious companies to make knock-off hardware.


RE: Cisco Fakes
By FITCamaro on 5/9/2008 2:31:43 PM , Rating: 3
I have no idea what you're talking about with $2000 10/100 cards(unless you mean back in 1995 or something) but depending on what it is, price is determined by volume. If you're only buying 10 of something, and they have to be made for you, sure it might only cost $10 in materials, but the people selling it to you have to make sure it works, write a driver for it, etc. It's not as simple as punching it out of the factory.

Thats why stuff for the government can be so expensive. You might just be ordering a relatively simple part. But if its a custom part, even if its just a hinge, it has to be designed, tested, and manufactured. Engineers have to be paid. And it has to be produced somewhere. It's kind of like the F22 situation. If the US is going to buy more, they need to do it while production is still ramped up. Otherwise it will be more expensive in the future after production has halted.


RE: Cisco Fakes
By VeauX on 5/9/2008 2:50:18 PM , Rating: 2
Plus the Berry ammendment... which add huuuge cost


RE: Cisco Fakes
By darkpaw on 5/9/2008 5:15:57 PM , Rating: 2
Hell, I'm not even talking about government just OTS Cisco parts, but yes my $2k price was a bit exaggerated I'll admit. I wish I had the part number, but it's been too long to remember, I just know the actual sales guys would always jump with glee whenever we got in any lots with Cisco gear.

Things like WIC-1DSU-T1 were things we'd easily get around a grand for. Looks like they still selling used for upwards of $500 a few years later.

I'll still stick to my general argument that Cisco gear is vastly overpriced. Sure it's better then the retail stuff by a long shot, but it doesn't mean it won't break.


RE: Cisco Fakes
By chrnochime on 5/13/2008 10:23:57 AM , Rating: 2
I'm pretty sure a WIC-1DSU-T1 module does not cost that much *new* these days, definitely nowhere near 1k. And point me to a place where you can buy a consumer router that even has a T1 interface.


I wonder...
By TechIsGr8 on 5/9/08, Rating: 0
RE: I wonder...
By tastyratz on 5/9/2008 12:21:13 PM , Rating: 2
Damn you stole my thunder, I was going to make a made in china sticker joke too


RE: I wonder...
By i3arracuda on 5/9/2008 12:24:24 PM , Rating: 2
Isn't everything made in China?


RE: I wonder...
By chick0n on 5/9/08, Rating: -1
RE: I wonder...
By MrBlastman on 5/9/2008 12:55:33 PM , Rating: 4
Were you made in China? It looks like you may have since your post looks like it is defective. ;)


RE: I wonder...
By afkrotch on 5/9/2008 1:26:09 PM , Rating: 2
The US is the highest importer and one of the top 3 exporters in the world. Odds are high that something you buy has a piece of the US in it.

Also China barely exports agricultural goods. The stuff in that pizza came from somewhere else. China's major exports are machinery, electrical products, data processing, equipment, apparel, textile, steel, mobile phones.

Without China, I'd still be eating a $2-$3 slice of pizza.


RE: I wonder...
By pixelslave on 5/9/2008 2:08:51 PM , Rating: 2
Just want to add to afkrotch's agricultural goods comment (BTW, I was made in China, but is now an American, TG) ... An example to his comment is that even though China is a major rice producer, it still have to import rices because it consumes too much. You can bet that as Chinese becomes richer, they will import even more -- you don't have to be a genius to predict that. Its GDP per capita is only about $5000. Considering that the riches there are unbelievably rich, the poors must be ... you get the picture. Assuming its GDP continue to grow, the riches probably won't eat more than they eat now, but the poors will eat more. We can then safely assume that, as China grows, we can say, "Without the world, China, you'd be eating expensive rices."


RE: I wonder...
By Hoser McMoose on 5/9/2008 8:52:52 PM , Rating: 2
Beyond simply being made in China, they were likely made in the EXACT same assembly line as the "real" Cisco stuff.

That is how a lot of this counterfeit stuff gets produced. Cisco (or Nike, or GM, or whoever) contract a Chinese manufacturer to produce 10,000 parts. The contract company then proceeds to make 12,000 parts and supplies 100,000 to Cisco and sells off the other 2,000 through direct to market through backdoor channels.

The contract manufacturer doesn't need to recoup the R&D costs or support costs like Cisco does, so they can significantly undercut the price and still make more money then they do from the Cisco contract itself.

I doubt the Chinese government is involved much except in their complicity, the goal here was almost certainly more one of making a quick buck rather then espionage or anything like that.


This is scary
By amanojaku on 5/9/2008 11:54:19 AM , Rating: 2
The average Joe has to worry about buying counterfeit products. I live in NYC and any street corner downtown has tables of counterfeit products like Folex watches and Fucci handbags. There's no way to track the sellers and no way to investigate their supply so buyers are taking a chance and willing to do so for low prices.

The military should be different. It doesn't worry about price (my taxes can swear to that!) and only buys from reputable sources. So how is it that counterfeit products are making their way into systems that might determine whether we live or die? It's not like anyone can go out and build a router or switch, either, so the counterfeiters should be easy to track. What the hell is going on here? If I want a passport I have to subject myself to a security check, but vendors can just sell whatever they want to the government without any screening? Puh-lease!




RE: This is scary
By xsilver on 5/9/2008 12:07:26 PM , Rating: 2
I read a while ago that the counterfeit handbag/watches area got shut down in NYC? Guess its back up? Whats weird is someone who is clearly not wealthy enough to afford an LV/gucci bag, touting a fake one around. Who exactly are they kidding?

whats scary is that the government purchase process is usually done by tender and/or subcontract after subcontract. It is easily possible that somewhere down the track after the 1st guy pays 40k for a real cisco router, the 3rd/4th guy buys a 10k router from a non reputable dealer and BAM - security breach.


RE: This is scary
By lightfoot on 5/9/2008 2:15:36 PM , Rating: 2
The US military - brought to you by the lowest bidder.


RE: This is scary
By Hoser McMoose on 5/9/2008 9:14:04 PM , Rating: 3
The U.S. military (or most anyone else for that matter) is not likely buying from Cisco directly. They instead paid for a full service contract through the likes of EDS or IBM, very reputable companies.

Those companies in turn purchase their hardware through a regional retailer, again probably a reputable company. The retailer buys their hardware through large distributor. Those large distributors buy their stuff from the lowest priced international supplier, and the lowest bidder is buying from Cisco themselves or from the knock-off counterfeit makes.

Ok, maybe not every step of the above is 100% accurate, but it serves the illustrate the point. It's not abnormal for hardware to pass through 5 or more parties before it gets to the final destination. This leaves lots of room for someone, somewhere along the line, to slip counterfeits into the mix. If they're "good" counterfeits it's tough for those further down the line to notice the difference.


Made in China
By mahax on 5/9/2008 1:21:12 PM , Rating: 2
Can you remember the days (80's mayby) when these "made in china" stuff were just laughed at? Now, no matter what it says on the package, it probably came from China and people dont even care where these things come from.

And then we get news almost every day how some corp. is closing factories and outsourcing. Mayby it's time we start paying attention if there was actually an alternative?




RE: Made in China
By FITCamaro on 5/9/2008 2:36:01 PM , Rating: 2
I try to at least buy things "Made in Japan". I mean buying electronics made in the USA is impossible these days. The only thing that might be manufactured here in your PC is the processor.

Its also why I stay away from shopping at Walmart. Nearly everything there comes from China. Unfortunately even higher quality brands these days are often made in China. Or Taiwan.


RE: Made in China
By Etern205 on 5/9/2008 6:57:26 PM , Rating: 2
It's virtually impossible to find a product that is purely "Made in Japan or Made in USA" or anywhere else these days.

Your product's sticker may say "Made in China/Japan/Taiwan/Thailand,etc, but does it mean all of the parts inside are entirely built from that country alone? Definitely not.

What these "made in" labels all say is the place that's assembled at.
e.g. You can have car with China parts and if it's assemble din the US, then they'll say "Made in the US".


RE: Made in China
By chrnochime on 5/13/2008 10:16:22 AM , Rating: 2
If you don't know how, quality wise, products made in Taiwan are, do some research. Disdain of products manu. in a country based on facts is one thing, but the same thinking due to lack of knowledge just makes you look bad.


Picture
By lufoxe on 5/9/2008 12:41:40 PM , Rating: 2
What episode from the Simpsons is that picture from?




RE: Picture
By realist on 5/9/2008 5:22:08 PM , Rating: 2
Episode Number: 279 Season Num: 13 First Aired: Sunday February 10, 2002 Prod Code: DABF04


RE: Picture
By jtemplin on 5/10/2008 10:27:52 AM , Rating: 2
I always felt like that it should have said Crisco Systems. I mean that was obviously the joke. It was melting and there were flies buzzing about...Oh well I guess you have to leave something to the imagination :-D


Nothing new!
By bobny1 on 5/9/2008 8:39:53 PM , Rating: 1
How do you think that China acquire so much technological advance?. They have infiltrated every system in the World, from the military to corporations. It is a simple method. They spread out their cheap, bugged hardware and ask it to call home.




RE: Nothing new!
By dhalilahma on 5/11/2008 6:36:01 PM , Rating: 2
By working harder and being smarter. Last time i checked they owned 4 trillion US debt. I would be more worried about China and Japan dropping the US dollar for the Euro than a few dodgy routers.


RE: Nothing new!
By audiomaniaca on 5/13/2008 2:10:01 AM , Rating: 2
As bugged and cheap as your MBP, iphone, dell desktop, ipod, motorola smartphone, intel processor and so on... Oh, sorry, I forgot, you're accessing the net with your G&E computer equipped with a Radio Shack monitor.

Last time I've heard of "devices calling home", I remember it was something related to Motorola, AT&T and Windows.

I can't believe that there are still people who thinks that there's anything in this world made not in China.


Not a surprise... kinda
By littlebitstrouds on 5/9/2008 11:51:50 AM , Rating: 3
We got missing computers here... fake one's here... while you think about it on a grand scale it seems insane, but the government is a business, and like a lot of the big business' I've worked for, money can get thrown around like nothing. Sometimes with not enough supervision. It's tragic, but not really a surpise to me. It still sucks though.




RE: Not a surprise... kinda
By Reclaimer77 on 5/9/2008 12:11:50 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
We got missing computers here... fake one's here... while you think about it on a grand scale it seems insane, but the government is a business, and like a lot of the big business' I've worked for, money can get thrown around like nothing. Sometimes with not enough supervision. It's tragic, but not really a surpise to me. It still sucks though.


Sadly its not. We could only hope our government was a business, because then they would actually produce revenue and not need to bleed its citizens dry with taxes and tariffs.

Businesses produce. Governments protract.

( I'm not the one who rated you down. Donno why I think you would care, just wanted you to know. So tired of drive bye rating cowards here )


So...
By Tryek25 on 5/9/2008 12:23:32 PM , Rating: 2
At 1k a piece you would think that they should be getting somewhat decent equipment but if you consider... they might be over paying quite a bit for something that might be simple. So at what tier is this equipment and how much could it compromise the network? Is it just a inter-office router?




RE: So...
By mindless1 on 5/10/2008 1:38:45 AM , Rating: 2
Note that the equipment must have worked ok or it would not be in place. The whole issue seems to merely be that it had unknown origin and that things with unknown origin "could", not necessarily do, involve security risks.

Funny thing is this is after Cisco already stated it wasn't, Cisco is being very above board about this so kudos to them for honesty instead of scare tactics.


Just buy directly from Cisco
By Doormat on 5/9/2008 1:06:03 PM , Rating: 1
Cut out the middleman bullshit and go buy direct at MSRP. You know you'll be getting legit products.




RE: Just buy directly from Cisco
By zolo111 on 5/9/2008 2:55:22 PM , Rating: 2
How about consumer products? Is it possible that best buy, CC is selling counterfeit limksys routers, gfx cards...etc?


...
By inspiron700m on 5/10/2008 5:55:15 PM , Rating: 2
can you say DiE Hard 4?




Nice security
By bsd230 on 5/10/2008 9:55:54 PM , Rating: 2
That's pretty freaking scary. I hope Cisco is right and they were only trying to make a quick buck. Either way the people who knowingly sold them should be charged with treason and get the death penalty. Jeopardizing our Nation's security, I say fry them till their eyes pop out.




Spelling
By Fracture on 5/12/2008 10:18:49 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Compromised hardware isn't the only source of security breaches for secure networks. A simple phishing attack on one of the countries most prestigious research laboratories allowed the breach of information from networks at Los Alamos.


Countries should be changed to country's (possessive/inclusive, not plural).




"There is a single light of science, and to brighten it anywhere is to brighten it everywhere." -- Isaac Asimov

Related Articles













botimage
Copyright 2015 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki