U.S. Companies Are Casualties of PRISM
PRISM whistle-blower Snowden was recently granted asylum in Russia, found a place to stay and is getting ready to look for a job. Snowden is just beginning to get out of his difficulties, whereas problems for U.S. multinational enterprises affected by the incident are just beginning.
In the past, people have had criticism and questions regarding relations between U.S. enterprises and the U.S. government, but most accusations stop at conjecture and individual incidents without any further investigation. PRISM is the first tangible relationship between the government and companies. All aspects of the program have come to light and this information has ravaged the faith and trust with which the world looks at U.S. enterprises. Although the first incidents just have a total of nine companies involved, including Google, Microsoft and Apple, this is enough to outright stun people because they include the core of U.S. technology enterprises. In reality, U.S. enterprises and the U.S. government have really become something of their own economic zone, using this type of strategic system to monitor the world.
We believe U.S. multinational enterprises aren't willing to succumb to U.S. government politics and be used as a security tool. However, they are being used as a U.S. security attack strategy. Let's remember the incident in 2012 with Huawei and Zhongxing. The US Congress made an announcement “politely refusing” to let Huawei and Zhongxing products be sold on the U.S. market. Now we have a sudden realization: To allow Cisco and others companies to stay competitive, Rep. Mike Rogers and other politicians “unwaveringly” shot down Huawei and Zhongxing not as a means of security defense, but as a means of security offense to hinder Cisco's competition outside the country. They understand that Huawei, Zhongxing and other non-U.S. companies cannot work with the U.S. National Security Agency and other organizations to fulfill the government's mission of monitoring the world.
Currently, only the U.S. has enough strength to carry out this type of offensive security strategy, and only U.S. enterprises have the ability to work with the U.S. government toward their goals. They have already become an important sector controlled by the U.S. government to monitor the entire internet, presenting the image of a pure market to the public while evading responsibility. The main Cisco internet servers and routers operate using Windows with Intel CPUs, while many others use Apple and IBM mainframes, and these companies have branches around the world completely dominating technology's role in society. This results in unrivaled market dominance, fulfilling the U.S. government's desire to monitor and snoop on the world's Internet users, and they are using this market dominance to their complete advantage.
U.S. multinational enterprises should not be tools of the government. If they have no choice but to become tools according to government needs, then how can other countries, including U.S. allies, be at ease with these companies? How can the safety of Internet users worldwide be ensured? Of course, no matter whether it is an objective fact or a global trend, complaining to U.S. enterprises is not something other countries can do easily. However, countries who want to defend their information rights and Internet user safety need to start implementing measures to be vigilant.
Especially for China, who has consistently been made into a fake enemy by the U.S., PRISM is the first big sign for concern and a sincere wake-up call. First, in forming policies and law, we must ask these U.S. enterprises that operate in China to respect the law. Next, we must make an assessment of information infrastructure's security problems, objectives and systems. Last, in expanding these infrastructures, they must go through effective methods and procedures to ensure that they are defensive and on guard.
We hope that, through the PRISM leaks, U.S. enterprises can have the opportunity to use lawful methods, enforcing change from the foundation up, instead of passively acting as security agents for the U.S. government again. We must also ensure that these corporations do not become casualties of the government's abuse of authority. However, for now, we can only hope.
In the past, people have had criticism and questions regarding relations between U.S. enterprises and the U.S. government, but most accusations stop at conjecture and individual incidents without any further investigation. PRISM is the first tangible relationship between the government and companies. All aspects of the program have come to light and this information has ravaged the faith and trust with which the world looks at U.S. enterprises. Although the first incidents just have a total of nine companies involved, including Google, Microsoft and Apple, this is enough to outright stun people because they include the core of U.S. technology enterprises. In reality, U.S. enterprises and the U.S. government have really become something of their own economic zone, using this type of strategic system to monitor the world.
We believe U.S. multinational enterprises aren't willing to succumb to U.S. government politics and be used as a security tool. However, they are being used as a U.S. security attack strategy. Let's remember the incident in 2012 with Huawei and Zhongxing. The US Congress made an announcement “politely refusing” to let Huawei and Zhongxing products be sold on the U.S. market. Now we have a sudden realization: To allow Cisco and others companies to stay competitive, Rep. Mike Rogers and other politicians “unwaveringly” shot down Huawei and Zhongxing not as a means of security defense, but as a means of security offense to hinder Cisco's competition outside the country. They understand that Huawei, Zhongxing and other non-U.S. companies cannot work with the U.S. National Security Agency and other organizations to fulfill the government's mission of monitoring the world.
Currently, only the U.S. has enough strength to carry out this type of offensive security strategy, and only U.S. enterprises have the ability to work with the U.S. government toward their goals. They have already become an important sector controlled by the U.S. government to monitor the entire internet, presenting the image of a pure market to the public while evading responsibility. The main Cisco internet servers and routers operate using Windows with Intel CPUs, while many others use Apple and IBM mainframes, and these companies have branches around the world completely dominating technology's role in society. This results in unrivaled market dominance, fulfilling the U.S. government's desire to monitor and snoop on the world's Internet users, and they are using this market dominance to their complete advantage.
U.S. multinational enterprises should not be tools of the government. If they have no choice but to become tools according to government needs, then how can other countries, including U.S. allies, be at ease with these companies? How can the safety of Internet users worldwide be ensured? Of course, no matter whether it is an objective fact or a global trend, complaining to U.S. enterprises is not something other countries can do easily. However, countries who want to defend their information rights and Internet user safety need to start implementing measures to be vigilant.
Especially for China, who has consistently been made into a fake enemy by the U.S., PRISM is the first big sign for concern and a sincere wake-up call. First, in forming policies and law, we must ask these U.S. enterprises that operate in China to respect the law. Next, we must make an assessment of information infrastructure's security problems, objectives and systems. Last, in expanding these infrastructures, they must go through effective methods and procedures to ensure that they are defensive and on guard.
We hope that, through the PRISM leaks, U.S. enterprises can have the opportunity to use lawful methods, enforcing change from the foundation up, instead of passively acting as security agents for the U.S. government again. We must also ensure that these corporations do not become casualties of the government's abuse of authority. However, for now, we can only hope.
Previous article![]( "All Change on the Internet")