Transcripts For CSPAN3 Hearing On 5G Supply Chain Wireless Technologies 20240713

Emerging 5g technologies an effort to secure networks while the transition begins. The Senate Committee is chaired by roger wicker of mississippi. Good morning, and welcome to the newly restored Committee Room of the commerce committee. I want to thank senator blunt of the rules committee and the architect of the capitol for their effort in restoring this room and welcome all of you to a history making hearing. The first hearing in the newly opened room. Today the committee convenes to discuss the security and integrity of the telecommunications supply chain, that is to say the equipment and services that make up a Communications Network. I welcome our distinguished panel of witnesses and thank them for appearing. Today we will hear from mr. Steven berry, president and chief executive office of the competitive carriers association, mr. Jason boswell, head of Security Network Product Solutions at ericson, ms. Asha katie, Corporate Vice president and general manager of next generation and standards at intel, mr. Mike murphy, chief technology officer, americas at nokia and dr. James lewis sr. Vice president and director of the Technology Policy program at the center for strategic and international studies. Closing the Digital Divide and positioning the United States to win the global race to 5g are priorities for this committee. Over the past several months we have been discussing the wide ranging economic and social benefits that Broadband Connectivity has delivered to communities across the country. Weve also discussed the promise of 5g networks to build upon these past advances and create new opportunities. Our continued ability to connect all americans and provide access to next Generation Technology will depend in large part on the security of the Nations Communications infrastructure. Over the past few years, the United States government, intelligence officials, and International Allies have determined that Telecommunications Equipment from certain vendors as much su huawei and zte poses a National Security risk. Foreign adversaries and enemies of the United States have the capability of using this compromised equipment to spy on americans, steal our intellectual property, and otherwise disrupt our way of life and economic wellbeing. Today congress and the Trump Administration have taken a number of actions to address these security threats and protect our networks and devices from hostile exploitation. These actions include banning the use of huawei and zte components in government systems, prohibiting the use of universal Service Funds to Purchase Communications equipment and services from way way a huawei and zte and adding huawei and its affiliates to the entities list. Most recently, Congress Passed the secure and trusted Communications Network act. When signed into law by President Trump in just a few days, this law will establish a critical rip and replace program for small and Rural Telecommunications operators to remove compromised equipment from their networks and replace it with components from trusted suppliers. While this is a meaningful step forward in safeguarding the security of the nations Communication Systems, the unfortunate reality is that our networks have already been compromised by foreign adversaries. We are seeing more reports that huawei can covertly access mobile phone networks around the world. At the same time, some of our close allies are fwragranting hi access to their Communication Systems. These are troubling developments. We need to do more to shore up our own Network Defenses against hackers and statesponsored actors, especially in our nations rural and underserved communities. This effort will require the development of a comprehensive strategy to secure the telecommunications supply chain. Currently huawei maintains the Largest Global market share of Telecommunications Equipment. The absence of a viable and affordable american or european alternative for end to end Telecommunications Components including radios, chips, softwa software, and devices has enabled huawei to increase its global influence. At a time of rising Global Demand for 5g equipment, i hope witnesses will discuss what more congress and the administration can do to support trusted suppliers, invest in new technologies and expand the domestic market for 5g network components. There are a number of International Standards setting organizations such as the Third Generation Partnership Project or 3gpp and the International Telecommunications union that are developing technical standards for 5g. U. S. Participation in these organizations is also key to a secure telecommunications supply chain. Todays hearing is an opportunity for witnesses to discuss how to increase u. S. Engagement in the Standards Development process. This will help ensure american Technical Expertise and priorities are considered in the development of next generation technologies. Finally, i hope we will learn about how the Telecommunications Industry can improve its cyber hygiene meaning what best Practices Companies could adopt to mitigate risks to vulnerable supply chains. I also hope we will learn about what more the fcc can do to secure Legacy Networks and manage Security Risks in the transition to 5g. Let me again welcome our witnesses and thank them for joining us, and i recognize my friend and Ranking Member senator cantwell. Thank you for holding this important hearing. I too want to thank senator blunt for his work in getting us ba back into his normal hearing room. Todays hearing, obviously we have a lot of great witnesses here, and thank you for traveling to be here. Weve heard a lot about 5g networks and how its going to revolutionize everything from sectors of our economy to advancements, but none of this will happen unless we make this system secure. Yesterday we had a hearing as part of our review of the budget for energy, and we were focusing on our nations grid and the fact that just recently an attack on our grid in the west was the first time an actor had actually brought down a power system for more than 12 hours. So its no longer just people searching around and looking at our power plants. Now actors are starting to bring what is essential services to a halt, and these are important issues for us to address throughout our system. So far the discussion by policymakers about how to keep Unsecure Networks and equipment out of our Domestic Networks has been the focal point, but obviously eliminating the threat posed by these equipment is the highest priority. We cant just simply look at that issue. We need to make sure that we are a loud voice across the globe for no Government Back doors to any Security Network. By mitigating this, we are helping to communicate what needs to be done. I believe its an imperative that the u. S. And its allies foster a truly secure diverse, and reliable supply chain for Communications Equipment. We need to assure the Communication Systems are secure and that the connections to those systems and software are also secure. To accomplish this, first and foremost, we need a broader strategic plan, and i know that recently our bill that we passed out by our colleague senator cornyn in july was about getting the president to see congress a much needed strategy on 5g, and hopefully well see more details on that soon. But we must also build a forceful Global Coalition of countries to share our values and respect Property Rights and the rule of law, and we need a smart multinational approach to this, and so i hope that mr. Chairman will continue to work with our colleagues on the Intel Committee and on the Foreign Affairs committee to make sure that this is also being accomplished. We must create incentives for other countries to use communication equipment that does not contain a Government Back door access, and the United States should have a great source of allies to work with us on these issues, so again, appreciate this hearing this morning. I think its important to continue to clarify u. S. Leadership on this issue and how we move ahead, and i appreciate the fact that we have so many great witnesses to talk about what these immediate next steps are in the legislation that has gone to the president s desk. Thank you, mr. Chairman. And thank you senator cantwell. We have a vote on the senate floor scheduled for around 10 30, and so well just do the best we can sharing the gavel and getting back and forth, but we are delighted to have the testimony. Your statements will be included in the record in full, and we recognize each of you for around five minutes to summarize your testimony. Mr. Berry. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Every american in Rural America reliable broadband maps. I look forward to your successful completion of the broadband data act and its signed into law, so from everyone from Rural America, a big thank you to this committee. So chairman wicker, Ranking Member cantwell and members of the committee, thank you for the opportunity to testify about the security and integrity of the telecommunications supply chain, both for existing wireless net o networks and for the nations future 5g. Cca is the nations leading association for competitive wireless carriers as well as the vendors and suppliers serving that ecosystem. Cca and its members fully support efforts to protect networks from cyber and National Security threats. I strongly commend this committees strongly commend th committees bipartisan work to send this to the president. This addresses many key concerns. It provides all carriers with clear direction. It importantly creates a fund to help small carriers replace covered equipment. Since i last appeared at this commity, theres been a lot of talk about what steps small carriers must take to secure the networks. And your actions, as a matter of fact your legislation, will allow these to not just talk the talk but walk the walk. Wireness net woks are providing connectivity from innovation ranging from health, Public Safety, to economic and safety. Theyre all providing security against threats. The transition provides an opportunity for all carriers to build into security as a basic function. The challenge is heightened by carriers that have equipment in their networks from companies deemed by federal agencies to pose a National Security threat. Let me be clear, most cca members do not have covered equipment in their networks. For those to do, often they provide to their own communities operating where others dont. On the thinnest of margins to connect their neighbors. These are owned by and ploy americans in the local communities, and i can assure you these patriots want to take whatever steps necessary to ensure our National Security. Through your actions, these carriers will have a program to support replacing covered Network Elements. Chairman whicker, i completely agree with your remarks where you said some things are paying for and protecting america is worth paying for. The undertaking to replace equipment is unprecedented, never been done. Networks in operation today were built over years, actually decades, and such a significant undertaking will be allen compassing. This will keep Rural Americans connected. For all the talk about rip and replace, carriers must create and execute individual plans that replace and then rip, they must maintain service before decommissioning. Anything less threatens the loss of connecttivity in Rural America including access to 911 and Public Safety services. These carriers are attempting to rebuild the airplane in mid flight. The challenge of securing networks does not end here. As we enter into the 5 g era there are new opportunities to build security from the ground up. There are three main factors for industry and policymakers going forward. Number one, all carriers must have clear guidance and information from the federal Government Regarding security. You did this. Your legislation fa silltates information specifically for small providers. Number two, equipment must be available for all carriers. The act suggests replacements that would allow carriers with and without equipment to confidently make the decisions that they will need. Flexibility will be the secret sauce to this success. Number three, new technologies hold the promise to enhance security, spur innovation, and save costs. We should explore virtual technologies. However policymakers should not mandate that. If they deliver on their promise, they will compete successfully in the marketplace. In closing, thank you again for the Exceptional Leadership in passing the secure and trusted Network Communications act. Cca is committed to working with the shareholders, stockholders, and stakeholders, to accomplish the facts of securing our networks while maintaining services for millions of consumers in Rural America. Thank you for the opportunity to testify. I look forward to your questions. Thank you very much, mr. Barry. Mr. Bosswell. Thank you. Chairman whicker, Ranking Member cant, wel can cantwell, thank you. Im jason bosswell, eriksons head of security for Product Solutions in north america. Since my early days as an engineer ive focused on security and advance the tell communications. Im pleased to provide eriksons per sperktive on security. Let me start by commending the recent pass age of chairman whickers Communications Network act. We stand ready to assist small carriers replacing equipment from untrusted vendors. The u. S. Led the way on fourg and reaped the benefits, 475 billion to gdp and 4 million u. S. Jobs. 5 go will accelerate and deliver more benefits to consumers and businesses, with the potential to bring 500 billion to the u. S. Economy and 3 million u. S. Jobs. But this brings new security challenges due in part to the increased potential attack surface. We need networks that are trustworthy, resilient and secure. Enabled by a robust market of trusted suppliers not just in the United States but worldwide. Erikson is leadering the way, supporting 65 across the u. S. Including in Rural America. We have customers in over 180 countries. Im proud to say that the u. S. Is our largest market, accounting for 30 of our global revenue in driving our r d priorities. Erikson has a commitment here. Were in plaino texas. We also have a tower Technician Training facility in texas. And we will soon open our 100. 05g Smart Factory in the u. S. This just came in this morning, today we announced our first 5g equipment rolling out from that factory manufactured right there in louisville, texas. Security is intertwined with the successful deployment of 5g networks and three priorities will enable this rollout. First, we need increased midband spectrum availability. And we commend the fcc for allocating spectrum for 5g. More is need. We need supreme lining. We need to focus on developing a skilled 5g workforce. Senators garma and sin maz, and thune, tester, mirran, peters and whicker telecommunication Skilled Workforce act would do that. Security is a top priority for erikson, and our actions reflect our philosophy internally and externally. First since 2018, we have been executing a supply chain regionization strategy to place manufacturing and development as close to the customer as possible in order to reduce risks and dependence on one site or vendor. In all of our development we secure our own chain with integrity checks, site audits, sign in and out for software, crypto graphic signing of hardware and software. Second, we take a holistic approach to Building Security into our systems from the start. Our own security and reliability model guides security across our products. Third, we lead industrywide endeavors to advance security across the whole 5g ecosystem. This involves our standards and also the development of best practices for security. We have active on the dhs supply Chain Risk Management Task force where i cochair a working group for supply chain evaluation to minimize risk in the purchasing process. Im on a working group focused on managing Security Risk and the transition to 5g. We need to sustain a secure and robust marketplace of trusted suppliers in the u. S. And globally. To do so it is important to pass 5g security legislation such as the thoughtful bill from cornnan, blackburn, sullivan and others, and keep holding hears like this one to highlight what is being done to ensure it. Shining light on these efforts will make them more effective and allow the u. S. To set the global example for security. On behalf of erikson, i thank the committee for its leadership. We look forward to working with you and i look forward to your questions. Thank you, very much, mr. Bosswell. Miss katy . Thank you. Members of the committee. Thank you for inviting me to speak about 5g. [ muted ] intel corporation. My responsibilities include our participation in industry standards and forums including 3 g and driving the benefits of 5 g to various other industries to fuel innovation. Intel is a u. S. Semiconductor manufacturer that ploys more than 100,000 people globally with more than half in the United States. Intel is the Largest Global Semiconductor Supplier with the vast majority for advance the manufacturing and r d conducted in the United States. It used to not intel inside only in computers. But now we are inside the network as well. 5g runs on intel. We are a leader in 5g and one of our rules is to supply high volume to Telecom Equipment manufacturers including noekia and ericson. We are expected to become the Worlds Largest chip makers. Intel takes a leading role in 5g standards and Industry Groups including 3 g and itu. I also represent intel at cti, and were a member of the oran alliance and the new improved supply Chain Security and some policy recommendations. 5g marks the convergence of communications and compute capabilities which will change our world. The u. S. Was the first nation with widespread 4g wonch which led to the american economy. 5g will enable benefits to secsores such as industrial, transportation, al culture and health care. Virtualization is critical to enabling the transition. As a part of this evolution, some of the Network Functions are being virtualized rather than being solved by a turnkey solution, creating what we call a virtual radio network. Intels product lines support 5g network approaches ranging from the traditional like ericson and nokia, so they can continue to deliver services, to also new entrants such as mav knew. We recognize the security challenges exist. Intel will continue our pro active efforts to build a more trusted foundation for all computing systems. Intels unique position in the Technology Supply chain has allowed us to take a leading role when it comes to transparency and security and partnership with our suppliers and customers. We have already developed a set of policies and procedures at our own factories to validate where and when intelbuilt components were manufactured. In todays supply chain technology, intel is working with manufacturers across the supply chain to help them offer customers better transparency and visibility into manufacturing, support, and requirement of computing devices. Intel calls this effort, compute life cycle assurance. The Industry Needs an endtoend framework like this initiative that can be applied to improve integrity, resilience and security during the cycle. The u. S. Government also has a valuable role to play in the 5g supply chain. Given the potential of it to provide valuable benefits to american businesses and consumers, the u. S. Should take measures including investments and insentives to help facilitate wide spread 5g deployments in the u. S. And accelerate new technological innovation. Thank you for the opportunity to highlight our role in this system and our approach to the security. I look forward to your questions. Thank you very much, miss katy. Mr. Murphy. Chairman whicker, Ranking Member cantwell, and members of the committee, thank you for the opportunity to testify today. First a short introduction. Nokia has been the leader in every generation of wire line and wireless communications. We have 11,000 employees in north america across 28 sites with five labs, including nobel receivers. We recognize the most Ethical Companies in 2020. Id like to address the fccs decision reyooirg removal of equipment of certain vendors. Nokia completed 60 major swaps including the largest, replacing 75,000 base stations in the verizon and base networks. We know swaps. Begin the demand on 5g, rural customers might be challenged to complete their tasks in the 12 months in the secure and trusted network act. We recommend that usage of the sixmonth extension or more be granted liberally. With respect to technology, were at the confluence of 4 g and 5 g. Many support both technologies. We believe rural carriers should be allowed to purchase those first as like for like. This would allow them to secure their networks and jump start 5g activities. The risk of gold plating could be mitigated. Also there is a senate bill that proposes to restrict moinsz for replacement on the condition within seven years. However fully compliant products are few and immature. Putting that burden on rural carriers, the least capable of being early adopters is not good. Finally there is some anxiety in this transition. However the u. S. Was the first country in the world to launch 5g networks, the first to virtlize solutions and more. These have been done by nokia, samsung and ericson. As for the 5g marketplace at large, it is challenging. China has made aggressive use of its Development Bank to support indigenous sploirz. Payment terms offered while legal are unavailable to competitors. The u. S. Export import bank and the Development Finance corporation could rebalance the situation. Also the Chinese Market Telecom Market is massive, supporting significant r 12k3 d by suppliers. R d spending support in the u. S. , the u. S. Connect and the Senate Intelligence bill are excellent. However more could be done to support 5g product development, local use, and 6g research. Regarding 5g security, it will enable use cases supporting Critical Services across multiple industries. This makes the attack service larger than in 4g, with the potential for catastrophic networks. This was known during the creation of 5g and actions in 3 gpp standards. Network breaches are possible. Nokia does not support the view that product or geographic isolation are effective. Rather securities best served by using trusted suppliers. For example in nokia, ethics and reporting of unethical behavior is a requirement. Product development, nokia imploemts a design for security governance mod thael involves all products for vul nerkts followed by structured timelines. Transparency is mandatory. It should be noted that these activities are independent of country of origin, and that is my final thought, namely that the governance, historical behavior, ethics and Security Systems implemented by companies are the true definition of trust. In closing, thank you again, chairman wicker, Ranking Member cantwell, and members of the committee, for the fund to testify. Thank you, sir. And dr. Lewis. Thank you, mr. Chairman, Ranking Member cantwell, thank you for the opportunity to testify. We hear fiveg is a race we cannot lose. But if it is a race we are not losing. Lets review. The u. S. Has not been rebuffed in europe. The uk decision is best seen as a partial ban. Europeans agree on the risk of using huawei, and the eu calls china a systemic rival. Where there is disagreement is over how to manage risk. Germany has a dilemma. If it bans huawei, china has threatened to retaliate against german exports, and china is germanys largest market. German Car Companies have allegedly asked chancellor merkel not to ban huawei. Those who advocate a partial ban argue if properly implemented, it makes the risk of using huawei equipment acceptable. A full ban is best, but if countries decide against it, the u. S. Will need to help make partial bans effective. Speck struchl is not an obstacle. Telecommunications Companies Say the spectrum allocation process could be faster and cheaper, but spectrum decisions have not put the u. S. At a disadvantage. The key issue as you know is finding ways to share spectrum now held by t. O. D. Standards are a battleground, but in 5g it is a battle where the United States is doing well. This could change if u. S. Export controls handicap us. This is a selfinflicted wound we must avoid. Telecoms technology is changing. The supply chain will depend on technologies where the u. S. Leads. Blocking ects sports of Semiconductor Equipment is the best way. Huawei does not sell the best equipment. A review found huawei was the most vulnerable to exploitation. Nokia and ericson offer better and more security technology. U. S. Is strong. We face tough competitors but the chief risk to this u. S. Strength in 5g innovation will be badly designed privacy rules. The doomsday argument is that because of the slowness in 5g deployment and the lack of spectrum, american entrepreneurs will not be able to take advantage of 5g. But were not slow in that and spectrum allocation is not an issue. 5g is a symptom of a larger problem. We face a powerful opponent who is using espionage and predatory economic practices, including exploiting American Patents to gain advantage. 5g is part of this contest. Our strategy should strengthen Americas Technology base and work with allies. These bills move us in that direction. To summarize, i believe americas 5g problem is overstated. If we take the right steps, we can win this race. The larger issue is how to deal with an increasingly hostile china. Thank you, and i look forward to your questions. Well, thank you, thank you very, very much. Let me just make sure, dr. Lewis, is your testimony the official position of csis . Csis doesnt take official positions because were either nonpartisan or bipartisan. I forget which one it is. [ laughter ] well, i always thought you were bipartisan. And i always thought because i was a career officer i was nonpartisan. But in any case its the individual scholars, not the entity itself. Okay. So you dont think the sky is falling, and were doing just fine in the race. Does everybody on the panel agree with that . Anybody like to comment or respond . Mr. Murphy . Indicated. Factually, the u. S. Has led in a number of firsts for 5g. But the first deployments in the Fourth Quarter of 2018 followed by more commercial systems in april of 2019, the first to use millimeter wave, the first to doe ploi low band speck strum nationwide with tmobile. It is factually incorrect to say that nonchinese vendors are leading, and there is a disadvantage [ muted ] a bit of a bug or two with our public address system. Let me put it this way. And be careful, i choose my words. Many of us are concerned that we may lack an affordable and viable alternative for endtoend Communications Equipment. To compete effectively in the global market. What can the u. S. Do to strengthen its splay chain, security requirement, and is there in fact, mr. Barry, well start with you, a viable alternative to huawei and zte equipment available in the market . Mr. Barry, and anyone else . First, what you did in the secure trusted act was a Monumental Movement forward, because you identified the need for the fcc to create a list of suggested replacement, i. E. , providers, trusted vendors that are available to everyone. Most of the smaller carriers dont have the technology not the technology but the employment, you know, gravitas to do all the research to identify what is a trusted provider. So that i think is going to be a huge improvement on the supply chain. I think it will also lead to some of our members, whom we not only have nokia wnd eric son sitting here at the table, but some of the new entrants like maviner and others that are looking for new technologies. And i think that requirement that the federal government identifies secured communication providers, the equipment pro vooifrz, will help us move forward quickly on alternatives. And a agree. I think it we need to be ever vigilant on that. But i dont think its an impossible task. I think the bill you just passed has done two things, provide information on a continuous basis and creating of the list you have essentially directed the federal government to be involved. I dont think its a oneshot pony. I think theyre going to have to be involved every day providing good guidance to carriers throughout the United States. Miss kenny . And if you would move that microphone, its pretty long for thank you. So i think the u. S. Has been involved, and i believe that the focus should be on innovation. If you look at 4g we have Many Companies that didnt exist before like ride sharing companies, airbnb and all. So the faster we have widespread rollouts across the nation instead of just the first, the better off we are. And i thank you for many of the acts, including the telecommunications act, where r d is invested and its a starting point. Where we believe that the government can do more to help new entrants. And while maintaining existing encome bants so we have a diverse supply chain. Virtualization is the key. The faster we have wide sprooed deployments the better off we are. The innovation is 5g is focused on other industries, like the 4 if 4 g we would like to bring it to other Industries Like aviation, ago culture and others. In10tives also are important. Thank you. Mr. Bozwell, would you like to weigh in briefly . Thank you. Yes. I think ericson has been a leader in secure 5 g not only in the u. S. But worldwide in rolling out networks. And the reason is weve been planning for this for a decade. Weve been building this standards and getting radios ready for what is coming right now for a long time. Going back to 2015, ericson radios that are in the field of which we have several hundred thousand, are ready for 5g today with software upgradeability. So that kind of foresight and planning has allowed us to actually kind of ready to go full steam ahead on that race to 5g given that other kind of accelerators line up as well, such as spectrum and small cell citing and making sure our workforce is skilled and ready as well. Thank you. Thank you. Senator cantwell. Thank you. Before i get into questioning, i would wonder im a little uncomfortable today not seeing a press table. I know we have press in the room, and they look like a resilient bunch of people who are just writing away no matter what. But i would feel more comfortable if we asked senator blunt where the press table is supposed to be in the room, then we could accommodate both the press having a place to write and feel comfortable here and having some audience participation. So im sure hes working on it or something, but lets ask him when he comes. Okay, to the 5g question, miss keddy, i hate to say decades ago i was involved in trying to fight past administration on the clipper chip. I thought that was a bad idea, the notion that in the 90s we thought the government should have a backdoor to ease our concerns about great encryption capability. And i kept thinking instead of saying intel inside, you were going to be seeing u. S. Government inside. So i it didnt work when we thought about it, and it shouldnt work today. And since youre a Global Company and mr. Dr. Lewis, your comments about were not really that far behind, i dont know why we cant get parts of asia, parts of europe, in a more unified voice around Communications Equipment that any company that has a government that is dmeemanding access to that technology as a book door is just unacceptable. We need to just build this International Alliance to say, its unacceptable. You want to be a mature economy . Were not against your companies. Were against the fact that you demand a Government Backdoor to them. Thats what were against. I dont know why we cant dld that International Coalition and communicate. Dr. Lewis, miss keddy, either one of you. [ muted ]. That information to sorry. We look at Information Security in two ways, and to one is security has Information Security and supply Chain Security. We look at how do we have security con strukts in both ways. As far as to your question around back doors, i think that you know more the government knows a lot more details than us. And so we look forward to working with the government to support the requests that is provided, versus being able to mandate it as a private company. Dr. Lewis. Thank you, senator. First the u. S. Could benefit by making it clear to other countries that there are alternatives to huawei. When i travel to asia and parts of europe, i hear this that huawei is the only place we can buy from. Thats complete nonsense but we have to do a better case of getting the alternatives out there. Second, as i think some of my fellow panelists have mentioned, u. S. Support for exports would be helpful, that would help us not match the chinese but at latest reduce what we used to call the huawei premium. So export support is a crucial part. Finally, we are starting to build an international coy lition. Its been a little bumpy. Its not nato. Its not asean, but it has members of both. We could perhaps be a little smoother in our approach sometimes. It doesnt help to threaten people. You about i see an International Coalition emerging. Miss keddy, did you want to add . On ensuring a Standard Base but that supply chain that gives more choices, that will also help the options. But in the case that these events do happen, and i wanted to emphasize the notion of solutions, so we can prevent and detect these. I could i think mr. Murphy, youre the cto, right . So youre probably our most technical person. Miss keddy probably has but this is, look, we should just like, you know, theres lots of examples of where even if you had to put, you know, the crown jewels in some sort of repository or something just to get cooperation and interoperability, you could do that. But this notion that were not fighting this on a big broad principle is crazy. Youve got to fight the principle. The principle is we shouldnt live in a world today where any government has a backdoor to technology. Like, thats just not the way we want to deploy. And that has to be consistent. It might be 5g now but it will be Something Else later. The more we communicate that the reason i bring up the clipper chip is we made, almost made the same mistake. The u. S. Government said we dont want ta level of encryption, ive got to have a backdoor. Were like, no, were not having a u. S. Backdoor. I think this is the conversation that needs to take place in asia, and hopefully because it has many ramifications for cloud and cloud services, thats one of the things theyve been demanding. You want to do Cloud Business in asia . This is what youve got to do, give us access. No, were not going to give them access. This is a global effort we need to communicate about. Thank you, im sorry. I think thanks. Senator fischer is next. Thank you, senator gardner and cantwell. I am glad that the secure and trusted Communications Networks act made it onto president s desk last week and i was proud to be a cosponsor of that companion bill in the senate last year. This legislation is critical to create a stable and secure foundation for americas Communications Networks. However it will also set the stage for carriers ability to meet timelines established in the legislation, and how applicants can request reimbursement. Mr. Barry, are there still small providers who havent been able to secure commitments from trusted vendors to assure that they can deliver the quantity of equipment needed for the networks within those timelines . Thank you for the questions, senator. Yes. Thats a difficult task for many small carriers. Were seeing with this legislation, open youve kickstarted the concept of, you may actually be able to replace that covered technology with new technology. Our carriers are already out there getting vendors and getting equipment manufacturers to give us quotes, and to give them estimates of what its going to take. As a matter of fact, several on this panel have already been involved with detailed conversations with the small carriers. Our intent is not to let any on this stone. We want to make sure were out there trying to find the solution asap. Yes, new technologies could in fact create new security opportunities. But there is a timelag, theres a flexibility, a need for flexibility. Some of the Technology May not be ready to deploy today. It may be ready in five, six, eight months, a year and a half. So we need to measure twice and cut once. And i think that maybe the small carriers, especially with this act, will get the information they need, and they are certainly ready to and willing to tackle the challenge. You know, that information is going to require them to have information on how to apply for the funding, as well. Thats going to be a big deal. As we move into this for any number of reasons, not the least being security. What are you hearing from your members . What are the questions youre hearing the most from your members who are going to have to rip and replace . I think the number one issue is now that we have a goal, the goal is no covered equipment in network. The next question is, how do we prioritize that . Which elements do we take out first . Do we take out everything from the antenna back to the core . How do you do that . And do you go from a 3g to a 4g to a 5g solution . Part of the problem is many of the vendors are not making the 2 or 3g technology that may be in some of these networks. How do you get to a 4 g when you have 3g but voice. It may be necessary to go to another pronged to you replace one that has voice. Those things are really sort of into the weeds, but theyre detail oriented. And its what our carriers think about in terms of, how do we maintain connectivity. Its like building a separate network while you operate so you can transition on day one and youll be able to make a call. Thank you. Dr. Lewis, you stated that the bans on Huawei Network technology such as in the United States, japan, australia, also, that that is the only way to eliminate risk entirely. A couple weeks ago i was in the uk [ muted ] theyre trying i [ laughter ] hello. Hello. Yeah. Last week i was in the uk with calling china with a handful of my colleagues, and we met with the government there. And obviously we expressed some concerns about their recent action. Also the influence that that may have on actions within the eu as well. Those are security concerns. The uk is a member of 5is. That causes us to take a step back and decide that special relationship we have with the uk, how do we move forward on that . When it comes to security measures . Can the core really be securely isolated in a way that some of these countries [ muted ] are talking about in theory . The chinese dont like this. So in theory, you know, theyre talking about this core, and its going to be secure, and we dont need to worry, and, you know, my comeback is we have to put National Security above price. How would you answer that . Thank you, senator. I think that the politics and the commercial motives that our European Partners have will probably drive them to adopt a partial ban. Thats not in the best interest of their security. We have the discussion of a backdoor. But they will be motivated by chinas economic power. That means for us, theres two things. First, we can help them do better at making sure that partial ban eliminates risk as much as possible. Theres debate over this. I would defer to my more tech nol lochblically astute colleagues. But there are some companies and intelligence agencies that say a partial ban can be made to work in the near term. The second issue we need to keep in mind is this is not a finished deal. The british have said, perhaps they said it to you, that their opening position is a limitation of 35 . But theyre willing to move that back as we go forward. So we need to help them make it work now. We need to get them to move in the right direction later on. Thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you, corey. Thank you, senator fischer. And senator rosen in a different time zone, you may begin your questions. [ laughter ] yeah, thank you, thank you so much. Thank you all for being here. And for this very important hearing. I want to talk about how we provide the u. S. And its wireless, how we really lead in this area, because we are a Global Leader in Wireless Technology and performance and innovation, and the u. S. Is at the cusp of a technological evolution just as the 4g wireless created millions of jobs, mobile apps, 5g is going to fundamly change the way that our industries op rate. For the u. S. To remain a leader in this space, our response must be one of coordination and cooperation. This means working with private sector, supporting r d and emerging technologies, coordinating with the agencies, and participating i believe really importantly in standard setting, where much of the Foundational Technology that 5g makes it possible. Homeland skiert chairman ron johnson and i introduced a bipartisan promoting the u. S. Wireless leadership act of 2020. We want to ensure the u. S. Has a seat at the table in the wireless standards setting process, because our global kmet competitiveness depends on our participation in setting good standards. So dr. Lewis, id like your opinion on hour important it is for the United States government to participate in these standard setting bodies, including the International Telecommunications union, the third g generation project, and i also like you to comment on what is the impact of our participation or lack thereof on technologies including telemedicine, our connected devices, our smart grids. Can you speak to that, please . Yes, thank you, senator. So there is a distinction between the itu and 3gpp. One of the questions that is emerging is what the role of the u. S. Should be in the itu, which is dominated by powers that are hostile to us in many instances. 3gpp as youve heard from some of my colleagues, we are doing better. Its essential that remaintain a strong u. S. Presence there. If that includes funding for u. S. Government participation, that would be valuable. The dilemma if we withdraw, and im sure my other colleagues will agree with this, the dilemma if we withdraw is that china seeks to dominate the standards process. It seeks to politicize it. And it seeks to have it pick Chinese Technology even when that technology is not the best available. So its crucial for us in all of markets that 5g will enable to maintain a strong presence in the standards bodies. Thats great. It really leads to my next question about Telecom Equipment manufacturing. So with the absence of a major u. S. Alternative to foreign suppliers, our wireless carriers rely on just a few companies to manufacture the next generation of 5g technology. Some u. S. Companies sell switches and routers that reside in the inner most parts of Carriers Networks but none build the wireless that allows cell sites to connect. In light of the coronavirus that weve been dealing with in the last few weeks or months, its clear that how dependent we are on goods and commerce from other countries. A breakdown in our supply chain highlights how interkoekted we are and the impact it has on our economy and security. As we continue to discuss securing the 5g supply chain, can the u. S. Regain a footing in 5g Equipment Manufacturing . What do you need from us to be able to do that . Or should we look to possibly 6g to regain our leadership position in the Global Markets . Anyone like to take that, please . Let me just tackle that a little. I mean, number one i dont think you can get behind on your gs ever. We cant avoid engaging in the 5g solutions. But i think some of the technologies that are companies, not only here at the table but the new companies in the United States are finding to not only replace those functionalities of equipment with Software Solutions, virtualization of the network, everywhere from the antenna back to the core, and to the interface, you know, with the devices, i think were were on the cusp of finding significant opportunities for Cost Reduction and new competitors in the marketplace. And i think that that is one of the areas that [ muted ] provide quote unquote equipment and functionality to the network, and i think some of the specialists here that are engineers could [ muted ]. I think what youve done in the bill the secure and trusted is a huge step forward. Especially for the small carriers that dont have but theres a couple bills floating around in the house and the senate, that recognizes this as a priority, and i concur that we need more with the private sector as we move forward in the standard setting bodies. I think that would be a priority for the nation as a whole. [ muted ]. Mr. Barry, congress has finally succeeded in passing rip and replace, some replace and rip, legislation to ensure huawei is removed from all u. S. Tell Communications Networks. Ive got deep concerns about huawei and the intelligence weve received which functions as an arm of the chinese government. Im thankful your companies are hard at work to transition. While i appreciate the dedication, im hopeful that we can provide them certainty to make sure we ensure this rip and replace model is not the default approach in the future. Your members and other interested parties explored these ideas at a series of events. Thank you very much for hosting one in colorado, my state. What more can congress be doing to ensure communications between the federal government and companies of all sizes in the Telecommunications Industry for longterm security . Thank you, and thank you for recognizing the fact that our small carriers, as you may say, have spent a lot of time on the educational side. Thats one thing that i think this committee has made enormous progress on, is creating the focus and education about what are the security threats . What are the solutions . And i cant stress the fact that you have now directed some certainty in their lives going forward. Not just for the carriers that have covered equipment in the network. But if youre a small carier, you cant afford to make the wrong decision in deploigs your resources especially when you have limited capital to invest. So i think the industry and the vendors in that industry, at least those that are cca members are stepping up to the plate. Ive seen a lot of activity internliel with their companies to say this is a problem and we need to be part of the solution. I cant congratulate them more on that. But thank you for u. S. Chamber of commerce skbroind us in those sessions. I must say that cisa, who is the specialist entity within the homeland security, we couldnt have been more pleased with the very frank discussions they shared with our members throughout all those meetings. Thank you. I have a question for both mr. Bosswell and mr. Murphy. Mr. Bosswell can be the concerns about huawei and insecurity made clear our Telecommunications Companies and allies are seeking new vendors. That will largely benefit chinese Nonchinese Companies like ericson. You never mentioned ericsons presence in china in your. But the website talks about the companys long history in china going back to the 1890s. Its invested heavily in research in china. Youve also opened a Research Institute with beijing. Is Chinese Research incorporated into the Core Products . What protections does the Security Team have in place including hiring protocols to ensure clients governmentbacked securities that might attempt to undermine the security of those products . Thank you. Ill try and address all those paints that you make. Of course china is a large market and we cant and dont ignore that market or any other market around the world, frankly. With y we dont have production in china for the u. S. Market. In 2018 we proactively, before it was a thing to be talking about, we started proactively executing a regionlation strategy for our supply chain to put manufacturing and development as close to the customer market as possible. Notice u. S. Maybe we could follow up with a written question for the record. Is chinese sourced Research Incorporated into the Core Products . From a software standpoint, from a development standpoints, funnels through sweden. Its all scanned, verified, sand and centrally dist roibuted in sweden. That gives us tight control and transparency so the answer is yes, but you believe its properly filtered through other vendors and systems . Actually most of the Development Items from a chinese perspective would be for that Chinese Market, from a manufacturing standpoint. We do manufacture things in china for the Chinese Market. The majority of our r d and development is in europe and north america. So none of that chinese Work Research that youre doing in beijing would find its way to products in the u. S. . I would have to follow up specifically about that, but we do maintain a tight chain of custody of our code with check in and out to make sure we can track back. I want to switch to mr. Murphy. Nokia has 50 offices across china. Nokia also operates six research and Development Innovation hubs, facilities and ploys 7,000 people throughout chinas footprint. Your customers include china mobile, telecom and railway. How would you answer the same question that i just asked mmr mr. Bosswell, how are you protecting the security and what protocols do you have in place in china to do so . Sure. Thank you, senator gartner. So id perhaps divide that into two parts, one manufacturing and one is r d. Manufacturing, we have a number of manufacturing plants around the world, and depending on the recipient of the product we will make the best choice for that. For example in tcase of the u. S theres no equipment manufactured in china. R d, we do have research in had china. But we apply the same standards for chinese employees as we do for other global employees. Meaning they must sign ethical standats, its a prerec quit of employment. All Software Goes through security verification. Vulnerabilities must be resolved and documented. So the fact that theyre physically located in china kind of is a little bit irrelevant in terms of producing a secure product. I apologize. I cut off others that are over. Im going to cut myself off and i believe the next senator lee, excuse me. Thank you, mr. Chairman. I want to thank chairman whicker to holding todays hearing on an important issue. We all would agree with increased speeds and greater capacity well enable breakthroughs in a variety of sectors. Theres a lot of promise with these new and advanced technologies but the u. S. Is going to be able to deliver only if we maintain the security of our networks both here at home and abroad. The decisions that we make today with our trade partners around the world are going to impact our National Security and economic outcomes for years to come. I intend to introduce legislation this week to ensure the security of our infrastructure, clear objective of trade policy. Unfair trade owned or controlled by a Foreign Government should not be tolerated. Period. Mr. Lewis, when we think about future trade agreements with United Kingdom and other countries, should the zrurt of our Communications Networks be at the forefront of those conversations . Thank you, senator. I think this legislation is long overdue. It is essential. Of course it should be part of our discussions with our allies and partners. And in fact in nany trade agreement. I think this is a great step forward. Thank you. Thank you. Mr. Boss, well, murphy, 5 g networks have potential to define functionalities. Can you talk about some of the security benefits as well as challenges that exist with new Network Elements . Either one . Ill go. Thank you, senator. So of course 5g will become more virtualized and Software Defined. The intelligence will be located more in the cloud or closer to the edge. So distinctions between different parts of the network may become blurred. It also gives us some distinct add vafrmgz as we bring in new security technologies. 5g will be built on a secure 4g infrastructure. But it does bring new tools to the toolbox. The new arc techtures that we will role out and types of technologies we will use allows us to use additional enscription, enhanced awe theptcation and granular data Access Control for enhanced Privacy Protection for subscribers. In addition, well have greater innetwork segmentation that can provide realtime defense and improved resilience. Availability of the network, thats a key cornerstone. So theres new technologies that well see. Ultimately its about how we design and build in and employment and operate those networks as well, on top of what we see in standards. Thank you, senator. So 5g raises the bar and lowers the bar at the same time. It raises the bar in the sense that 3gpp revoflsolves thing. One could lower the bar, meaning theyre more vulnerable. We need to take action on the product side as both mr. Bosswell and myself have noted in design for security or integrity protections in things that we produce. At the end of the day no matter what we do, well always be a vulnerability that can be infiltrated and that always comes back to trust in the supplier themselves. And this is where the behavior, the ethics, the Historical Performance and behavior, and the governance it puts on security, securing the products it produces, is the most important. Thank you. Mr. Barry, last week the senate sent legislation by chairman whicker to the president s desk that would help Rural Telecommunications carriers remove equipment from high risk vendors like huawei and zte and replace it. In your testimony you suggest the the lack of availability of a properly trained workforce may i am pact this process to remove the equipment. How will legislative efforts like the telecommunication Skilled Workforce act that i introduced with several of my colleagues on this Committee Earlier this week help ensure the necessary workforce is in place . Thank you, senator. Yes, its s3355 is key to being able to stay up with the growth. It would be a shame to lose the economic benefits that this new technology promises if we have a lack of trained labor trained labor force. I think it would be a great move. We support it. Theres a lot going on in the world, not only the 600 mega hefrtsz were repurposing, youve got a lot in Rural America. They may only have access to their to you werz and facility two or three months out of the year. Having a crew thats available and the technology to deliver, you know, the labor forces is critical. And without it well not make that well not make that transition. So thank you so very much. All right. Thank you, mr. Barry. My time has expired. Thank thank you, mr. Chairman, thanks to all of you for being here. There is what i think one could fairly characterize is a broad consensus there are vulnerabilities in the network, the use of hawi equipment is troubling. It does seem however there is debate to whatever extent this vulnerability, based on where the equipment is and depending where the equipment is ooh might manage the risk through work around. Given your expertise and experience in this area, can you clarify bhor clarify whether or not there is a distinction between the core and periphery of the networks and whether that makes a distinction for security . Thank you, senator. There is 5g and Computing Power and 5g networks. There is a debate over how to manage this risk. There is a third element that might involve the use of Cloud Computing as the backbone for some communication telefunctions. I think the debate is resolved. If i had to speak, i would say if you dont want any risk dont use huawi. If you do use it, i think it can be done. Do you know about using this discussion internally with the rip and replace plan . I think the fcc has come to the correct conclusion the best way to reduce risk is to eliminate huawei equipment. Congress has come to that conclusion. Thank you, mr. Chairman. For similar reasons you would say the same with respect to software. If you impose a Software Solution to it, you might mitigate it and the only way to eliminate it is to rip it all out. You can reduce risk but the only way to eliminate it is replace the technology. It has been criticized according to some for underestimating its costs, especially when you take into account the resulting equipment options, the resulting options that will involve less equipment being available. Fewer options do tend to increase the price tag, and sometimes can produce additional costs and additional delays. Mr. Berry, is the rip and replace price tag 1 billion accurate, in your estimation . Senator, thank you. Its difficult to know. Our carrierers are going out to the vendors and asking for bids and how you can actually replace the technology. Its hard to say. A lot of it is timing and flexibility. For example you mentioned availability of services, goods and equipment and variability to build and put the new technologies in place. Its a matter of timing. The s. E. C. , if you use a cycle, maybe a little longer than a year, i appreciate the wisdom of the committees legislation year to kickstart this. I also appreciate the fact that you have a flexible opportunity there for s. E. C. To give additional time. I think with that you can manage costs. I think we will see as more carriers come in with verifiable cost estimates, we will see if that amount of money covers it or not and the legislation provides for unique ability to come back and identify additional resources. Just to be clear, does the rip and replace price tag, as we have it now, take into account the increased cost of equipment resulting from it . The increased cost of equipment for resulting in fewer options. When youre taking options off the table. Its interesting, the timing may actually give you more options in the marketplace. Not only do we have Legacy Networks that are in place, and youre replacing those Legacy Networks with existing vendor suppliers in that workspace, but you have new technologies coming on board that as time if you can wait 9, 10 months or a year, you may be able to reduce your costs. Thats the unknown part. I think it will absolutely require a cooperative effort. We know what the goal is to eliminate the equipment and capability and networks. How fast do you get there will depend how much cost it might cost. Thank you very much. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Thank you, senator lee. Senator peters. Thank you, mr. Chairman and all our witnesses and excellent testimony today. Mr. Braswell, this question goes to you. With 4g we have hardware choke points to check and maintain system security. As we push to move from hardware to software to allow more u. S. Companies to participate and take control of our supply chain, can you describe how companies will have the same ability to check the cyber hygiene of software if there is no hardware choke point . Thank you, senator, yes, id be happy to describe that process a top priority for erickson and my Area Security of our Network Products and integrity of our supply chain. The focus is on three key pillars, transparency, traceability and trustworthiness. Ill talk about each one, if thats ok. From a transparency standpoint we do at the beginning, code testing, vulnerability standing, contacting report, hardware guidelines on every release of code. Were very transparent in the process of that and how we do that and results shared with customers for all of those products as well. Were very open there. On the traceability aspect, all of our software is scanned, verified, signed and distributed from sweden. That gives us tight control over our Software Development life cycle and cycle ability of the software. It provides a chain of software custody that insures authenticity and integrity of that code once it has left erickson. Once it is deployed on a radio for a customer and boots up, they can insure that is verifiable and authentic code because we put it at the chip level. It gives us a hardware root of trust from the physical aspect of the radio to the Software Running on top out. Lastly, from a trustworthiness standpoint, the trustworthiness of the network is more than the security integrity of products. Its also operational procedures and transparency, how you do deployments, also, are you operating under the rule of law and under an independent judiciary. All these things factor in to determining trustworthiness of a vendor. We try to convey some information like the Risk Management task force in giving guidance from a government and industry perspective to customers and carriers and enterprisers and the world that makes us an integrity high supply chain. Certainly all the Network Providers are providing 5g and all committed to cyber. We hear that loud and clear. My concern is some small and medium size have less than 10 employees and cant afford have a full time Security Officer around the clock. What recommendations do you have for small and mediumsized isps that serve Rural Communities . How can we assist them have a robust Cybersecurity Program but maintain profit margins. Thank you, senator. That is a huge challenge for carriers serving isolated areas throughout the United States. I think the bill does a phenomenal job saying thats share information and make sure that information is shared with small providers. Cisa, homeland security, are putting field offices out there and saying heres your contact. I recommend every provider, whether its wisp or small provider know who those contacts are. Most states have contacts. Talk to them on a regular basis. When the information gets out on the suggested list of providers and you have a federal program through the homeland security, that can give you the data you need, and you should talk to them all the time. They will give you a headsup, if this is a problem or if you will experience problems. Ive been very impressed with the new cisa operation. I think its only a year or so in operation and theyre doing a phenomenal job. Good to get that assessment. Is there more they can do . Yes. I think theres more they can do. I think the u. S. Government in conjunction with industry are doing a much better job of bringing some transparency to this issue. I was at a conference in miter, a quasipublicprivate entity, huge attendance from u. S. Government entities. I was really surprised at the quality of data exchanged and quality of interest from every military operation to the private sector, including many of the Companies Represented here. Right. Thank you for your answer. Appreciate it. Senator sullivan. Thank you. I want to thank the witnesses for this enlightening testimony. Dr. Lewis, i want to talk the reciprocity with china. Senator van hollen and i last week introduced what is called the true reciprocity act of 2020. As you know, in a whole host of areas, media, investment, economics, theres not a reciprocal relationship. They can do things over here that we cant do over there. As you also know, huawei, i know theyre controlled by the government of china and subsidized. Let me give you something very disturbing that relates to reciprocity and lack thereof. Im wondering how we can address it. Huawei has recently begun to file Patent Infringement lawsuits in the u. S. Against its perceived or actual u. S. Competitors, u. S. Companies. Specifically, they filed a 1 billion Patent Infringement case against verizon, claiming over 1 billion in damages. Could verizon go to a beijing court and file a Patent Infringement lawsuit against huawei . Everybodys laughing. Whats the answer . And would they be treated fairly if they could . You can say no. I want to get to a broader point. You can say no. Ok. Hell no . Ok. Its actually a really important question, because in my view, theyre using the openness of the u. S. Society and our courts, which are independent. Theirs arent. To actually, as a weapon against us. Im just wondering, not just for you, but the rest of the panelists, the bill that senator van hollen and i, tries to say essentially, if we couldnt do it there you shouldnt be able to do it here. It is a broad category. But should we look at for example maybe limiting discovery . Huwei will try to use this not only to try to intimidate American Companies but in the discovery process, maybe try to get trade secrets, maybe try to get information from our tech companies, from our telecoms. How should we be trying to address this . To me, this is a really big problem. They wrote a wall street journal oped as if they were some kind of noncontrolled party, by the communist party. Do you have any thoughts on that or any of your other panelists . I have a quick question for mr. Berry. Let me start first, senator, thank you. This is a crucial issue. Every time i open the Washington Post or last week the economist i feel we are definitely be taken advantage of. Even they cannot do that in china. Thats on the media side which says, we cant do that in china. You walk out of the senate, do a vote, you have a chinese journalist sticking a mic in your face. Can our journalists stick mics in jingpings face . I dont think so. Its one where if you close one door our opponent will look to find another. Unfortunately they use patents and discovery as a new venue for espionage. Do you think its threatening to american Competitive Companies to do broadbased discovery when they cant do it in china . Ive only interviewed a few broadbased companies and they agree its damaging. I would ask if you have a view on it and want to submit it for the record. Its a loophole. Real quickly, i want to ask mr. Barry. I was part of the cosponsorship of the chairmans leadership on the rip and replace bill. Can you speak to some of the other challenges dealing with mostly rural and extremely rural and remote carriers congress and the fcc can look at the legislation the chairman led and we recently enacted in the congress . Thank you, senator. We mentioned flexibility will be the key to whether or not we get this done in a rational reasonable way. In Rural America these carriers are working on a shoestring, trying to keep connectivity while you literally restructure your entire network is going to require a lot of flexibility. The sec, tfcc, the last order t did, there was some concern whether there was authority there in to maintain your network while youre tran signaturesin transituationing. Some thought it was retrospective in nature instead of prospective. We all have to get on the same game card in it. If we are going to maintain services especially in alaska and difficult areas, you have to get flexibility to maintain that network as you transition out. Prioritization how you do it. Just because a generator goes out on the network doesnt mean its an huawei product. It may allow that network to operate that may have huawei goods and product in it. Thats not the reason youre maintaining the network. I think it will take a lot of cooperative effort and the rural areas will be one of the most difficult to deal with. Thank you. Mr. Chairman, i know im the last witness. Can i just actually, we have senator scott here. Im sorry. Senator scott. I did not im not even going to finish my sentence, then. I was going to ask for a ill just have the witnesses, if you can submit additional comments on my earlier question about the lack of reciprocity and danger they will be given an opportunity to say that aloud when i take my second round. Oh. Well, maybe i will hang out for that. Great. Senator scott. Thank you, chairman. Thank you, senator sullivan, for giving me this opportunity. Mr. Berry, could you talk about what we need to do to encourage private industry to create alternatives to huawei . When you read the paper, they say theres no alternatives. What do we need to be doing to help create alternatives sxwlchlt secondly, any of you could answer, why, if youre up here in d. C. , we all understand the risk of huawei. The public doesnt get it and you dont hear it locally at all. What can we do to encourage and do to get the public educated about the risk of huawei . Thank you, senator. What you can do is you provided a bill, fund for replacement equipment. It got earns attention and Everyone Wants to find solutions now because theres a potential to pay for it. Small carriers dont drive the marketplace normally, they dont drive the technology development. This gives us an opportunity to recognize there are funds to reimburse. On the other side, i think the recognition that there is nefarious Network Elements out there that need to be replaced gives everyone thought maybe theres a better way to do it. I think our industry has the capability to respond in a very effective fashion very quickly. I think thats what were seeing in the marketplace right now. Many of those sitting at this table are providing that opportunity. I know the small kiiriers being able to know if they make a decision to go with a certain technology its on the recommended list. They wont have to literally go under because they cant pay the bill. How can we educate People Better . Heres the idea. We did three nationwide sessions trying to educate our carriers to the risk. We had great response not only from the department of justice, fcc, homeland security, ntia and the white house, those are the types of things the big issue is everything is connected to the internet. It doesnt matter if its a switch, part of the ram or part of the core, eventually connects to the internet. Just because it may happen in washington, d. C. , you could have a plant shut down in florida because that vulnerability. Its like the chain that breaks at the weakest link. I think thats what all these interesting discussions are trying to do right now, find that weakest link and fix it. When yall were answering senator sullivans question, you talked about huawei using the patent process to take advantage of the american system and other countries, is there anything we should be doing to penlced huawi to do that . Companies like erickson and nokia dont do that. To penalize. Thats putting on my old hat as on the council for the house against Committee Years ago. The nefarious thing is the open process, the best way to defeat that challenge is potentially through information thats classified and cannot be made public. That concerns me, from my older, you know, service on the hill. I dont know how you do that in a public fashion. Thats a good way anyone can test the knowledge the u. S. Intelligence community may have bringing actions like that. Im not so sure i have a good answer for you. Is there a ive only been here a year. Is there legislation now that protects classified information like that . Will you yield to senator sullivan . Absolutely. I mean, what were looking at is not the classified aspect but just the reciprocal aspect. The reciprocal aspect is glaring to me, particularly in this case. Our companies cant do that. One response in the bill senator van hollen and i put forward, you would limit the discovery to Chinese Companies in america courts because we cant do discovery in their courts. Seems very fair. Most americans would, i think, instinctively support it. If we get all our allies to do the same thing, then you start to really Leverage China to quit playing in a way thats nonreciprocal. Theres nothing else from the classified side, that you have a recommendation we need to be doing . Senator, one of the issues thats come up in this discussion, its true, the one word the chinese leaders really dislike is reciprocity. In discussions with chinese officials, if you say reciprocity, its a threshold. They are very unhappy. We need to consider whether you can use some of the sanction tools available, whether its putting people on the entities list, there are treasury or commerce sanctions that might offer and opportunity to close off this new avenue of espionage. Thank you. Ill stop because i think my time is up. Thank you very much. Dr. Lewis, huawei is on the entity list. It cannot receive information from u. S. Persons and entities but it can sue and try to get around that through discovery, and you and senator sullivan had a lengthy exchange about that. Mr. Berry, is there anything more youd like to say about this issue and then i will give our other three witnesses a chance to respond . No, sir, i think its another way to glean information not otherwise made available. I agree with senator sullivan, it has to be addressed. Would anyone else like to weigh in on that . I dont see anyone raising a hand. Mr. Chairman, can i make one quick comment, just to add to this discussion . When i raise the issue of reciprocity with the chinese at very senior levels including our ambassador here and also senior officials in beijing, one of those issues they pretty much acknowledge theres no reciprocal treatment across a whole host of areas but say its still appropriate its nonreciprocal because theyre a developing country. Thats literally the answer. Thats what they say. Thats a debatable prospect. I think true reciprocity in the relationship has to be the standard. We get our allies to do it, too. They dont have reciprocal relationships with hardly anybody. Thats my comment. Thank you very much. As we conclude, let me see if we can cover the federal advisory committee. The Communications Security Reliability Interoperability Council that the fcc works through. I think we call it cisric. Its mission is to provide recommendations to the fcc to ensure optimal reliability for communications systems. Mr. Murphy, can you discuss why 5g networks will require a different approach through communication Network Security paired to 4g and 3g. Mr. Berry, i will follow up by asking you concerning the security of the telecommunications supply chain, requires diligence to monitor their networks. While theres no one size fits all approach to address vulnerabilities, what types of best practices are your members using . Thank you, chairman wicker. 4g is dominated by smartphones and 5g will be dominated by smartphones and many industries. Ranking member mentioned the power issue earlier this morning, meaning the potential for catastrophic impacts are larger in 5g. The network itself is changing in the way its structured, moving towards a more distributed and virtualized system. We cannot take what was 4g and say thats adequate for 5g. We have to look at 5g and a higher bar for the security processes we implement. This whole issue of trust of the supplier comes into play. It has a more important aspect than 5g compared to 4g. Likewise on a technical level, vendors such as ourselves and mr. Boswell with erickson, we also have to up our game in the security process for 5g, it is not the same. Mr. Boswell, you will up your game . I serve on the cisric you mentioned. We will all be going through transition with 5g. With this fcc security advisory, counsel, were working on one of two working groups, one focused on stand alone 5g security and the other, the transition from the other gs into 5g. Thats an area of extreme importance especially for smaller carriers. The work is collaborative. Colleagues from nokia and government industry. The Lessons Learned out of what we can do and transition to 5g will be applicable not only for large carriers but also small carriers. All of them will be in this transition state for 4g and 5g quite a while. Its important to provide consistent guidance and how do we update policies and procedures to be ready for this new virtualized Software Defined infrastructure. For smaller carriers in particular, that might be a completely new thing for them. The larger ones may be doing virtualized things and Software Defined network for a while. They not only have the challenge i have to put a new radio on and deliver new services and now i have virtualized infrastructure as well. That may be new for them. Were trying to address this in the s. E. C. Securitied a Advisory Council you mentioned and the work and backing from the government that set that up. I guess its important to realize virtualized portals are not secure in themselves. We make them more secure with practice and thats where the cisric and vast entities come into play because you can share that information with carriers. Most small carriers try and still impact their networks. For example. You go down to cspire in jackson, mississippi, their Network Operations center, they can tell you literally to the minute how many adversarial attacks they had on the network and how many intruders attempted to get into their network and communicate with entities in their network. Some of our carriers are higher other outside entities that monitor dark fiber scenarios, everyone trying to touch their network. Its a constant thing. Without cisric and experienced entities out there small carriers would have a very difficult time coming up with best practices because the threat changes literally every day in some respect. Thats a key component. Not only do you have to continue it but be probably even more energetic in the response in the coming years. Thank you. Dr. Lewis, something you said about partially using huawei equipment might give someone the impression that you are somewhat relaxed about what the United Kingdom has done. So, im just curious to learn what you really really think there. Thank you. I can handle the truth. I am relieved to hear that, mr. Chairman. Let me say that congress has been the bedrock of the opposition to huawei and the confrontation with china. Your work is much appreciated. I think your comments how im relaxed will please my friends in ghq. You have to look on the bright side. Its a debate whether you can do the divide the british talk about and architectural fix. My feeling is you have to play the hand you are dealt. It would be better to do what australia did, better not to do that. Theyre our closest allies in the world. They might change their mind with leverage points. Right now, partial band or not like partial band, how do we make our communications with a key ally more secure. Key witnesses said today there are a lot of alternatives and apparently the uk is not convinced. They didnt get that message. Am i on to something here . I would say the uk received political direction possibly from the previous Prime Minister that it was important to maintain good relations with both china and the u. S. , economic relations with china, security relations with the u. S. , and the british are trying to craft a solution that will let them do both. That may not be possible. I dont think the technical debate over whether their partial ban can work is over. There are even American Tech Companies that will say, with the right architecture, with the right setup in the cloud, you could make this work. Its a to be determined kind of question. Senator johnson. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Ive got a lot of questions, succinct answers would be helpful. Appreciate your testimony. I was in munich, microsoft was talking about a cloudbased solution that leapfrogs, no offense to nokia and erickson, leapfrog to 5g. I come from a security involvement, the reality is huawei will exist. 1. 4 billion people in china and they have a good market. They have equipment and somewhere around the world that equipment will be installed and in a Global Network we will come in tact with it. We need to recognize that reality. Rather than try to pose a policy not accepted by everybody we better accept the reality and we have to come up with solutions that contemplate reality huaweis equipment is going to be installed some places. Can you speak to that, mr. Lewis and i want to talk to nokia and erickson about capacities and that type of thing. Thank you, senator. I think thats right unfortunately when you look at some of the markets in the developing world, where we have Strong National interests, the middle east, africa, south america, huawei will be a presence there. We need to learn to operate on networks not perhaps trustworthy. We have an opportunity in the move towards 5g and 6g, to work with our allies and security partners, to come up with standards and best practices that will make telecom more secure. I dont see the british decision as a loss, i see it as an opportunity. Our view is a reality. Speak to the cloudbased solution for 5g, basically leapfrogging the equipment issue. I will defer to my other colleagues. But what i hear from interviewing many Many Companies, is that this is an alternative. It will lead to greater security, but it is somewhere between three years and 10 years out. We it would be nice if it was here sooner. It will fix our problems, make them smaller ultimately. Next year it wont help. You cant defeat something with nothing. But we have something. We have nokia, we have erickson. How big of a capacity challenge is meeting the demand for 5g as it develops and is deployed . Speak to both nokia and erickson here. Im sorry, senator johnson, capacity in what respect . Of the equipment thats needed to satisfy 5g demand and deployment. So, its going at a different pace in Different Countries across the world. But at the moment, we dont see a significant issue with meeting the equipment demand. There is a great demand on capabilities, which is very challenging to meet. However, not so much on the equipment side. Were always told huaweis equipment is substandard. Is that true or not true . Are they advanced . Are they ahead of nokia and erickson in terms of technology or behind . It would be false its correct to say huawei are a formidable competitor. Thats partially due to the Massive Research and Development Arm capable of forwarding due to their domestic market on the sales side to the banks in china. However, when it comes from a technical perspective, if we go back to the early part of my testimony, if we look at first in the world, it was actually the u. S. Was the first in the world to launch 5g back in the First Quarter of 2018, then more commercial systems in 2019. So we dont feel were at a technical disadvantage being able to keep on par with huawei. Chinas predatory americanism, youre talking about being supported by chinese banking. Is there a greater economic support from china . How large an economic disadvantage is nokia and erickson . How big a disadvantage is that to huawei . I will ask mr. Boswell to answer that one. Thank you, senator. We certainly believe in our network and integrity of our products and solutions and think theyre the best in the world. You asked for a comparison. As mr. Murphy said, theyre formidable opponents and certainly a competitor on the world stage. Here in the u. S. Market, the u. S. Enjoy as competitive and robust marketplace of secure and High Integrity and trusted suppliers. We can still go fast on this race to 5g with trusted suppliers. You you are not answering the question. What kind of cost advantages are we at because of chinas mercantilism and support. If its china literally putting billions and billions of dollars into subsidizing sale of 5g equipment, thats a problem. Where are we at there . My apologies, senator. The finance is not my forte. We are structured for manufacturing demand and rollout customers are asking for both in the u. S. And rest of the world. Were able to go as fast as our customers want us to do now. If the chairman will indulge me, anybody can answer that questions as far as costs . Anybody on the panel . I can try. Ironically i moved to china this time of the year and i set up a lab with hua wi. Research and Development Done at a low cost by government and research stutz. At that point in time i believe that continues today, they have significant support from the government and different entities with china in excuse of their product developments, and sequentially with sal subsequently sales and we do not have that equal with Government Support to help us. In the sense of what can be done to remediate that or mitigate that, i think its to create a level Playing Field on research and Development Side to support vendors like ourselves to have a more level Playing Field both in 5g and especially 6g. Were not going to steal their technology. I cant get an answer theyre 30 below you guys. I wont get that answer. Ive already taken more time. Mr. Lewis, i would like to meet with you at some point in time. Just a quick one. Is 30 accurate . No. I was just picking that number out of theres some evidence with a European Company there was a 30 discount. In other cases, its been much greater and can answer that in a question if you wish. We will do that offline. Go ahead, senator. This is interesting. Ok. Answer the question. There is a long line behind you. We need to know that. If were going to by the way, in the private sector if you have an incumbent supplier with a monopoly you want to get rid of you start supporting alternate suppliers. I think were in the same situation here. China has taken the wrong path, theyre not a benign force, a mall lined force. This is a National Security issue and we have two suppliers here and we helped them here saying we will not allow huawei and we need to do support against theyre crediting mercantilism. If you have support, that would be helpful. Perhaps this is best answered in the record, but for u. S. And Law Enforcement and intelligence agencies, i dont know if my colleagues would agree, they would tell you if there is interest in getting into that market for the National Intelligence Communication System they will spend whatever it takes. It is in the hundreds of millions in some cases, greater in others. Thats the kind of competitor you dont like competing against. They will buy the business at any price. We will talk offline and do some questions for the record. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Thank you, senator johnson. Dr. Lewis, its not accurate to say our allies who made a decision we wish they had not, had no one else to turn to. Thats really not an accurate statement, is it . Thats correct, senator, as you heard from our colleagues from nokia and erickson, there are many alternatives. I think thats an important take away from this hearing. Mr. Berry, you want to have the last word on the entire panel. Thank you, senator, i appreciate it. To respond to senator johnson, this committee sent a huge shot across thibaut of every ally and friend of the United States. You said, this committee across the bow of every ally it doesnt matter what covered equipment providers cost is or is not, they cant sell in the United States. They wont have a market in the United States. I think what you did on the International Front is far more important than you may think. What you were willing to do here is what you wanted britain to do, poland, french, all our allies. Now, you have a barricade to stand behind and say, can you follow our lead . I think thats what youve done here. Thank you. It was actually a statement by the house and the senate as a whole on a bipartisan basis, and i expect the president will be signing that legislation with some fanfare in the next few days. Thank you all. I want to thank all the members who have come and gone and helped us strengthen our understanding. The hearing record will remain open for two weeks during this time. Senators are asked to submit any answers to questions upon receipt and asked to submit written answers to the committee as soon as possible but by no later than wednesday, april 1st, 2020. Cross your heart, hope to die. With that, i want to thank the witnesses and announce this hearing is now adjourned. This weekend on book tv, mayoral leadership, reflexes from a watergate lawyer and the effect of a twoparty political system on democracy. Saturday night at 11 00 p. M. Eastern in the nation city, former chief of staff, rahm emanuel. Cities across the country. And 7 50 p. M. Eastern on sunday, Jill Winebanks talks about her legal career including her role as one of the three special assistant prosecutors in the watergate case. At 99 00 p. M. Afterwards, the book twoparty doom loop, damaging the democracy, matthew dallek, author. What would be the chief advantages to having a multiparty democracy . Democracy is always going to involve conflict. Politics is conflict. The issues of consensus are not political issues. The challenge is we need some system by which we can agree that some set of rules are fair and some set of procedures are fair and we can abide by those outcomes. Watch rahm emanuel, Jill Winebanks and afterwards with lee drutman, this weekend on book tv and tune in for the live coverage of the tucson festival of books on book tv on cspan2. A stake dinner at the white house. Vice president and mrs. Lyndon johnson are among those who join president and mrs. Kennedy on honoring his imperial majesty and the emporess. This weekend on real america, the 1962 film Firm Alliance on the state visit by the shaw and empress of iran, with first lady john kennedy and jacqueline kennedy. I speak on behalf of all my fellow americans welcoming you to the United States. The interests of both of us is the same, to maintain our freedom, maintain our peace and to provide a better life for our people. Real america, sunday at 4 00 p. M. Eastern on American History tv on cspan3. Our cspan campaign 2020 bus is going across the country asking what issues should president ial candidates address . The issue most important to me in campaign 2020 is foreign policy. I know candidates have addressed it already. I think its important for candidates that focus on issues they constitutionally have a lot of control over. I think its just important because compared to other people with government its one area you have a lot of direct control over. The issues most important to me for this election cycle. Theres actually three of them. Im looking at candidates, im looking for their stance on the second amendment, their stance on immigration and their stance on abortion. The most important issue for me in this 2020 campaign is healthcare. Many of my family and friends have had to struggle to make ends meet with all their medical bills and medical debt, so being able to get medicare for all would be really beneficial to pretty much everyone i know. Thats the main issue i have for this election. My big issue is probably Climate Change and how we can address it while also addressing economic disparities and rebuild our economy to be more sustainable. The issue i would like the candidates to address, our nativeamerican rights and what their stands are on preserving those rights. Im a nativeamerican currently here in utah. I am from arizona so i would like the candidates to dive a little deeper where their stance are, in regards to nativeamerican. Voices from the road on cspan. The Supreme Court heard oral argument on a case regarding the constitutionality of a federal law forbidding encouragement of illegal immigration. The justices have through june to issue a ruling. This runs an hour. Well hear argument this morning, case 1967, United States versus smith. Mr. Feigin. Thank you, mr. Chief justice and may it please the court,