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

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 such as 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 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 fwrantgranting Huawei 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, software 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 back into our 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 ork 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 bipartisan networks 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 service to their own Rural 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 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 we need to sustain a secure robust marketplace, just suppliers in the u. S. , and globally to do so it is important to Pass Security legislation, such as the soft thoughtful from blackburn and others keep Holding Hearings like this time to find what agencies are doing, to secure a system. Shining lights will allow the u. S. To set the global example for 5g security. On behalf of ericsson, i think the committee for its leadership. We look forward to working with you and i look forward to your questions. Thank you very much for straws well rose completely 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 officer of the competitive carriers association, mr. Jason boswell, head of Security Network Product Solutions at ericson, ms. Only asha katie, Corporate Vice color we are president and general manager expected to of next generation and become standards at intel, mr. More mike murphy, chief technology years 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 such technical problem telecommunications supply chain, that is to say the equipment and services that make up a Communications Network. I welcome our distinguished technical problem 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 access 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. 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 incentives to help facilitate wide spread 5g deployments in the u. S. And accelerate new technological innovation. Thank you for the opportunity to highlight 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 5g 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 u. S. Export import bank, and the finance corporation, could potentially rebalance the situation, also the chinese market, Telecoms Market is massive, supporting significant are in the span, why domestic report suppliers, subsequently supplied to foreign markets. Spending support in the u. S. , through the National Spectrum consortium, and the Central Intelligence committee, are excellent however more could be done to support 5g product development, local use cases, and especially 6g research. Finally regarding 5g security, 5g will enable cases of Critical Services up among multiple industries. This makes it larger than in 4g, with potential for catastrophic impacts, should that act should bad actors infiltrate networks. This was known during the creation of 5g, and many of the witnesses a 4g, but network reaches are still possible, nokia does not support the review of ice that isolationist effective, rather the securities best serve by using trusted suppliers. For example in nokia, ethics and reporting of unethical behavior is mandatory for all employers and is a prerequisite for employment. In productive element, nokia has Security Development governance, vice strict development processes, and transparency is mandatory. These activities are independent of country of origin, that is my final thought. Namely the governments historical behavior ethics, and Security Systems implemented by companies are the true definition of trust and closing thank you chairman quicker and members of the committee, for the opportunity to testify here today doctor lewis. 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. 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 d. 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 exports 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. Are strong in the markets. 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. 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 deploy 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 and Eric Ericsson 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 providers, 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 for a petite person. 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. Well, we believe that the government can do more to help new entrants. And while maintaining existing incumbents so we have a diverse supply chain. Virtualization is the key. The faster we have wide spread 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, agriculture and other economies. Incentives also are important. Thank you. Mr. Bozswell, would you like to weigh in briefly . Thank you. Yes. I think ericsson 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, ericsson radios that are in the field of which we have several hundred thousand, are ready for 5g today with software upgradability. So that kind of foresight and planning has allowed us to actually be 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 siting and making sure our workforce is as well. 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 technical problem technical problem i felt the notion that in the nineties we thought the government should have a back door to ease our concerns about great encryption capability and i kept thinking instead of intel inside, you are going to be saying u. S. Government inside, it didnt work when we thought about it, and it shouldnt work today. And since you are a global company, doctor 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 demanding access to that technology as a back door is just unacceptable. We need to just build this International Airlines to say, its unacceptable. You want to be a mature economy . You are not against your companies, we are against the fact that you demand a Government Back door to them, thats what we are against. So i know dont know why we cant build that International Coalition and communicate. So doctor lewis, mrs. inaudible , even if you . inaudible story. We look at Information Security into ways. One security has Information Security and supplies Chain Security. And we look at how do we have security constructs in both ways. As far as to your question around back doors, i think that you know more of the the government knows more details than us and so we look forward to working with the government support, the requests that is provided versus being able to mandate it as a rapid company. Doctor 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 Coalition. 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. But i see an International Coalition emerging. Miss keddy, did you want to add something to that . On ensuring a Standard Base but a diverse 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 here. 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 into 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 that 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 now 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 senator cantwell. I am glad that the secure and trusted Communications Networks act made it onto the 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 carriersability to meet timelines established in the legislation, and how applicants can request reimbursement. Mr. Barry, are there still small providers who havent be able to secure commitments from trusted vendors to be able to secure is they are able to provide quantity for the networks within those timelines . Thank you for the questions senator. Yes, that is a difficult task for many small carriers. What we are seeing with this legislation, especially you have kick started the concept of you may be actually able to replace that 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. It 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 must grow on this stone. We want to make sure we are out there trying to find a solution asap. And yes, new technologies could create new security opportunities, but there is a time lack, there is the flexibility, a need for flexibility. So 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 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. That is 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 you are hearing the most from your members who are going to have to repeal and replace . I think the number one issue is now that we have a goal, the goal is no covert equipment in your network. The next question is how do we prioritize that . Which ones 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 two or three g technology that maybe in some of these networks. So how do you get to a 4g technology when you have 3g technology but you have voice . So it may be necessary to go to a 4g lte inaudible product so you replace an Old Technology with a new technology that actually has a voice. So things those things are really in the weeds but they are very detail oriented, and its what our carriers think about in terms of how do we maintain cake 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 technologically 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, i want to talk about how we promote the u. S. , and how we really lead in this area. We are a Global Leader in wireless technology. In performance an innovation, and the u. S. Is at the cusp of a technological evolution. Just as the industry created millions of jobs, the air of mobilization google apps, change the way our industry operates. For the u. S. To remain a leader in the space, our response must be one of coordination, and cooperation, this means working with private sector supporting our indiana, merging technologies, coordination with the relevant agencies, and participating really importantly in standard setting, where much of the Foundational Technology of 5g that makes 5g possible. Homeland security chairman introduced the bipartisanship the wireless leadership act of 2020, we want to ensure that the u. S. Has a seat at the table, in the wireless standard setting process, because our Global Competitiveness depends on our participation and setting good standards for the next generation. So doctor lewis, i would like your opinion on how important it is, for the United States government to participate in the standard setting bodies, including the International Telecommunications union, the third g. Generation project, and i would also like you to comment on what is the impact of our participation, or lack thereof on technologies including telemedicine, are connected devices, are smart grids can you speak to that please. Yes thank you senator. So, there is a distinction between the i20, and three ppp, one of the questions that is emerging, is the role of the u. S. What it should be an i. T. , what is dominated by powers that are hostile to us in many instances. Three gdp, as you have heard from some of my colleagues we are doing better, it is essential that we maintain a strong u. S. Presence there. And that includes funding for u. S. Government, participation that would be valuable. The drama if we withdraw, and im sure my other colleagues would agree with this, the dilemma if we withdraw is a shiny china seeks to dominate this process, seeks to politicize it, and seeks to have it dominate that even though. ,. ,. ,. ,. , . . Would it let me just tackling little bit i think we can get behind on this. 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. 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 deploying 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 internally 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 us in those sessions. I have a question, are companies Communications Companies and our allies, theyre looking for vendors that will not Chinese Companies, like ericsson, you never mentioned ericssons presence in china, but ericssons website, talks about companies long history in china, going back to the 1890s, and it says, ericsson has several joint Venture Companies in china, and has invested heavily in training in china, and also open the institute of technology in china, what productions and protections the Security Team have been placed, including hiring protocols, including chinese activities that in light those products. Thank you senator, i will try to address all those points that you make, china is a large market, but we cant ignore that market or any other market around the world frankly, we dont have production in china for the u. S. Market, in fact back in 2018, we proactively before it was, a thing to be talking about, we started having regionalization strategy, for our supply chain, to put manufacturing and development, as close to the customer market as possible. In the United States. Well the maybe we could follow up with a another question for the record, the Chinese Research is in the Core Products of. Erickson from a software standpoint, all of our software from a development standpoint, funnels through sweden. And all of our software scan verified and signed and distributed from sweden. Its gives us stability and. You believe its phil filtered through other vendors and assistance. Most of the Development Items from a chinese perspective, is for the chinese market. From a manufacturing standpoint. So 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, and technology will find its way through products in the u. S. I would have to follow it specifically about that but we do maintain a tie change of custody are a code. And we have policies that we can track back where the specific things have been forced from. I want to switch to mr. Murphy. Nikki has over 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. Among other Chinese Government and entities. How would you answer the same questions that i as an is to . I asked just as mr. But what about security protocols you have in place in china and to do so . Sure. Thank you senator gardner. I would divide that into two parts. One is manufacturing and one is our andy. On the manufacturing side of this number of manufacturing plants around the world and depending on the recipient of the project, we would make the best choice for that. So in the case of the u. S. There is no equipment that is manufactured in china. On the er and decide as you noted, we do have research in china, but per my testimony we apply the same standards for chinese employees as we do for our other global employees, meaning they must sign ethical standards. Its a prerequisite of employment. All Software Goes through a design for security verification test. Vulnerabilities must be resolved. And documented. So the fact that they are physically located in china is a little bit in relevant in terms of producing a secure project. I apologize, i caught all others that are 30 seconds over so im going to cut myself off and i believe the next senator lee, are you ready . All right. Thank you mister chairman. And i want to thank chairman worker for holding todays issue hearing on a very important issue we all would agree with increased speeds and greater capacity well enable breakthroughs in a variety of like this from agriculture to health care. 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 security 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 any trade agreement. I think this is a great step forward. Thank you. Thank you. Mr. Bosswell, 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 . Mr. Murphy or mr. Was well, either one . Ill go. Thank you, senator. So of course 5g will become more virtualized and Software Defined. What we mean by that its intelligence in the network 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 advantages 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 arcitectures that we will role out and types of technologies we will use allows us to use additional microphone across the network, enhanced authentication and regulator Access Control front enhanced Privacy Protection for subscribers. Well agree that its important. In addition, well have greater innetwork segmentation that can provide realtime defense and improved resilience. Availability of the network, thats a key cornerstone. Of security and availability. So theres new technologies that well see. Ultimately its about how we design and build in and build in and operate those networks as well, on top of what we see in standards. Mr. Murphy. 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 revofldssolves thing. One could lower the bar, technical problem we still need to take action on the part side as both mr. Basel and myself had noted in design for security or integrity protections in the 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 wicker to the president s desk that would help Rural Telecommunications carriers remove equipment from high risk vendors like huawei and zte and replace it. With secure Telecommunications Equipment. In your testimony you suggest the the lack of availability of a properly trained workforce may impact this process to remove the compromised 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, the expensive growth of the 5g. 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 while this world, not only do you have the 600 megahertz where repurposing, youve got a lot in Rural America. They may only have access to to their tolerant facilities 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 you mister chairman. Thank you centrally. Thank you mister chairman, thank you all for being here. What i think one could fairly characterized as a broad consensus that there are and the use of huawei equipment in the networks poses a risk of access by the Chinese Government. Certainly for espionage purposes and potentially for operational control purposes. Either way this is troubling. It does seem however there is some debate among experts as to whether to whatever extent this vulnerability exists in equal parts throughout the network. There are some who would draw a distinction based on where the equipment in question is located within the network. Some have suggested that this makes a difference, and that depending on where the equipment is you might be able to manage the risk through some work rounds. So doctor lewis, we will start with you. Given your expertise and your experience in this area can you clarify whether or not there is a distinction between the court and periphery of the networks and is that the distinction that could make a difference for our security . Thank you senator. There is a distinction. Its increasing under the development of 5g. What used to be done in the core in terms of processing can now be done in some cases at the edge, giving the Computing Power that will reside in 5g networks. There is a debate over how to manage this risk and there is a third element here that might involve the use of Cloud Computing as the back bone for some telecommunications functions. I think the debate is unresolved but if i had to speak i would say if you dont want any risk, dont use huawei. If you decide to use huawei, you need to work hard to manage that risk, but i think it can be. Dont do know what the fcc is having this discussion internally in connection with rip and risk replaced planning . I think that the fcc has come to the conclusion, the correct conclusion that the best way to reduce risk in the u. S. Is to eliminate huawei equipment. Congress has come to that conclusion. Thank you sir, thank you mister chairman. So for similar reasons then you would also say the same with respect to software . If you try to impose a Software Solution to what it might mitigate your risk but it doesnt eliminate it. In order to eliminated youve got to wrap it all out. Thats correct. You can reduce risk but the only way to eliminate it is to remove the technology. The fcc is npr am to establish the rep and replace program has been criticized by some four according some two for underestimating its cost, especially when you take into account the resulting equipment options, the resulting options that will result in less equipment being available fewer options do tend to increase the price tag, and sometimes can produce additional costs and additional delays. Mr. Barry, is the rip and replace price tag of 1 billion accurate, in your estimation . Senator, thank you. Thats a tough question. Its difficult to know. Our carriers 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 also timing and flexibility. For example you mentioned availability of services, goods and equipment and the ability to build and put the new technologies in place. Its a matter of timing. The fcc, 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 the fcc 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 in the networks. How fast do you get there will depend how much cost it thank you very much. Thank you mister chairman. Thank you centrally. Mr. Peters. Thank you mister chairman and we are all witnesses to that. Thank you for some excellent testimony here today. Mr. Buzz well, its a question goes to you. With 4g, we have hardware choke points to check, maintain and improve system security. But as we push to move from hardware to software in order to allow more u. S. Companies to participate and take control of our supply chain, the question is, could you describe how companies with the same or who have the same ability to check the stopper hygiene of software is there is no hardware choke point . Thank you, senator. Yes, i would be happy to describe what we feel is a process of security, certainly our tops a priority for ericsson and my areas security of our Network Products and integrity of our supply chain. I believe it focuses on three key key pillars. Transparency, traceability, and trustworthiness. I will talk a little bit about each one if thats okay 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. 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. Senator sullivan, thank you mister chairman, i would like to thank the witnesses for the enlightening hearing. Doctor lewis, i would like to talk a little bit about the issue of reciprocity with china, last week senator holland and i talked about the true reciprocity of 2020, as you know in a whole host of areas, Media Investment economics, there is not a reciprocal relationship. They can do things over here, that we cannot do over there. And as you also know, huawei, lets face it i read the intel, they clearly ultimately are controlled by the communist party of china. Whoever says that is not the case, does not know what they are talking about. And clearly subsidized. Let me give you something i find very disturbing, that relates to reciprocity, or the lack thereof, and im wondering how we can address it. Huawei has recently began to file Patent Infringement lawsuits, in the u. S. Against his perceived or actual u. S. Competitors u. S. Companies. So specifically they fire a one billion dollar Patent Infringement case against verizon to. Saying over one billion dollars in damages. Could verizon go to a beijing court and file a Patent Infringement lawsuit against huawei . I mean everybody is laughing, whats the answer . And would they be trade fray fairly if they could. You can say no, i think i want to get to a broader point. Thats a quick answer no. Tell no . No. Its an important question, because in my view there using the openness of the u. S. , society, and our courts, which are independent, to actually as a weapon against us. So im just wondering not just for you but the rest of the panelists, the bill that senator van holland and i tried to say if we cant do it there, you should be able to do it here. It is a broad category, but should we look at for example limiting discovery . Huawei is going to try to use this, not only 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 because for me its a really big problem they wrote an oped like this is a non controlled party, do you have any thoughts on that or any of your other panelists . And then i have a question for mr. Perry. Let me thank you first senator because thank you its a crucial issue, every time i open the washington post, or last time the economist, ive seen insert from china daily, i feel we are definitely taken advantage of. Because the times are even economist, cannot do that general. So that is one of my elements and one of senator van hollen spills on the media side, saying we cant do that in china, but you do that in china you have a, vote you have a chinese journalist taking a mic in your face, can our journalist stick mics in sheeting pinks face . So sometimes if you cause one door are prone it will look to find another. If you use these patents, and discovery up associated with patents,. Do you think its opened up to broadbased discovery, even though there is no way to that we can do this with china. Ive only interviewed a few technology companies, but a lot would agree with you that it is very damaging. I would ask the other witnesses if you have a few on, that if you would like to submit it for the record, please do. I think its an important issue and its a loophole and very quickly i want to ask mr. Perry i was part of the coast sponsorship 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 thank you senator we mentioned if we can get this done in a rational and reasonable, way in middle america, these carriers are working on a shoestring. They are trying to keep connectivity while you literally restructure your entire network, its going to require a lot of flexibility. Fcc, the last order they did, on the ability it was from there was concern, whether they could maintain the network while you are transitioning. Some of us thought, that the provisions that the fcc had were retrospective in nature instead of prospective. We all have to get on the same game card on this. If youre going to maintain the networks and provide services, especially in alaska so difficult in many areas you will have to get a little bit of flexibility as you transition out so priors prioritization of how you do it, just because a generator goes out on the network it doesnt mean its a huawei product yes that generator may allow that network to operate, it may have some huawei goods and product in it, but that is not the reason you are maintaining the network. And so i think its going to take a lot of cooperative effort and the rural areas are wanted are going to be one of the most difficult to deal with. Mister chairman i know im the perhaps last witness, oh no we actually have senator scott. Here on sorry senator scott, im not an even finish my sentence then. I was going to ask for another question if you could submit additional comments on my comment about lack of reciprocity. We will be given 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 and then secondly, any of you answer, why, if youre up here in d. C. , we all what can we do to get the public educated about the risk of our huawei . Thank you senator. Thats a tough one. What you can do between courage it is to provide a fund for replacement equipment which means youve got everyones attention and yes, Everyone Wants to find six do so this is not 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 that there are some funds to actually reimburse. On the other side, i think the recognition that there is nefarious Network Elements out there that need to be replaced it is everyone as everyone thought that maybe there is a better way to do it. I think that our industry has the capability to respond in a very effective fashion, very quickly. And i think thats what we are seeing in the marketplace right now and many of those sitting at this table are providing the opportunity. And other small carriers. We really appreciate being able to know if they make a decision to go with a certain technology, its on the recommended list, they are not going to literally have to go inaudible because go under because they cant pay the bill. How can we educate People Better . Well this hearing is a good idea. We did three nationwide sessions. Trying to educate our carriers to the risk, and we had great response, not only from the department of justice, fcc and 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, a part of the ran, or a part of the core, eventually it connects to the internet. And because it may happen in washington d. C. , you can have a plant shut down in florida because of that vulnerability. Its like that chain that breaks at the weakest link and i think thats what all of these interesting discussions are trying to do right now, its fine that weakest link and fix it. We were answering senator sullivans question talking about huawei using the patent process to take advantage of the american system inaudible other countries. Is there anything that we should be doing to penalize huawei for doing that . Is there anything through the patent process that we can do that would penalize them . Is its Companies Like ericsson and nokia dont do that. For me, thats putting on my old hat has i used to be a council of the House Intelligence Committee years ago. The nefarious thing about that is that the open process, the best way to defeat that challenge, it is potentially through information thats classified and cannot be made public. And that concerns me from my older service on the hill. I dont know exactly how you wouldnt do that in a public fashion but thats a good way anyone contest 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 they 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 compaired 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 iot devices 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 about 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. Reality huaweis equipment is going to be installed some places. technical problem its 400 million in the middle class. They have a good market. They are going to have event. And somewhere around that world that equipment is going to be installed in a Global Network and we are going to be coming in contact. Rather than close a policy that is not going to be accepted by everybody we had better accept the reality we are going to come up with solutions that contemplate the reality that huaweis equipment is going to be installed in some places. Can you speak to that mr. Lewis . And then i want to start to talk to nokia and ericsson about Manufacturing Capabilities and 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 that are 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. So i often hear, well 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 ericsson 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. And we have many more forests. So we dont feel were at a technical disadvantage being able to keep on par with huawei. Chinas predatory mercantilism, 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 an economic advantage eighties snow and ericsson, how big a disadvantage is that to huawei and i will ask mr. Boswell about that one. Thank you mister senator. We certainly believe that the security and integrity off our Network Products and solutions are the best in the world. You asked about a comparison to them. As mr. Murphy said, there are formidable opponent and certainly a competitor on the world stage. Here in the u. S. Market, the u. S. Enjoys a competitive and robust marketplace though of secure and High Integrity ands trusted suppliers. And i think its important to uphold that as an example to the rest of the world. We can still go really fast on this race to 5g and do it with secure answer trusted suppliers. No offense, you are not asking the question though. Im talking about what kind of a cost disadvantage are you and your companies out becomes shy of chinas mercantile isnt and their state support. If youre talking about banks its not a big deal. If its china literally putting billions and billions of dollars into subsidizing the sale of 5g equipment thats a problem. Thats where its at 30. My problems are. The finance side of things is not my forte. Im on the security and engineering sides and ericsson. I would agree with what mr. Murphy said about we are not facing restrictions in terms of our ability to meet manufacturing demand in terms of equipment and getting it out there and then meeting the rollout demands that our customers are asking for and thats both in the u. S. And in the rest of the world. So we are able to go as fast as our customers want us to do right now. So the chairman will allow me can anyone answer that question . Anybody on the panel . I could try. So ironically, 25 years ago i moved to china at this time of the year. And i set up a Research Development lab and in my lap were two companies called huawei and then tee. And they developed a very rapidly obviously and they developed because of governance support and the provinces purchasing their equipment and research and Development Done at a very low cost if not free by universities, Government Research institutes, so at that point of time and i believe that continues today, they have very significant support from the government and different entities with china in the the execution of their execution of their product develop product developments and subsequently in the sails through the financing mechanisms. So we do have some disadvantages in that perspective. And not having equal level of support in supporting us. So in regards to what can be done to mitigate that, i think it is the cradle level playing field. Also on research and development side, to support vendors like ourselves, to have a more level playing field, both in 5g and especially moving into 6g. We are not going to steal your technology, theyre 30 below you got, i wont get that answer and ive already taken more time. Mr. Lewis i would just like to meet with you at once at some point in time. It is a 30 is accurate. I was just putting that number out. There is some evidence in some cases, it was a 50 discount, now its been much greater, so you can answer that question if you wish. We will do that off line. Go ahead senator johnson this is interesting. So answer the question, there is a long line behind you the. We need to know that, and by the way in the private sector, if youve got a supplier monopoly want to get rid of, you start supporting alternate suppliers, i think were in the same situation here, we have chinas taking the wrong path, they are not a benign force their malign force, National Security issues, we have to suppliers here, we obviously helped them here by saying we are not going to allow huawei to do this, but we might need your support from the soundbite of competing against if you have some information that would be helpful perhaps this is best in Law Enforcement and agencies. I dont know if they would agree, they would tell you if theres a chinese interest in getting into that market, and having access to telecommunications in system, they will spend whatever it takes, so it is and hundreds of millions in some cases, greater than others that is the kind of competitor you dont like competing against. We will talk often into some questions for the record thank you senator johnson, so doctor lewis it is not accurate to say that our allies have made a decision that we wish they had not had no one else to turn to thats correct, senator, as you heard from our colleagues from nokia and ericsson, there are many alternatives. I think thats an important take away from this hearing. Were gondolas and mr. It was in berry, you want to have activated 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 mercantilist mercantilist states. Emergence elizabeth was you said, this committee deactivated this word in the dictionary across the bow of every ally and it wasnt even check for politics it doesnt matter what covered and news so equipment providers cost is or i yeah is not, they cant sell in the so that the second United States. Pronunciation reactivated in that those two demands they wont have a market in the United States. And if theres any where theyre going to talk about that its here i think what you did on the we International Front is far more important than you may think. What you were willing to do here is what you want it written to do but you want to poland to do, france, all of our allies. Now you have a barricade to stand behind and say, can you follow our lead . And i think thats what you have done here. Thank you, and 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 dont want to thank all of them all of the members who have come and gone, and i think helped us strengthen our understanding. The hearing record will remain open for two weeks during this time. Senators are asked to submit any questions for the record upon receipt. Witnesses are requested to submit their answers to the committee as soon as possible. But by no later than wednesday, april 1st, 2020. Cross your heart, hope today. And so with that, i would thank the witnesses and announced that this hearing is now adjourned. That welcome back. Like may, happy birthday. Youre welcome. Its all for. You im really delighted to welcome