- 5G rollout is underway as it’s a critical step in mobile technology.
- USA tech companies were slow in developing 5G, while Chinese giants, under state direction, bet heavily on it. Consequently, part of the American ban of Huawei and other Chinese equipment is protectionism for their tech sector.
- While there are some valid security questions remaining around 5G, they can be alleviated with future development and separating edge and core of network, as EU states are planning to do.
With the ubiquitous spread of wireless network during the past decade, the rollout of 5G promises a revolutionary network upgrade, but is getting tied down by geopolitics and great power competition.
5G is coming whether you like it or not. To put it simply, your home router won’t benefit much from 5G, but it’s crucial for your self-driving car. The main advantages are two – 5G has less latency and is capable of operating better (compared to 4G) in a crowded area with multiple wireless signals. Lastly, remember the phrase “internet of things” (IoT), that promises to connect your dishwasher, fridge and smart house with the internet? Enabling that is what 5G is designed to achieve, and while estimates vary, it is believed that 5G related tech will generate $12.3 trillion in economic value by 2035.
The rollout of 5G is, as usual for each new step of mobile technology, accompanied by a flurry of concerns, some more valid than others. For starters, there is a lot of pseudoscience scaremongering and conspiracy theories about 5G microwaving human brains, even though there is no solid scientific studies that support such an assumption. Furthermore, the underlying technology and frequency spectrum have been used for decades without any signs of harm. As many analysts argue, the unprecedented backlash is championed by social media echo-chamber groups, coupled with bad public communication from companies and lawmakers, both of whom didn’t address the public’s concerns in time, adding more fuel to the fire of scaremongering.
The next big 5G concern floated around can be summed up as great power competition in the tech sector, especially given that American tech is lagging behind in 5G. A brief historic overview of mobile development gives us a general idea of the issue at hand. GSM was developed and funded as a pan-European project that started in the early 80s and had 200 networks in 109 countries all over the world by 1997. 2G was spearheaded by European countries, while 3G was pushed by Japan and since 2011, American tech was the dominant force behind 4G rollout and use. During the same period one can also notice the ascension of Asian tech giants on 4G, but they simultaneously bet big on the development of 5G, especially Chinese firms like Huawei and ZTE.
Rapid Chinese 5G development was made easier with the “Made in China 2025” initiative launched by the Chinese party in 2015, that allocated around 400 billion dollars worth of investment into 5G development during a period of 10 years. Compared to the USA, where telecommunication companies are still paying off debt from the 4G rollout, it resulted in American companies falling behind. Consequently, at least part of the big 5G scare touted by the Americans, is a blatant attempt of protecting their own tech giants. Furthermore, it is attempting to prevent Huawei, the world’s biggest supplier of networking equipment and second largest smartphone maker, from taking a dominant share of the “expected” 12.3 trillion dollar 5G pie.
Naturally, there are some valid risks associated with 5G, as is usually the case with any new technology. Tech-geopolitics wise, 5G’s main suppliers at this time are Chinese tech companies, with Huawei at the forefront. Due to the Chinese state being close to their tech giants, as well as the wording of Chinese national security laws, which oblige any entity or individual to help maintain state security, western governments are paranoid about espionage or disruption. The Chinese party could theoretically force their companies to include back-doors for remote access. While eavesdropping is a potential yet detectable risk, it’s the threat of Beijing’s ability to disrupt communication services during a geopolitical standoff, that is keeping western intelligence services on the edge.
In the end it all comes down to how widely 5G is expected to be used – by connecting a plethora of new devices, along with backwards compatibility with 4G ones, it will be used literally everywhere. Putting aside malign state intent, 5G has overall improved standards, but still falls short in three areas. Firstly, the network is far more complex compared to 4G, which increases the number of points to attack. Secondly, with 5G being backwards compatible, it’s prone to 4G exploits that remain unaddressed. Lastly, 5G committees were lax and allowed network operators to not implement some security features due to costs. Broadly speaking, development, performance, cost, and time to market were all prioritized over security.
Currently, multiple government agencies are already searching for critical exploits, and as is usual with technology, some issues will get addressed over time. America’s bully approach versus Huawei, as well as the unpredictability of Trump’s foreign policy, is also backfiring. The debate split opinions within NATO members, with some following American ban (eg: Australia), while the EU considered it an overreaction. Not only was a European report ambivalent by only mentioning a potential supplier risk, but Germany as well as the United Kingdom gave a partial go-ahead to 5G rollout with Huawei equipment. The decision was heavily pushed by European network carriers, who were already deploying and testing 5G parts and a reversal would cost money and time. The allowed deployment comes with caveats though – Huawei parts can only be used in the access network (antennae), while they can’t be used for the network’s core which manages access and authentication.
As was mentioned before, 5G is getting rolled out en masse as it represents a foundation for future development of “internet of things”. While some security concerns remain, the fact is that hacking has been happening since the advent of the internet, regardless of which era tech was in use at the time. Chinese, Russian and American hackers battled it out during 2, 3 and 4G, even without any “theoretical” backdoors planted in hardware. Lastly, one can argue that some amount of network vulnerabilities (still unpatched 4G exploits; prioritizing faster development and lower cost over 5G security) is desirable to all state actors – eastern and western – since they are all happy to have some exploits to snoop with.