????

????華為（Huawei）到底有多可怕？這家中國(guó)電信設(shè)備制造商一直面臨著來(lái)自外國(guó)政界的阻力,。因?yàn)樗麄儞?dān)心華為會(huì)成為中國(guó)政府的特洛伊木馬,。

????最近，一部分英國(guó)國(guó)會(huì)議員稱,，華為在大臣們不知情的情況下提供了關(guān)鍵基礎(chǔ)設(shè)施,；美國(guó)與澳大利亞政界人士已經(jīng)阻止了華為獲得關(guān)鍵合約。政治麻煩需要多年時(shí)間才能解決,，但華為可以采取措施緩解外國(guó)政要的憂慮,。

????華為的增長(zhǎng)并沒(méi)有受到這些事件的影響。自2008年以來(lái),，這家公司的收入以每年12%的平均速度增長(zhǎng),，而且其中三分之二的收入都來(lái)自海外市場(chǎng)。而據(jù)電信行業(yè)協(xié)會(huì)（Telecoms Industry Association）統(tǒng)計(jì),，美國(guó)市場(chǎng)電信開(kāi)支雖然高達(dá)1.1萬(wàn)億美元,，但華為在美國(guó)市場(chǎng)的銷(xiāo)售卻僅占公司總銷(xiāo)售額的15%。此外,，由于美國(guó)是對(duì)全球科技基調(diào)的制定者,，因此華為恐懼癥可能會(huì)蔓延到其他國(guó)家的企業(yè)和政府。

????而這種恐懼癥的根源在于中國(guó),。雖然華為聲稱公司沒(méi)有軍方背景,，但中國(guó)政府特別不透明而且擁有強(qiáng)大的權(quán)力。同時(shí),，中國(guó)大公司進(jìn)行融資所依賴的大銀行均屬國(guó)有,，因此，很難想象華為這樣的大公司會(huì)拒絕聽(tīng)命于中國(guó)的執(zhí)政黨,？而且,，外國(guó)政府要想訪問(wèn)華為公司在中國(guó)大陸總部?jī)?nèi)存儲(chǔ)的數(shù)據(jù)必將遭遇重重阻力。所以，這種不安是有理由的——不過(guò)這種不安不應(yīng)該只針對(duì)華為,，而是應(yīng)該針對(duì)能夠接觸到重要數(shù)據(jù)的所有中國(guó)公司,。

????并且，網(wǎng)絡(luò)從其自身的性質(zhì)而言就是脆弱的,。 “后門(mén)”導(dǎo)致數(shù)據(jù)被泄露的風(fēng)險(xiǎn),，雖然只存在于理論上。但舉證責(zé)任應(yīng)該由供應(yīng)商承擔(dān),。沒(méi)有任何系統(tǒng)是絕對(duì)安全的,，因此公司和政府只能盡量減少被入侵的可能性。而如果供應(yīng)商來(lái)自于以網(wǎng)絡(luò)間諜活動(dòng)著稱的國(guó)家,，抵制這些廠商在邏輯上具有一定的合理性,。

????實(shí)際上，這種情況并非中國(guó)獨(dú)有：美國(guó)政府要求它最大的互聯(lián)網(wǎng)公司提供用戶數(shù)據(jù)所引發(fā)的憤怒就是最好的證明,。既然美國(guó)能強(qiáng)制美國(guó)的公司提交數(shù)據(jù),，中國(guó)自然也可以。如果企業(yè)界對(duì)總體安全問(wèn)題賦予越來(lái)越多的經(jīng)濟(jì)價(jià)值,，則華為憑借低廉的價(jià)格建立起來(lái)的競(jìng)爭(zhēng)優(yōu)勢(shì)將受到侵蝕,。

????華為改變不了自己的中國(guó)血統(tǒng)，也改變不了人們對(duì)網(wǎng)絡(luò)安全的普遍擔(dān)憂,。但它可以將公司治理作為改進(jìn)的方向,。雖然華為三分之一的員工和三分之二的收入都在海外市場(chǎng)，但它在最新年報(bào)中所列的45名高層委員會(huì)成員全都是中國(guó)人,。每一個(gè)人在公司任職時(shí)間都超過(guò)了12年,。

????華為的權(quán)力也非常集中：公司98%的股份由員工持有——同樣全是中國(guó)人，這批股份被作為一個(gè)整體,，結(jié)果使公司創(chuàng)始人任正非單獨(dú)持有的1.2%的股份,，擁有不成比例的重要性。人們認(rèn)為華為是一家以愛(ài)國(guó)主義和利潤(rùn)雙重驅(qū)動(dòng)的公司,，而邀請(qǐng)幾位大名鼎鼎的外國(guó)科技界名流加入由中國(guó)人組成的董事會(huì)，向外國(guó)員工發(fā)放股份等做法,，對(duì)于改變這種觀念極有幫助,。

????How scary is Huawei? The Chinese telecom equipment maker has met resistance from politicians who fear it could be used as a Trojan horse by the Chinese government.

????Most recently a group of UK parliamentarians complained the group supplied critical infrastructure without ministers' knowledge; American and Australian politicians have already blocked Huawei from key contracts. The political tribulations will take years to resolve, but there are ways to dial down the fear.

????It's not that Huawei's growth has suffered. The company's revenue has increased by 12% a year on average since 2008, and two-thirds of it comes from outside China. Still, the United States represents just 15% of the group's total sales, despite representing a market with $1.1 trillion of telecoms spending in 2012, according to the Telecoms Industry Association. Moreover, since America sets the tone for global technology, Huawei-phobia could filter down to businesses

????The main reason for that phobia is China. While Huawei says it has no links to the military, China's government is particularly untransparent and powerful. Even the big banks on which China's large companies depend for financing are state-owned, and it's unthinkable that a company as big as Huawei could resist an order from the Communist Party. Equally, foreign governments would struggle to access data stored in the company's mainland headquarters. So some disquiet is justified -- though the same should apply to any Chinese company with access to important data.

????Networks, too, are by their nature vulnerable. The risks from "back doors" through which data can be plucked out, remain theoretical. But the burden of proof is on the supplier. No system is perfectly secure, so companies and governments can only work on reducing the probability of an incursion. Avoiding a foreign supplier whose home country is known for international cyber-espionage has some logic.

????True, China isn't alone: witness the furor over U.S. government requests for user data from some of the country's biggest internet companies. But if America can strong-arm companies into handing over data, so can China. If companies put more and more financial value on security overall, it is likely to erode the advantage Huawei gets from being cheaper than its rivals.

????Huawei can't do much about its Chinese origins, or broader concerns about network security. Corporate governance, however, is an area where it could use a major upgrade. While a third of its employees and two-thirds of its revenue are outside the People's Republic, all 45 of the people who staff Huawei's top committees, as listed in its latest annual report, are Chinese. Every one of them has served at the company for more than 12 years.

????Power is concentrated, too: the 98% of shares owned by employees -- again, all Chinese -- are treated as a single block, which gives founder Ren Zhengfei's separate 1.2% stake disproportionate significance. Popping a couple of big-name foreign tech heavyweights on the Chinese board, and giving foreign employees a stake, would go a long way to combating perceptions that Huawei is fuelled by patriotism as much as profit.