Proposed Senate amendment would block infrastructure-bill grant money from buying Chinese-made drones

[Drone_Pilot]

Proposed Senate amendment would block infrastructure-bill grant money from buying Chinese-made drones​

 

[dirkclod]

All I can say is let’s not buy nothing from a China. Nothing.
Then where are we going to buy about anything ?‍

 

[brett8883]

Makes sense to me.

 

[dirkclod]

Makes sense to me.

What nothing or just drones ?

 

[Drone_Pilot]

All I can say is let’s not buy nothing from a China. Nothing.
Then are where are we going to buy about anything ?‍

Everything that's electronic has some Chinese parts in it I don't know what they're going to do then I believe there's only five drone companies that are approved but they still have Chinese parts

 

[brett8883]

What nothing or just drones ?

Well I think the point of amendment is that the Chinese government could use Chinese made electronics including drones to find venerabilities in our infrastructure to cause harm. Look at the Russian hackers that held that one pipeline hostage and caused chaos throughout the country.

It really wouldn’t take much for China to insert code into a DJI firmware update to infiltrate Government networks once it was connected to one. Could be through an SD card or USB or who knows what. If we were able to anticipate all methods of attacks they wouldn’t ever happen.

As far as Chinese goods in general that’s more complex and I don’t think you can equate these two issues

 

[vindibona1]

I think there are two points to support such an amendment: 1) It would be far too easy to use Chinese drones as a "Trojan Horse" for a myriad of purposes. 2) If there is a $500 million grant, couldn't that money be spent to help develop at least one- or several US competitors to DJI, which has had financial support from the Chinese Communist Party (i.e. the Chinese Government). Wouldn't it be great if we have more than one company that we could have full faith in to build and support drones and the technologies?

 

[dirkclod]

I think there are two points to support such an amendment: 1) It would be far too easy to use Chinese drones as a "Trojan Horse" for a myriad of purposes. 2) If there is a $500 million grant, couldn't that money be spent to help develop at least one- or several US competitors to DJI, which has had financial support from the Chinese Communist Party (i.e. the Chinese Government). Wouldn't it be great if we have more than one company that we could have full faith in to build and support drones and the technologies?

Yeah it would but don’t see any US Co that has made anything that
didnt have something from China That’s what I was getting at.
And guys I jumped in this and is political and should have know better.
So this might not go much father. I hate it but see nothing that
comepares to DJI products. Some say made in USA but have foreign components in them. Offices might be here but components aren’t. Or not all of them.

 

[vindibona1]

Yeah it would but don’t see any US Co that has made anything that
didnt have something from China That’s what I was getting at.
And guys I jumped in this and is political and should have know better.
So this might not go much father. I hate it but see nothing that
comepares to DJI products. Some say made in USA but have foreign components in them. Offices might be here but components aren’t. Or not all of them.

The point I was trying to make was that the money could be allocated to help a US company develop something that COULD compete with DJI. DJI has so much of a head start on everyone that anyone wanting to compete would need a leg up. But yes, we've boxed ourselves into a corner depending on Chinese components and raw materials for many things.

 

[dirkclod]

More than a leg ?

 

[Vic Moss]

We've (DSPA) talked with two Senator's staffs about this, and were quoted by Rand Paul in his objection to it in committee. We talked with the White House this week about the Executive Order as well. This bill and the EO CANNOT pass. It would devastate SAR agencies and cause issue with many commercial pilots in the US.

There hasn't been one shred of evidence that this is an actual security issue. It's simply a political ploy (mainly by my party unfortunately) to jump on the "anti-China" bandwagon.

 

[DavidT_ NZ]

I think there are two points to support such an amendment: 1) It would be far too easy to use Chinese drones as a "Trojan Horse" for a myriad of purposes. 2) If there is a $500 million grant, couldn't that money be spent to help develop at least one- or several US competitors to DJI, which has had financial support from the Chinese Communist Party (i.e. the Chinese Government). Wouldn't it be great if we have more than one company that we could have full faith in to build and support drones and the technologies?

Unfortunately the US dollar strength makes it a difficult choice when purchasing from an overseas market, compared with what the Chinese (DJI) drones can be sold for. Maybe inside the US, it does not factor, but when imported goods are being considered, certainly here in New Zealand, the currencies are often a deciding factor. And the numbers being sold plus ongoing servicing and the cost and supply of parts. It would be nice to have a choice to buy US made, but that dollar conversion almost doubles the cost by the time products arrive here in NZ.

 

[Drone_Pilot]

We've (DSPA) talked with two Senator's staffs about this, and were quoted by Rand Paul in his objection to it in committee. We talked with the White House this week about the Executive Order as well. This bill and the EO CANNOT pass. It would devastate SAR agencies and cause issue with many commercial pilots in the US.

There hasn't been one shred of evidence that this is an actual security issue. It's simply a political ploy (mainly by my party unfortunately) to jump on the "anti-China" bandwagon

Unfortunately the US dollar strength makes it a difficult choice when purchasing from an overseas market, compared with what the Chinese (DJI) drones can be sold for. Maybe inside the US, it does not factor, but when imported goods are being considered, certainly here in New Zealand, the currencies are often a deciding factor. And the numbers being sold plus ongoing servicing and the cost and supply of parts. It would be nice to have a choice to buy US made, but that dollar conversion almost doubles the cost by the time products arrive here in NZ.

DavidT for the US it's always about the Benjamins $$$

 

[Movingpix]

Proposed Senate amendment would block infrastructure-bill grant money from buying Chinese-made drones​

Proposed Senate amendment would block infrastructure-bill grant money from buying Chinese-made drones​

I can just imagine how all our data gathered by hundreds if not thousands of us Chinese drone users end up in the servers of a hostile country just because we made ourselves dependent on them.

 

[spudster]

2) If there is a $500 million grant, couldn't that money be spent to help develop at least one- or several US competitors to DJI, which has had financial support from the Chinese Communist Party

If something like that would be proposed in the US it would first have to be approved by congress, then go though a bid process, then go though a prototype phase, then a choice to be made. After that you then have lawsuits against the awarding process by the losers. Once that is all done (maybe, if lucky, 5+ years from now) a new administration could come in and just cancel it all or use the money for something else.

Or we could be just like the Chinese Communist Party and give the money away to the president's favorite supporter that offers the highest kickback!

 

[sar104]

I can just imagine how all our data gathered by hundreds if not thousands of us Chinese drone users end up in the servers of a hostile country just because we made ourselves dependent on them.

Yes, but for the most part that's worthless data, since it's unlikely even to be sensitive, let alone classified. The original, legitimate concern was in relation to the use of DJI equipment by the US military or LE either in exercises or actual operations, where even just the flight telemetry could be used to infer sensitive information. But that clearly doesn't apply to their use by other federal agencies for non-sensitive operations - at that point it looks more like the results of lobbying by US manufacturers and/or poor understanding and decision making in DC.

 

[Drone_Pilot]

All I can say is let’s not buy nothing from a China. Nothing.
Then where are we going to buy about anything ?‍

I'm returning my TVs my toaster my modem and my wife

 

[Flying Shroppie]

First of all I have to say I'm a Brit then to add "a very old Brit" If some guy in China wants to see me flying my drone up and down the local fields looking for crop marks which might indicate pre-historic human habitation good luck to them.
I stay away from military establishments and Government property. There is still plenty to look at on this crowded island without worrying about what something a DJI employee might make of my fun flying.
Chill out guys.

 

[Flying Shroppie]

I'm returning my TVs my toaster my modem and my wife

Whats your wife done to have a return label slapped on her? I can understand the toaster, that's obviously hard core military weaponry but your wife might just object and then you are real trouble.

 

[GFields]

Well I think the point of amendment is that the Chinese government could use Chinese made electronics including drones to find venerabilities in our infrastructure to cause harm. Look at the Russian hackers that held that one pipeline hostage and caused chaos throughout the country.

It really wouldn’t take much for China to insert code into a DJI firmware update to infiltrate Government networks once it was connected to one. Could be through an SD card or USB or who knows what. If we were able to anticipate all methods of attacks they wouldn’t ever happen.

As far as Chinese goods in general that’s more complex and I don’t think you can equate these two issues

vulnerabilities