????

????華為（Huawei）到底有多可怕？這家中國電信設備制造商一直面臨著來自外國政界的阻力。因為他們擔心華為會成為中國政府的特洛伊木馬。

????最近，一部分英國國會議員稱，華為在大臣們不知情的情況下提供了關鍵基礎設施；美國與澳大利亞政界人士已經阻止了華為獲得關鍵合約。政治麻煩需要多年時間才能解決，但華為可以采取措施緩解外國政要的憂慮。

????華為的增長并沒有受到這些事件的影響。自2008年以來，這家公司的收入以每年12%的平均速度增長，而且其中三分之二的收入都來自海外市場。而據電信行業協會（Telecoms Industry Association）統計，美國市場電信開支雖然高達1.1萬億美元，但華為在美國市場的銷售卻僅占公司總銷售額的15%。此外，由于美國是對全球科技基調的制定者，因此華為恐懼癥可能會蔓延到其他國家的企業和政府。

????而這種恐懼癥的根源在于中國。雖然華為聲稱公司沒有軍方背景，但中國政府特別不透明而且擁有強大的權力。同時，中國大公司進行融資所依賴的大銀行均屬國有，因此，很難想象華為這樣的大公司會拒絕聽命于中國的執政黨？而且，外國政府要想訪問華為公司在中國大陸總部內存儲的數據必將遭遇重重阻力。所以，這種不安是有理由的——不過這種不安不應該只針對華為，而是應該針對能夠接觸到重要數據的所有中國公司。

????并且，網絡從其自身的性質而言就是脆弱的。 “后門”導致數據被泄露的風險，雖然只存在于理論上。但舉證責任應該由供應商承擔。沒有任何系統是絕對安全的，因此公司和政府只能盡量減少被入侵的可能性。而如果供應商來自于以網絡間諜活動著稱的國家，抵制這些廠商在邏輯上具有一定的合理性。

????實際上，這種情況并非中國獨有：美國政府要求它最大的互聯網公司提供用戶數據所引發的憤怒就是最好的證明。既然美國能強制美國的公司提交數據，中國自然也可以。如果企業界對總體安全問題賦予越來越多的經濟價值，則華為憑借低廉的價格建立起來的競爭優勢將受到侵蝕。

????華為改變不了自己的中國血統，也改變不了人們對網絡安全的普遍擔憂。但它可以將公司治理作為改進的方向。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，但它在最新年報中所列的45名高層委員會成員全都是中國人。每一個人在公司任職時間都超過了12年。

????華為的權力也非常集中：公司98%的股份由員工持有——同樣全是中國人，這批股份被作為一個整體，結果使公司創始人任正非單獨持有的1.2%的股份，擁有不成比例的重要性。人們認為華為是一家以愛國主義和利潤雙重驅動的公司，而邀請幾位大名鼎鼎的外國科技界名流加入由中國人組成的董事會，向外國員工發放股份等做法，對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.