Array
(
    [content] => 
    [params] => Array
        (
            [0] => /forum/index.php?threads/chinese-firms-are-evading-chip-controls.18616/
        )

    [addOns] => Array
        (
            [DL6/MLTP] => 13
            [Hampel/TimeZoneDebug] => 1000070
            [SV/ChangePostDate] => 2010200
            [SemiWiki/Newsletter] => 1000010
            [SemiWiki/WPMenu] => 1000010
            [SemiWiki/XPressExtend] => 1000010
            [ThemeHouse/XLink] => 1000970
            [ThemeHouse/XPress] => 1010570
            [XF] => 2021370
            [XFI] => 1050270
        )

    [wordpress] => /var/www/html
)

Chinese Firms Are Evading Chip Controls

Fred Chen

Moderator

This past fall, the Biden administration moved decisively to cut off China’s supply of powerful chips, targeting the cutting-edge semiconductors used for supercomputing and artificial intelligence. However, recent reporting points to blacklisted Chinese entities—including China’s top nuclear weapons lab—gaining access to restricted chips through a combination of smuggling and renting through the cloud. Smuggling also appears to be possible for low-level vendors: Other recent reporting found that Chinese small businesses are smuggling restricted chips through neighboring countries, and that 40,000 to 50,000 of these chips are already in China. If the administration wants to succeed in holding a chokepoint over national security-sensitive supercomputing, the U.S. agency tasked with export control enforcement (the Bureau of Industry and Security, or BIS) will have to get more creative.

To address these problems, we propose a random chip sampling program. What would this look like? First, require that sellers of controlled chips register their sales with the BIS using unique IDs assigned during manufacturing. Then place requirements on sellers to notify the BIS about any secondhand sales and any cases where chips are destroyed or lost. Finally, to stop chips from leaking into China, conduct randomized end-use checks to confirm the current registered owner of a chip actually has it in their possession. The BIS has historically done this with larger devices, such as lithography machines (a category of manufacturing equipment crucial for producing advanced chips). But given that millions of controlled chips are sold each year, BIS officials couldn’t hope to keep tabs on each one manually. Instead, by checking the location of a small but random share of all sold chips, the BIS would catch (or better yet, deter) any supercomputer-scale smuggling of chips to China. Thankfully, the most concerning use cases for these chips, such as building a next-generation authoritarian version of ChatGPT or conducting advanced ballistic simulations, require thousands of chips running continuously for weeks. We estimate that with 5,000 inspections a year, the BIS could achieve greater than 90 percent confidence that no smuggling of chips at this scale was occurring.


However, there is another loophole: virtual access through cloud computing services. For example: Nvidia to Rent Out AI Supercomputing Power to Chinese Companies, Founder Says Service providers are expected to implement guardrails to help prevent cloud chips from being used for applications that threaten U.S. national security.
 
Nvidia chips keep being found in Russian missiles, and the latest one had serial numbers from 2023.

Jetson SoCs aren't something as high volume, or wide use as gaming video cards. The diversion is somewhere obvious, with most likelly being Nvidia's mainland China distributor.
 
  • Like
Reactions: VCT
It's sad but seems Nvidia is trying to exploit every possible legal loophole to continue shipping to China.

No surprise Xi turns around and immediately ship to BFF Putin...
 
Was at a US Govt seminar a couple of weeks ago on the subject of Strategic Goods trade and staying on the right side of the law.

If the Speakers were to be believed the US Govt and others in the region, ASEAN, are all over this topic.

However the use of the dual-use list seems to be the prime way to circumvent the rules at this moment in time.

There does seem to be quite the business in doing outsourced due diligince on potential customers though.
 
I don't see the logic behind this.

There will always be someone/some group in surrounding countries like Vietnam/Kazakhstan/etc. willing to smuggle products at a high enough X% markup. They don't care about any consequences because even a few dozen smuggling runs would be enough to retire very comfortably.

Even if somehow 100% control of the end user is attained, there's the rest of ASEAN, India, Central Asia, Middle East, Africa, etc... There are probably even organized groups within the US willing to do so.

The likely outcome is that restrictions will enrichen certain traders in surrounding countries and price it out of the budget of most individuals and smaller private organizations in China, but I don't see how that has any chance of stopping the flow of goods.
 
Last edited:
I don't see the logic behind this.

There will always be someone/some group in surrounding countries like Vietnam/Kazakhstan/etc. willing to smuggle products at a high enough X% markup. They don't care about any consequences because even a few dozen smuggling runs would be enough to retire very comfortably.

Even if somehow 100% control of the end user is attained, there's the rest of ASEAN, India, Central Asia, Middle East, Africa, etc... There are probably even organized groups within the US willing to do so.

The likely outcome is that restrictions will enrichen certain traders in surrounding countries and price it out of the budget of most individuals and smaller private organizations in China, but I don't see how that has any chance of stopping the flow of goods.
I mostly agree. The notion of organized groups in the US selling to China is unlikely though. Getting caught would result in a lot of federal prison time.
 
Risk Reward?
My advice is to never mess with the Department of Justice and federal judges. They are serious people. The DOJ has more resources to support a case than any state or local prosecutors, they have the FBI to investigate for them, and federal sentences can be long and harsh, especially WRT national security issues. Selling high-end GPUs, for example, to China would probably not end well for any US citizen.
 
My advice is to never mess with the Department of Justice and federal judges. They are serious people. The DOJ has more resources to support a case than any state or local prosecutors, they have the FBI to investigate for them, and federal sentences can be long and harsh, especially WRT national security issues. Selling high-end GPUs, for example, to China would probably not end well for any US citizen.

Agreed , one should not mess with authority.

However what is the difference between sanctioned product and drugs for example?

Folk will always do what they think they can make money doing.
 
My advice is to never mess with the Department of Justice and federal judges. They are serious people. The DOJ has more resources to support a case than any state or local prosecutors, they have the FBI to investigate for them, and federal sentences can be long and harsh, especially WRT national security issues. Selling high-end GPUs, for example, to China would probably not end well for any US citizen.

So far, the risk-reward ratio been extremely low in USA. Tell as single enforcement action against a high profile company where a C-level ended up with jail time, while it's statistically improbably with the size of the industry USA has.

US govt attorneys are very reserved with bringing charges against the industry when the political winds aren't blowing the right way. Bankers for example started to actually getting behind the bars only after the left swing of the establishment, and a lot of very public attacks. Nobody is verbally attacking Nvidia now, nor MiiVii (while it's not even an American co).

It's very likely current brouhaha over Haas will end up in a much less dramatic way than if they were caught diverting equipment, to say, Iran, because Iran triggers the current left wing establishment more. Probably they will get a friendly call from the authority with offer to collaborate on trade diversion issues, rather than a 3 am commando raid, and a material support + high treason combo.
 
Last edited:
Agreed , one should not mess with authority.

However what is the difference between sanctioned product and drugs for example?

Folk will always do what they think they can make money doing.
Illegal drugs in the US are a much bigger and diverse problem than the entire high-end chip market, no less just the relatively small number of high-end chips getting to embargoed countries. Hundreds of thousands of people are involved in the drug trade worth over $150B/yr, according to the Rand Corp think tank. Drugs don't have traceable serial numbers and are produced by criminal and hidden distributed labs by highly armed cartels, and there are thousands of people in the sales channels. The two problems are not comparable in required manpower or risk of violence.
 
Last edited:
So far, the risk-reward ratio been extremely low in USA. Tell as single enforcement action against a high profile company where a C-level ended up with jail time, while it's statistically improbably with the size of the industry USA has.

US govt attorneys are very reserved with bringing charges against the industry when the political winds aren't blowing the right way. Bankers for example started to actually getting behind the bars only after the left swing of the establishment, and a lot of very public attacks. Nobody is verbally attacking Nvidia now, nor MiiVii (while it's not even an American co).

It's very likely current brouhaha over Haas will end up in a much less dramatic way than if they were caught diverting equipment, to say, Iran, because Iran triggers the current left wing establishment more. Probably they will get a friendly call from the authority with offer to collaborate on trade diversion issues, rather than a 3 am commando raid, and a material support + high treason combo.
Are you saying there are conspiracies that reach into the executive levels of Nvidia, AMD, and Intel?
 
Are you saying there are conspiracies that reach into the executive levels of Nvidia, AMD, and Intel?
You can call "a conspiracy of inaction" a conspiracy, then yes. The press is exploding with allegations of American products being diverted to Russia. Haas though is seemingly a much more deliberate diversion effort case.

Govt should simply not let them exploit the benefit of doubt, and explicitly outlaw legal presence for American companies in Russia, regardless of whether they actually do prohibited activities there or not.
 

SK Hynix investigating use of its chips in new Huawei phone​


SK HYNIX has opened an investigation into the use of its chips in the latest phone from Huawei Technologies after a teardown of the device revealed its memory and flash storage inside.

Shenzhen-based Huawei’s Mate 60 Pro uses Hynix’s LPDDR5 and Nand flash memory, said TechInsights, who conducted the teardown of the device for Bloomberg News. The handset’s components are almost entirely provided by Chinese suppliers and Hynix’s hardware is an isolated example of materials sourced from overseas, according to TechInsights.

Icheon-based Hynix “no longer does business with Huawei since the introduction of the US restrictions against the company and, with regard to the issue, we started an investigation to find out more details”, a company spokesperson said in a statement to Bloomberg News on Thursday (Sep 7). “SK Hynix is strictly abiding by the US government’s export restrictions.”


Hynix shares in Seoul erased gains on the day after the statement. A Huawei representative did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

It’s unclear how Huawei may have procured the memory chips from Hynix, which makes most of its semiconductors at plants in China. One possibility is that Huawei may be tapping a stockpile of components it accumulated as far back as 2020 before the full set of US trade curbs had been imposed on it. International suppliers of advanced technology have been prohibited from supplying Huawei over the past three years by US trade curbs, implemented on fears of the hardware being used to aid China’s military. BLOOMBERG

 
I wonder if they will be able to investigate all possible 3rd party channels. Or they can get hold of the actual dies and confirm the markings.
 
 
Having known some interesting people, anything can be done for a price, sometimes even at a surprisingly low price. Some of this applied to one of the biggest tech companies in the nation. Finding the right leverage is the key.
 
Back
Top