The FCC wants to ban Chinese tech from the undersea cables that connect the U.S. to the rest of the world — proposed new rules would 'secure cables against foreign adversaries'
FCC chairman Brendan Carr said in a statement that the commission is looking to defend U.S. infrastructure against a variety of threats.

The FCC announced yesterday that it plans to vote on new rules "to unleash submarine cable investment to accelerate the buildout of AI infrastructure, while securing cables against foreign adversaries, like China," as part of its efforts to follow the America First Investment Policy Memorandum that President Donald Trump issued in February.
“Submarine cables are the unsung heroes of global communications, carrying 99% of all Internet traffic," FCC chairman Brendan Carr said in a statement. "As the U.S. builds out the data centers and other infrastructure necessary to lead the world in AI and next-gen technologies, these cables are more important than ever."
Carr's proposal takes a two-pronged approach: one incentivizes "the use of American submarine cable repair and maintenance ships and the use of trusted technology abroad," including a proposal to "presumptively entirely exempt from Team Telecom review license applications that meet a high-level security standard."
The other disincentivizes the use of Chinese technology in global infrastructure by imposing additional restrictions on its use in any undersea cables that connect to the U.S.
"We have seen submarine cable infrastructure threatened in recent years by foreign adversaries, like China," Carr said in his statement.
Perhaps the most prominent example arrived in November 2024 when two undersea cables that connected Finland and Sweden to the rest of Europe were cut; December 2024 reports suggested that underwater footage supported claims this was a deliberate act of sabotage conducted by a Chinese bulk carrier that dragged its anchor across the cables.
There are also concerns that China might abuse the use of its technologies in these undersea cables to conduct mass spying. Reuters published a special report in 2023 about the U.S. and China's mutual distrust over the other's involvement with this critical infrastructure. "Spy agencies can readily tap into cables landing on their territory," the report said, with one expert telling the outlet that "undersea cables were 'a surveillance gold mine' for the world’s intelligence agencies."
Get Tom's Hardware's best news and in-depth reviews, straight to your inbox.
So what does Carr want to do about that? The FCC said that Carr's proposal would see it "adopt a range of measures to protect submarine cables against foreign adversaries—apply a presumption of denial for certain foreign adversary-controlled license applicants, limiting capacity leasing agreements to such entities, prohibiting the use of 'covered' equipment, establishing cybersecurity and physical security requirements, and more—all while streamlining the Commission’s license review procedures."
This wouldn't be the first time the U.S. looked to ban Chinese tech from communications infrastructure. Equipment made by Huawei and ZTE was banned from use in American telecommunications in 2019, for example, although the Pentagon argued in 2024 that it was effectively impossible not to use Huawei's products in some capacity because it's the largest telecoms provider in the world. Presumably, these restrictions would face similar obstacles if they're accepted.
Follow Tom's Hardware on Google News to get our up-to-date news, analysis, and reviews in your feeds. Make sure to click the Follow button.

Nathaniel Mott is a freelance news and features writer for Tom's Hardware US, covering breaking news, security, and the silliest aspects of the tech industry.
-
Amdlova
They are building AI data center in other places. Cheap electricity and they will need to connect it to The Mothership. So no chinese fingers allowedchaos215bar2 said:What does this have to do with AI? -
Eximo AI is also going to be constantly vacuuming the internet, so they will want the bandwidth.Reply -
PDav Virtually all the traffic over those cables, certainly all the even slightly important traffic, is encrypted. Much of it is encrypted with manually exchanged symmetric keys, not RSA encryption. Quite a bit of it is under multiple layers of encryption, which, as you might imagine, can cause issues with MTU sizes and runt packets, unless some old hand forces the junior tech who set up the tunnel to have the routers engage in packet reassembly. (Yes, I've seen these problems, in real life, on real networks.)Reply
So just how are the Chinese going to "harvest" this traffic? Are we arguing they are going to fill a couple petabytes per day just so they can decrypt all the old out of date information by tying up a trillion dollar quantum computer at some date in the future, for years? This whole FCC claim seems to be a load of the old bollocks to me. -
Li Ken-un
It’s as ridiculous as either side (I forget who made the claim) accusing the other of making NAND chips that could steal data. And just how are those NAND chips going to surreptitiously exfiltrate the data?PDav said:This whole FCC claim seems to be a load of the old bollocks to me.
We’re talking about dumb pipes and buckets here. -
GenericUsername109 How exactly do you tap into an undersea optical cable without damaging/disrupting it? How do you decrypt those jiggabytes of end-to-end encrypted traffic? This reminds me of the pandemic scare campaigns. An intimidation tactic, so that people accept Orwellian measures by our governments.Reply -
d0x360 GenericUsername109 said:How exactly do you tap into an undersea optical cable without damaging/disrupting it? How do you decrypt those jiggabytes of end-to-end encrypted traffic? This reminds me of the pandemic scare campaigns. An intimidation tactic, so that people accept Orwellian measures by our governments.
Not everything is encrypted and even when it is it can be helpful. Tapping a cable is difficult but absolutely possible.
Chinese (well CCP) tech should already be banned from any infrastructure, especially this. They backdoor everything they possibly can and will never lose the bid on a contract because every company in China is run by the government.
You want to talk orwellian? Talk CCP. -
GenericUsername109
We should not get political here, so let's just say, that communist countries are kind of expected to do this (no surprise), but not the geopolitical west. Let's not try to out-Orwell them, please. :)d0x360 said:Not everything is encrypted and even when it is it can be helpful. Tapping a cable is difficult but absolutely possible.
Chinese (well CCP) tech should already be banned from any infrastructure, especially this. They backdoor everything they possibly can and will never lose the bid on a contract because every company in China is run by the government.
You want to talk orwellian? Talk CCP. -
PDav
If you'll remember back to the opening of the Iranian Oil Bourse, on the day it opened (or possibly the day before, it's been a while), suddenly, boat anchors attacked the cables in the Gulf, and the undersea comms went down hard. At the same time, one of our electronics warfare ships was out of touch for three days. Gee, whatever could have happened?GenericUsername109 said:How exactly do you tap into an undersea optical cable without damaging/disrupting it? How do you decrypt those jiggabytes of end-to-end encrypted traffic? This reminds me of the pandemic scare campaigns. An intimidation tactic, so that people accept Orwellian measures by our governments.
It IS possible to tap a single fiber without cutting it, it has to be carefully bent past the critical angle for the fiber without breaking it, and a sensitive sensor placed where it can receive the leaking signals. This will reduce the strength of the signal on the other end, but it might not be enough of a reduction to be noticed. I'd hate to try that on every fiber in a big cable in actual field work. -
Zizi Mai I see huge potential for china to lay undersea cables connecting their internet to the non-USA world. The countries will have access to both network systems. In times of conflict, lots of propaganda will flow through those US connected cables & having alternate source will provide different perspectives on the conflict. This augur well for other countries that traditionally have be relying on US network as the sole provider & source.Reply