Nvidia says no 'backdoors' in chips as China questions security
The California-based company is a world-leading producer of AI semiconductors, and this month became the first company to hit $4 trillion in market value.
But it has become entangled in trade tensions between China and the United States, and Washington effectively restricts which chips Nvidia can export to China on national security grounds.
"Cybersecurity is critically important to us. Nvidia does not have 'backdoors' in our chips that would give anyone a remote way to access or control them," Nvidia said in a statement Thursday.
A key issue has been Chinese access to the "H20": a less powerful version of Nvidia's AI processing units that the company developed specifically for export to China.
Nvidia said this month it would resume H20 sales to China after Washington pledged to remove licensing curbs that had halted exports.
But the tech giant still faces obstacles. U.S. lawmakers have proposed plans to require Nvidia and other manufacturers of advanced AI chips to include built-in location tracking capabilities.
Beijing's top internet regulator said Thursday it had summoned Nvidia representatives to discuss recently discovered "serious security issues" involving the H20.
The Cyberspace Administration of China said it had asked Nvidia to "explain the security risks of vulnerabilities and backdoors in its H20 chips sold to China and submit relevant supporting materials".
China is aiming to reduce reliance on foreign tech by promoting Huawei's domestically developed 910C chip as an alternative to the H20, said Jost Wubbeke of the Sinolytics consultancy.
"From that perspective, the U.S. decision to allow renewed exports of the H20 to China could be seen as counterproductive, as it might tempt Chinese hyperscalers to revert to the H20, potentially undermining momentum behind the 910C and other domestic alternatives," he said.
Other hurdles to Nvidia's operations in China are the sputtering economy, beset by a years-long property sector crisis, and heightened trade headwinds under U.S. President Donald Trump.
CEO Jensen Huang said during a visit to Beijing this month that the company remained committed to serving local customers, adding that he had been assured during talks with top Chinese officials that the country was "open and stable".
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Indian Express
15 minutes ago
- Indian Express
As Trump's fresh threats loom, India still has a slight tariff edge over China but loses advantage with Vietnam
Despite fresh tariff escalation threats and the prospect of higher duties under the new regime announced by US President Donald Trump that could take effect from August 7, India continues to have a relative advantage on a key metric being tracked by policymakers in New Delhi – the tariff differential with China. As on August 1, China had the highest effective tariff rate (ETR) of the US's major trading partners, with India with a comparative advantage of around 20 percentage points. While tariffs on China remain at 34 per cent, the total ETR inclusive of the tariff rate at the end of 2024 came to around 42 per cent, according to Fitch Ratings' updated ETR Monitor that reflects the July 27 and July 31 announcements of new reciprocal tariff rates for most trading partners of the US. While India is slightly over 21 per cent, according to the latest data, the overall effective tariff rate for the US across all its trading partners is now 17 per cent — about 8 percentage points lower than Fitch's ETR Monitor of April 3, 2025, when higher reciprocal tariffs were originally announced, but around 3 percentage points higher than the estimate at the end of June 2025. The ETR represents total duties as a percentage of total imports and changes, with shifts in import share by country of origin and product mix. With Vietnam, though, India now has lost a slight advantage in ETR terms after additional tariffs kicked in, as against an advantage up to end-2024. This is despite Trump's rhetoric against transhipped goods and his administration's efforts to neutralise China's supply bases in ASEAN. And going forward, given Trump's frustration with India on not agreeing to his terms for a deal, this disadvantage is likely to fester. That is likely to be the case till Delhi gets a deal of some kind with Washington DC, but the situation could, however, change for the worse going forward, with Trump warning Monday that he would raise the tariff on India 'substantially' for buying Russian oil. Amid all the upheaval thrown up by America's tariff action, the assumptions that the Indian policymaker had implicitly factored in include that Washington DC will maintain a differential of 10-20 per cent in tariffs between China and countries such as India; and that a trade deal with the US needs to be clinched precisely for ensuring the gap in tariffs between India and China is maintained, even with a limited early-harvest type of deal. New Delhi did back out at the last minute from signing the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (a trade deal among Asia-Pacific countries including China) given the sensitivities of agri livelihoods. A higher-than-anticipated US tariff rate, especially on a comparative basis, could dent India's growth prospects, economists said. Though Trump did not specify the rate of penalty for India on account of Russian oil and defence imports, earlier statements made by Trump indicate that it could be to the tune of 100 per cent. This way, India stands to potentially lose the US tariff advantage vis-a-vis China at least till the time a deal is struck, even if Beijing, too, faces the same penalty for importing from Russia. China is the largest buyer of Russian oil, at about 2 million barrels per day, followed by India (just under 2 million a day) and Turkey. China had agreed to cut tariffs on US goods to 10 per cent from 125 per cent in May, while the US had agreed to lower tariffs on Chinese goods to 30 per cent from 145 per cent. But with respect to Russian oil, Trump has been singling out India, while being largely silent on China. Given how talks between Indian and US negotiators have proceeded so far, an interim deal still seems distant and is unlikely to be clinched before September, with October a possible outer deadline. Indications are a sixth round of talks between the two negotiating teams will take discussions forward on August 25. India's government has asked it various ministries to come up with potential giveaways to sweeten the deal for the upcoming negotiations. Once the official level discussions wrap up, there is a sense that a final call on the deal could come down to a conversation between the two leaders, Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Trump. For India, the best-case scenario would be to get a deal of some sort now, and then build on that in the future negotiations that could run into 2026, experts said. The effective duty on Chinese products on a landed basis across US ports in commodity categories where Indian producers are reasonably competitive is being tracked constantly. The net tariff differential with India, and how that curve continues to move, is of particular interest here, given the belief that Washington DC would ensure a reasonable tariff differential between China and India. Officials said a 10-20 per cent differential is expected to tide over some of India's structural downsides — infrastructural bottlenecks, logistics woes, high interest cost, the cost of doing business, corruption, etc. US and Chinese officials wrapped up two days of discussions in Stockholm last week, with no breakthrough announced. After the talks, China's top trade negotiator Li Chenggang declared that the two sides agreed to push for an extension of a 90-day tariff truce struck in mid-May, without specifying when and for how long this extension kicks in. Anil Sasi is National Business Editor with the Indian Express and writes on business and finance issues. He has worked with The Hindu Business Line and Business Standard and is an alumnus of Delhi University. ... Read More
Hans India
17 minutes ago
- Hans India
‘Every patriotic Indian has sought answers on China'
New Delhi: The Congress on Monday said every patriotic Indian has sought answers on China since the 2020 Galwan incident but the Modi government has chosen to obfuscate and hide the truth with its policy of 'DDLJ -- deny, distract, lie, and justify'. The opposition party also alleged that the Modi government is responsible for the biggest territorial setback India has faced since 1962, and accused it of pursuing 'normalisation' with a hostile China because of its cowardice and misplaced economic priorities. The Congress' attack on the government came on a day the Supreme Court censured Leader of Opposition in the Lok Sabha Rahul Gandhi over his alleged derogatory remarks about the Indian Army during his Bharat Jodo Yatra. The apex court, however, stayed the proceedings initiated in the matter against Gandhi before a Lucknow court. The top court told Gandhi, 'How do you get to know that 2,000 sq km of Indian territory has been occupied by Chinese? Were you there? Do you have any credible material?' Congress general secretary in-charge communications Jairam Ramesh said ever since 20 brave soldiers were martyred in Galwan on June 15, 2020, every patriotic Indian has sought answers. 'Yet instead of providing answers, the Modi government for the past five years has chosen to obfuscate and hide the truth with its policy of 'DDLJ -- deny, distract, lie, and justify',' he said. In a post on X, Ramesh went on to ask a series of questions. 'Why did the Prime Minister give a clean chit to China saying 'Na koi hamari seema mein ghus aaya hai, na hi koi ghusa hua hai' on 19 June 2020, only four days after our soldiers heroically sacrificed their lives for the country in Galwan?' Ramesh said. 'Chief of Army Staff General Upendra Dwivedi has said: 'We want to go back to the status quo of April 2020'. Does the withdrawal agreement of 21 October, 2024, take us back to the status quo?' he said. Are Indian patrols not required to take Chinese concurrence to access their Patrolling Points in Depsang, Demchok, and Chumar, whereas earlier they were able to freely exercise India's territorial rights, Ramesh added. Are Indian patrols not prevented from accessing their Patrolling Points in Galwan, Hot Spring, and Pangong Tso by 'buffer zones' that lie predominantly within the Indian claim line, he further asked. 'Was it not widely reported in 2020 that 1,000 sq km of eastern Ladakh had come under Chinese control, including 900 sq km in Depsang? Did the SP of Leh not submit a paper at the annual Director General of Police Conference in which he stated that India had lost access to 26 out of 65 Patrolling Points in eastern Ladakh?' Ramesh said.
The Hindu
17 minutes ago
- The Hindu
Figma sheds $11 billion in market value days after blockbuster IPO
Shares of Figma slumped 23% on profit taking on Monday, as euphoria over the design software firm waned days after its blockbuster initial public offering. San Francisco, California-based Figma shares had scored a massive 250% gain during their market debut on Thursday when they were priced at $33 but finished at $115.50, giving the company a market capitalisation of about $56.3 billion. Figma's market value closed at $59.5 billion on Friday after its shares rose 5.6% to $122. The shares traded as low as $92.75 on Monday, down 23%, reducing its market value to about $45.2 billion. "The excitement for Figma's business is not over, but the euphoria that's gone into its heady stock pricing seems to be deflating as those that wanted an early piece of the action bought in during market hours while some IPO recipients are probably taking sweet profits," said Michael Ashley Schulman, chief investment officer at Running Point Capital in Los Angeles. Founded in 2012 and led by CEO Dylan Field, Figma provides cloud-based collaborative design tools, with a roster of marquee clients including Alphabet, Microsoft, Netflix and Uber. Field owns about 54.2 million Figma shares worth about $5 billion after selling 2.35 million shares in the IPO. As is common in many Silicon Valley startups, Field retains 74.1% voting power over Figma given his holdings of Class B shares. Adobe had abandoned a $20 billion deal to acquire Figma in 2023 following antitrust pushback from regulators in Europe and the UK. "With Figma at a $46 billion market capitalisation, Adobe's failed buyout offer must now seem like a distant memory," Schulman added.
