US lawmakers raise alarm over data collection by OnePlus without users' permission: Report
Two U.S. lawmakers have asked the US Commerce Department to investigate Chinese smartphone maker OnePlus over alleged security concerns. According to a Reuters report, representatives John Moolenaar and Raja Krishnamoorthi sent a letter to the department raising concerns that OnePlus devices may be collecting sensitive user data without consent and sending it to China-owned servers.
The letter claims that
OnePlus smartphones
may be gathering personal data, including "transfers of sensitive personal information and screenshots," without users' explicit permission. The lawmakers wrote, 'This investigation would determine the types of information being collected by OnePlus devices.'
They cited a commercial analysis that reportedly found the data collection patterns and flagged them as potentially unsafe. The information, according to the lawmakers, 'indicates' that OnePlus may be sending this data to servers owned by entities in China.
This isn't the first time the US government has raised red flags over Chinese tech companies. In 2020, Huawei faced federal charges including racketeering and intellectual property theft. The company received temporary relief from U.S. trade bans but continued to face scrutiny under national security laws.
The TikTok controversy in 2022 followed a similar path, with officials accusing the app of sharing sensitive user data with its Chinese parent company, ByteDance. At the time, U.S. FCC Commissioner Brendan Carr stated, 'It harvests swaths of sensitive data that new reports show is being accessed in Beijing.'
The call to investigate OnePlus echoes ongoing concerns over how Chinese-owned tech firms handle U.S. consumer data and whether that data could be accessed by foreign governments.
Apple iOS 26: Top 5 iOS 26 Features You NEED to See!
AI Masterclass for Students. Upskill Young Ones Today!– Join Now
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
News18
16 minutes ago
- News18
SCO Summit: India, Pakistan And The Curious Case Of Missing Fingers
How Defence Minister Rajnath Singh's SCO gambit is a case of a Bharat rising confidently, self-assuredly and surefootedly Not every agreement inked from a position of strength translates into strategic triumph. The 1971 war is a telling reminder. Bharat's decisive victory split Pakistan, created Bangladesh, and saw 93,000 Pakistani soldiers surrendering in Dhaka—one of the most humiliating defeats in modern military history. Yet, just months later, the Simla Agreement of 1972 exposed how battlefield gains could be squandered at the diplomatic table. Despite explicit warnings from then RAW chief RN Kao to 'count her fingers" after shaking hands with Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, Mrs Indira Gandhi fell for his charm, unilaterally agreeing to release the Pakistani prisoners without even securing the return of Indian soldiers languishing in Pakistani jails. If all treaties signed from a point of strength are not success stories, then all treaties not signed aren't failures either. Last week, when Defence Minister Rajnath Singh refused to sign the SCO's joint statement on countering terrorism, he not only safeguarded Bharat's core security interests but also offered a glimpse of a country willing to stand firm—alone if necessary—in pursuit of its national priorities. The Defence Minister's conduct at the SCO summit reflects a growing confidence, maturity, and self-assuredness of the country while dealing with global powers. Unlike in the past, when New Delhi would have been tempted to make a compromise for the sake of 'consensus" or 'regional solidarity", today's Bharat doesn't mind walking that extra mile on treacherous terrains if the country's long-term interest so demands. The SCO draft statement was a watered-down document that, with Chinese collusion, sought to downplay Pakistan's terror connections. It also refused to acknowledge, far less condemn, Islamabad's sinister role in not just waging but also spreading global jihad. What particularly irked New Delhi was the refusal to give the dastardly Pahalgam attack a place in the draft statement. For Bharat—having borne the brunt of Pakistan-sponsored terrorism for decades—any endorsement of such a document would have compromised its core security interests. More so in the wake of the much successful Operation Sindoor, where Bharat drew for Pakistan—and the world—a new Lakshman Rekha on terrorism. Critics argue that Bharat should reconsider its engagement with institutions like the SCO, given their internal dynamics and frequent tilt against Bharat's interests. But there is a compelling counterpoint: Bharat's very participation forces these blocs to confront their inconsistencies. By attending and then refusing to endorse a flawed document, Bharat highlighted the SCO's duplicity on terrorism. New Delhi's presence gives the SCO a democratic legitimacy, especially when most of its member states lack genuine democratic credentials. At the same time, it does moderate the innate anti-Bharat tendencies of such institutions. Yet, the incident is also a reminder of the solitary nature of Bharat's fight against Pakistan-sponsored terrorism. The West's support often stops at rhetoric. Washington's Bharat policy is still largely China-driven, focused on counterbalancing Beijing rather than addressing Islamabad's terror machinery. Europe, preoccupied with internal crises, besides being wary of disturbing its fragile equations with Islamic states, rarely ventures beyond routine condemnations, followed by an exhortation to both sides to return to talks. Russia, Bharat's time-tested partner and an SCO member, finds itself increasingly aligned with China, compelled by geopolitical realities and economic compulsions after the Ukraine war. Moscow's growing dependence on Beijing inevitably narrows the space for unequivocal support to New Delhi, especially on issues where Chinese and Pakistani interests converge. Perhaps the most sobering takeaway from the SCO saga is the fact that Bharat is, in many ways, alone in its fight against terrorism emanating from Pakistan. While Western capitals may occasionally put up rhetorical support in Bharat's favour, very few will be willing to shun, far less confront, Pakistan for its terror connections. However, the path ahead is not without challenges. Bharat will likely face more such moments where standing up for its core interests may mean standing alone. The international system is inherently transactional. Allies shift their positions, interests evolve, and moral arguments often give way to strategic calculations. This reality makes it imperative for Bharat to continue diversifying its partnerships—deepening ties not just with the Quad countries but also with nations in Europe, ASEAN, Africa, and the Middle East. Simultaneously, Bharat must persist in exposing Pakistan's duplicity on terror at every available forum, denying Islamabad the international space it needs to whitewash its record. Be that as it may, the fact of the matter is that Bharat's conduct at the SCO summit reflects the case of a confident, self-assured, and surefooted nation. Yes, there is this concern of finding itself isolated on the international platform, but one needs to see it in the larger context of Bharat rising at an unprecedented pace and scale—a pace and scale that seem to be unnerving its friends and foes alike. The next couple of decades will be critical. As Bharat continues its unprecedented economic and geopolitical ascent, it will inevitably unsettle entrenched interests, both among rivals and even some partners. How deftly Bharat navigates this phase—balancing assertion with strategic partnerships, principle with pragmatism—will determine how swiftly it cements its place as a global power. The good thing is, as Rajnath Singh's resolute stance at the SCO shows, Naya Bharat not just counts the fingers after shaking hands with other powers; it has also started making them accountable if some of the fingers go missing after the handshake! About the Author Utpal Kumar Utpal Kumar is Opinion Editor, News18 and Firstpost. He can be reached at He tweets @utpal_kumar1 First Published:
New Indian Express
36 minutes ago
- New Indian Express
Trump says Vietnam to face 20% tariff under 'great' deal
WASHINGTON: President Donald Trump announced Wednesday that he had struck a trade deal with Vietnam under which the country would face a minimum 20 percent tariff and open its market to US products. The deal comes a week ahead of Trump's self-imposed July 9 deadline for steeper tariffs on US trade partners to take effect if agreements had not been reached. Trump initially announced that the trade deal had been reached, without providing details. Shares in clothing companies and sport equipment manufacturers -- which have a large footprint in Vietnam -- rose on the news, but later declined sharply after the president released details including the continued tariffs. "It is my Great Honor to announce that I have just made a Trade Deal with the Socialist Republic of Vietnam after speaking with To Lam, the Highly Respected General Secretary of the Communist Party of Vietnam," Trump wrote on his Truth Social platform. He said that under the "Great Deal of Cooperation," imports of Vietnamese goods will face a 20 percent US tariff, while goods that pass through Vietnam from other countries -- so-called "transshipping" -- will see a steeper 40 percent tariff. "In return, Vietnam will do something that they have never done before, give the United States of America TOTAL ACCESS to their Markets for Trade," he said. "In other words, they will 'OPEN THEIR MARKET TO THE UNITED STATES,' meaning that we will be able to sell our product into Vietnam at ZERO Tariff," he added. The president said he believed US-made SUVs, "which do so well in the United States, will be a wonderful addition to the various product lines within Vietnam." Trump's announcement comes a week before the US has threatened to reimpose steep tariffs on dozens of economies, including the EU and Japan, many of which are still scrambling to reach deals that would protect them from the measures. Those higher tariffs are part of a package Trump initially imposed in April, citing a lack of "reciprocity" in trading relationships, before announcing a temporary lowering to 10 percent. Without a deal, Vietnam's "reciprocal tariff" would have risen from the baseline 10 percent to 46 percent. Since April, Washington had so far only announced a pact with Britain and a deal to temporarily lower retaliatory duties with China. Both involve the United States maintaining some of Trump's tariffs on the trading partners.
Time of India
36 minutes ago
- Time of India
On U'khand's kanwar corridor, food licence rule revives old fears
Haridwar: Days before the annual pilgrimage begins, a rule requiring all food vendors in Uttarakhand's kanwar corridor to display their licences and registration certificates — documents that include names and ownership details — has triggered panic among a set of shopkeepers. Muslim-owned eateries and stalls, some in business for decades, now find themselves hesitating. Not because the paperwork is new, but because its visibility might cost them their customers, and possibly their safety. "If our names are up there, why would the kanwariyas stop at our shops?" asked Farman, who runs a modest eatery in Jwalapur's Indira Basti. Around him, others nodded. They weren't contesting the law. Their worry was simpler: that in the charged atmosphere of a religious procession, identity could quickly become a liability. In Haridwar and nearby Roorkee, Muslim artisans have for years crafted the kanwars themselves, fastening cloth and sequins, sometimes adding miniature shrines. "Even those are being avoided now," said another resident, who asked not to be named. "So, they wear red vests, carry towels—anything to blend in." by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like How to Choose the Right Lender Lenders | Search Ads Undo It is not lost on anyone that the rule requiring licence display is an old one. Officials cite the Food Safety Act of 2006. "This is routine," said Haridwar DM Mayur Dikshit. "It has nothing specifically to do with the kanwar yatra. No one will be asked about their name or religion." On the ground, though, perception moves faster than policy. The vendors said the implications of the govt mandate are anything but routine. "There are around 50 to 60 artisans from Meerut who come here every year to make the palaki kanwar. People love it, they buy it. So why won't they buy food from us?" asked Ahsan Ansari, a local municipal councillor. The question sounded rhetorical, but behind it lay the assertion that commerce and faith have, for long, existed side by side in this city. Piran Kaliyar, a few kilometres from Roorkee, is one of the places where this tension is most palpable. The Ganga canal cuts through it, and along the left embankment, for a stretch of about three kilometres, local Muslims set up stalls during the yatra. They sell tea, fruits, and offer first-aid. In past years, the dargah of Alauddin Ali Ahmad Sabir, the 13th-century Chishti saint after whom the town is named, even hosted fruit stalls for pilgrims. Last year, there were nearly a hundred such setups. This year, hesitation has taken their place. Shah Ali Manjar Aijaz, the Sajjada Nasheen of the shrine, did not mince words. "The rule is good in principle," he said. "But the effect is that kanwariyas may avoid our stalls. Worse, if anything happens — some incident, a brawl —we could be blamed because our names are on display." He paused, then added, "It's a kind of exposure we didn't ask for." The atmosphere in Rishikesh, another key point on the yatra route, is less tense. The stretch from there to the Neelkanth Mahadev temple has no Muslim-run stalls. "We don't expect any issues here," said Lakshman Jhula SHO Santosh Paithwal. "Still, we're preparing as per the directive." Elsewhere, reactions have been polarised. Hindu Raksha Sena, a hardline outfit, hailed the order as a necessary step to protect "religious sanctity." A delegation thanked chief minister Pushkar Singh Dhami and handed over a memorandum to city magistrate Kusum Chauhan. Their concern was not about licences or business, but about faith, and how it should be "protected" during the yatra. But in places like Indira Basti and Piran Kaliyar, faith isn't the problem. The unease is quieter, the kind that rises when people feel seen not for what they do, but for who they are. A fruit vendor near the dargah, folding up his stall before dusk, said, "We've been serving them for years. Now we're afraid they'll walk past."
