ADI Promotes Human Rights Abusing Dahua
By John Honovich, Published Feb 26, 2021, 09:23am ESTPublicly Traded Resideo's ADI division, the security industry's largest distributor continues to promote 'stocking up' on Dahua despite Dahua's human rights abuse sanctions and growing evidence of Dahua's ongoing persecution of ethnic minorities.
Inside this note, we share a response from ADI to IPVM, a complaint to Resideo's Supplier Code of Conduct, and Resideo's ignoring the 'red flag' status of Dahua.
Red Flag
Since October 2019, business dealings with Dahua have carried a red flag:
Ongoing Persecution
While industry partners of Dahua have tried to ignore this as 'politics', an investigation by the LA Times and IPVM shows that Dahua has continued to develop and market ethnic oppression technologies throughout 2020.
ADI Top Brands
Despite this, Dahua is still listed as one of the 12 'Top Brands' for ADI in the USA:
Response ADI To Uyghur Warning Report
ADI responded generically to IPVM about Dahua's Uyghur Warning evidence saying:
ADI is committed to providing exceptional service to our customers. We will continue to monitor the situation and remain committed to comply with law and regulations.
Submission Violating Resideo Supplier Code of Conduct
Resideo maintains a Supplier Code of Conduct covering various ethical and human rights violations.
IPVM submitted a complaint about Dahua to Resideo's Integrity & Compliance team who acknowledged receipt:
Thank you for reporting your concern to the Resideo Integrity & Compliance team. Resideo takes all reported concerns seriously. Your concern will be reviewed by the appropriate person in the region (or business) for handling.
Stock Up on Dahua
At the same time, Dahua was featured amongst ADI USA's 'stock up and save' promotion this week:
Normalizing Human Rights Abuses
ADI is normalizing human rights abuses. As the largest security systems distributor, ADI's continuing to carry and feature Dahua, despite its ongoing human rights abuses and its repeated deception on these matters, signals to security industry participants that abusing human rights and lying about it is business as usual.
Vote / Poll
1 report cite this report:
Comments (96)
Must be a real slow news day at the IPVM offices.
News? Really? They are not a news organization; those no longer exist. We know what ADI is doing, many of us use them as vendors every day. And will continue to. "Keep up the good work ADI! Ignore the complainers, they will eventually find something else to distract them - watch the tv networks catering to the 50+ crowd playing tv shows of the 60's, 70's & 80's. There are any number of commercials every 10 minutes describing human and animal rights abuses in every corner of the world, begging for our time, and more importantly, money, to "fix" it. Spend more time worrying about what is going on in your own respective countries first. Don't forget about that reverse mortgage. Fix your own problems, then worry about lost causes like abuses in cultures you have no understanding of." We may begin hearing some say. Maybe they're right, maybe not. "Got your ethnic human rights under control in your own country? Give it a try sometime" - may be heard echoing about. Boycott ADI, along with the mfg of MR. Potato head. Let's see how that affects their actions. An experiment of sorts. So much energy to waste, so little time. You only have so many years available to you; use them wisely... I just wasted 5 minutes....This won't stop; your efforts are futile, you're intelligent, start getting it - many beg. Take the $3million you make from us annually and put it to better use. Test "things", tell us what you think about it; this is what we want - some say. Stop wasting our time with issues that we will refuse to begin to do enough about to make a difference - others emplore you. Anyone here that cares enough to take any actions that make a real difference, will. I don't have enough time and neither do you. - say some of our peers. Worry about your own backyard first - fix it, or give it a good old college try. May be unhelpful, but it's right...you know it is.
| 02/27/21 07:48am
We do not subscribe and pay monthly subscriptions to tell us about human rights. If we need that will go to CNN and it's available for free.
Well, now, not exactly for "free"; the cost of therapy required after watching a maximum dose of 5 minutes of CNN could potentially approach multiple thousands of dollars.. And remember; CNN has demonstrated many times that they are only interested in human rights or ethnic abuses when it suits "their narratives and/or very specific ethnicities", not because they(the abuses) are actually wrong...Please be careful; overexposure to CNN and other so-call news organizations may be dangerous to one's mental health (imo).
| 02/27/21 08:25am
Bottom line this platform is supposed to be neutral. So if the USA bans certain products we must all start shaking. I am worried about this kind of behavior.IPVM is the only technical site that we really find very useful information about Security products . Most of the guys that come here are engineers and solutions architects. We will see past this marketing and it's embarrassing. Most of us don't care whether the product is Chinese or American. As long as it works.
Any of us that purchase Chinese-company based products (and we all do)must agree with that statement, mostly. But I would still prefer American, if comparable. Btw - John just updated the IPVM "about" section of the website and you may want to take a peek at the "neutrality" part. Ethics does appearently have some weight to the viewpoints expressed by them, but only "officially" for a week or so now(even though he says they've always been that way...blah..blah..and so on..)
| 02/27/21 08:43am
If I may ask . How did you come to the decision of preferring American products to Chinese?
John just updated the IPVM "about" section of the website and you may want to take a peek at the "neutrality" part.
There is no 'neutrality' part (nor do I recall there ever being any). Are you confusing that with 'independent', which is prominent on our about page?
I was also wondering if maybe ADI is attempting to unload all of the surplus inventory they have already invested in, but not necessarily inviting their customers to create new orders requiring the distribution channel to purchase yet even more inventory. Similar to a going, going gone sale. Buy it up so we don't have to endure the losses. Why should ADI have to take the loss? Maybe sell off the existing stock then keep an eye on those human rights abusers; you know, the abuses will end annnnny day now... waiting....still waiting....ok, and yet, still waiting....any day now they will "fix" their culture...come on PRC, you can do it...
02/27/21 07:42am
IPVM is biased toward Western products. This kind of report can only fool the ignorant.
May want to watch how you use thee word "biased" John will reference the dictionary and attempt to correct you. Maybe choose a different word to convey a perfectly reasonable thought that everyone else understands(we understand). IPVM may not have a predisposition for using western products ( although I wouldn't hold that against them in the slightest - I would purchase quality, cost competitive, American made products all day long, as long as union labor was not used - union and quality don't belong together especially on Monday or Friday production runs). You may end up losing less hair in the end. Don't pull it all out in the "control of the language debate".....thanks John; I'm now a member of Hair Club for Men (or whatever the language police call us today - humans with "male-like" appendages maybe). 12th floor air may be a bit thin.
| 02/27/21 08:34am
I mean exactly biased. "biased can just mean having a preference for one thing over another".
The notion that the USA can be the moral compass for everyone is wrong and those days are long gone. It hinders progression and technology advancement. We are tired of it. I do not want to see these kinds of articles on IPVM. They will end up losing the plot.
I need to look at an IPVM report and believe that it is accurate and I can make a decision based on the accuracy of the research done instead of second-guessing myself thinking maybe the report is in favor of a certain manufacturer.
Can you provide an example of how IPVM is biased? I have read many reviews based on testing results. How is that biased?
The fight against dahua and hikvision didn't start now.
In the CCP, everyone is valued. Some are worth more $$ than others.
The 10% of dealers that that say yes to buying slave products from the CCP must be hoping that they can get a lung, heart, kidney or liver from the CCP. Every Uyghur is being genetically tested to see if their organs are a match for someone in the West. So think about it, a Uyghur might be worth $200,000 when parted out. Various observers have reported that there is no anesthesia used when they chop these poor people up to steal their organs. The detailed reports of gang raping of Uyghur women are disgusting enough. Are we also going to buy slave produced goods from the CCP? This is merely rewarding the new Nazis for their atrocities and experimenting on the innocent.
I think most of you that are attacking John should know from what I have seen he is not anti-china or pro-western companies. If he was that bias he would have banned some of you for some of the ridicilous comments. How would any of you feel if some of the people in those Chinese concentration camps were family members or friends? You understand there is a holocaust happening there right? The U.S. and recently Canada has declared it as a genocide. There is a difference between Chinese state owned companies like Hikvision and Dahua and Private Chinese companies like Uniview, TVT, and ZKTeco to name a few. He has not attacked Uniview (there is no evidence they are involved in the human rights violations, they are not owned by the PRC, and the recent tamper proof testing done by IPVM showed Uniview as a clear winner). And I do not recall IPVM slandering those mentioned Chinese companies.
The fact that some of you are so obsessed, loyal, or just plain lazy to learn and sell a new product is alarming (no pun intended). How do you expect your customers to evolve if you can not?? Instead of wasting time complaining about all these news and writing about it, learn an alternative product or do not read the article and move right along. If our government is ok with a Chinese brand that is NDAA compliant but not with Hikvision or Dahua maybe that should make you think about it longer and actually appreciate the work IPVM does to protect our industry. Most integrators do not know about this who do not have IPVM. I heard about one not being paid for a job they did on a federal site because they used a Hikvision OEM. If that is not worth the membership alone for this valuable infomration then I do not know what is!
My friend has a prominent company, is as white as white can get, and said he felt uncomofortable supporting Hikvision and switched to Uniview a year ago. Loves the product and I was also refered by a friend to the brand. That says something.
Since using Uniview we have gotten more referals from end users than any other brand we installed in the past. We also like Hanwha and use it when price is not an issue. All of our smartphones have internals from China. I do not see John being Pro-western. He and his team shares facts and the IPVM Calculator has us winning projects against the biggest names in the industry so thank you for that. The studies for favourability show Axis winning almost every year and are they American? No!
I do not write much on here but I was getting tired of the complaining. Really? you are going to complain about what news stories are on here when there is a damn genocide going on and Hikvision and Dahua are helping to make it happen? The sattire in all of this is so 2020.
That is by far the stupidest analogy I have ever heard in my life. "Arms" are all weapons. It is not like some are not and some are. Many countries make them. That is their purpose. Period. If there was a specific U.S. government owned weapon that identified and only killed a specific race for example? Now that would be a fair analogy. Selling arms to another country is not a security threat for that country. Having video surveillance from a government owned country that is in a trade war is a whole different story altogether.
There are thousands of camera manufacturers in the world and ONLY TWO that use technology to make people who are walking down the street disappear by notifying the police of their presence due in fact of their ethnicity and religion. On top of having the ability if they really wanted to...to disable or peek into all the cameras and blame it on a hack. Can you imagine what the federal government buildings having that risk would mean in case of a war?
And I did not say I am ok that the U.S. being the number 1 arms dealer in the world. But they do not have bullets that automatically kill a specific ethnic minority while knowing to only stun and not kill everyone else through some technology. If you want an analogy I just gave you one without being anal about it.
I think we have to separate out the manufacturer of the tool and the user of the tool.
Dahua (as far as I'm aware) do not actually abuse human rights. Dahua (as far as I am aware) supply equipment to the Chinese authorities and that the Chinese authorities abuse human rights.
Facial recognition software (and indeed racial profiling software) are not themselves abuses of human rights. If the Chinese authorities decide to use them for abusive purposes it seems genuinely harsh to label the supplier of the equipment as an abuser of human rights.
Personally, I'd be a lot more comfortable if these reports described Dahua as a manufacturer or surveillance equipment used by the Chinese authorities for human rights abuses.
It seems very convenient that Dahua (and Hikvision) are always pulled out for special attention when very, very, few surveillance cameras and recorders are made anywhere except China. And if we were really concerned about human rights abuses we'd have to boycott everything from China. And that wouldn't just be Dahua and Hikvision.
Dahua (as far as I'm aware) do not actually abuse human rights. Dahua (as far as I am aware) supply equipment to the Chinese authorities and that the Chinese authorities abuse human rights.
No, e.g., Dahua builds and operates police stations in Xinjiang. And Dahua builds Uyghur warning technology for the Police for the clear purpose of suppressing ethnic minorities.
To be clear, I agree with you on the principle that if someone sells a generic device to a customer, without direct customization or implementation, they should not be held responsible. For example, imagine Hikvision (or Axis or Avigilon) cameras are sold direct (theoretically) to a guy who turns out to be a serial killer. Unless Hikvision (or Axis or Aviiglon) knew this person was a serial killer, it's not the manufacturer's fault.
In this case, Dahua knows full well what "Uyghur Warning" technology is being used for and they know full well what those police stations they are operating are used for, etc.
I’m happy to accept what you say at face value and I have no doubt that you believe what you write. Unfortunately, by any standard of proof, you wouldn’t get a conviction. You have heresay and circumstantial evidence. All you can prove is that Dahua work with and manufacture equipment for people who are alleged to be committing human rights abuses in China.
If you’d written what you wrote in the Hikvision/Guardian piece about my company, we would have sued and we’d have won. Because you’re making too many leaps from what people suspect to what can be proved.
My real challenge with your stance is that you don’t take the same position with all Chinese manufactured goods. Dahua, Hikvision and Uniview are not doing this because their staff hate Uygurs (although maybe that’s true) but rather because it’s the position of the Chinese government. And because China is a communist dictatorship none of these companies has clean hands. And the even sadder fact is that if you tried to make any kind of system without any Chinese components, you’d REALLY struggle.
We lost the ability to leverage anything with regard to China when we allowed the vast majority of our manufacturing base to be relocated there.
I’m delighted to engage on any subject. I love the whole IPVM ecosystem but I do think you’re pushing too hard against Dahua and Hikvision.
by any standard of proof, you wouldn’t get a conviction
It was accepted by the US government:
Concluding:
And the Norwegian Ethics Council investigated Hikvision and by their standard of proof found Hikvision's human rights absues to be 'ongoing':
For sure, maybe it does not make your standard of proof but there are others that it does pass.
Once again, the US is not the moral standard as relates to human rights abuses. Pot coating the kettle black.... I say so what to what the US government may "find" they are far from innocent.
the US is not the moral standard as relates to human rights abuses.
And your counter to Norway coming to the same conclusion is?
And the Norwegian Ethics Council investigated Hikvision and by their standard of proof found Hikvision's human rights absues to be 'ongoing':
The key word in the US statement is IMPLICATED. Implicated isn't convicted or guilty. It's "they were seen hanging around the area when the crime was committed".
Your stance of making very black & white statements (that are sometimes just plain wrong - like the Guardian and Hikvision fitting cameras in a school toilets) really undermines your credibility.
It just comes across as "I'm going to scour the internet for any mention of Dahua and then attach something bad to it".
As for the Norwegian statement it says they are "contributing to human rights abuses". Again, not actually committing human rights abuses.
Sadly, you have ZERO evidence to back up your assertions that Dahua staff are actually committing human rights abuses.
Dahuad real mistake was not being inclusive enough. Singling out 1 ethnicity was just wrong. They should have included us all. What they did was racist by today's standards, alone.
See but dauha is not using the technology, themselves, to commit human rights abuses, no matter what the perceived purpose or intended potential uses by others or regardless of what they know about how it may be used. Even so far as to say they purposefully implemented a single ethnicity analytic function; they, are not, themselves abusing anyone unless they are somehow physically "forcing" said ethnicity, themselves, to participate in the creation or use of said feature and they, themselves are physically abusing said ethnicity. The PRC should be held responsible. They are actually commiting the actionable abuses.
I suggest keeping it simple: this is wrong, that's it
ADI, sorry you are not receiving the attention you deserve. We got away from you a bit on this one...
"ADI Promotes Human Rights Abusing Dahua" -
I never actually read the part in the ADI monthly flier where they literally stated the above language.
Could the title of this article be considered slander or no, maybe defamation? Maybe, depending on how the reader interprets the use of language. I have to go review my learner's Dictionary again..
Maybe a title of
" ADI running a sales promotion of controversial equipment manufacturer" -
not quite the attention grabber though.
UI # 9 - I don't think John is saying that only these two companies are engaged in aiding a brutal genocide. I am sure many large corporation - including some in the US - do things that are unethical from white lie advertising to abusing employees to ... well... helping a brutal genocide take place. I doubt anyone is saying that you can perfectly avoid any trade against any company that does something morally wrong. He has never made the case that USA companies are angelic. But his reporting is immensely helpful if you care about human rights abuses. If you don't, then just move on to the next article - as most are just technical in nature.
If I need some cyanide-based pesticide such as Zyklon B for some legitimate purpose - and I have a choice between purchasing "Brand ABC" - a brand that is making tons of money off selling it to a regime that is gassing innocent people - and "Brand XYZ" which is not, I personally would like to purchase from Brand XYZ. Hopefully you would too. So the information IPVM is providing is very helpful in this regard. I know any Chinese product ultimately helps the CCP. Short of living in a cave I can't avoid not purchasing from China.
Further, because other corporations and the US government are taking the abuse very seriously, even if you don't care about other humans, you can argue that it is still important simply because you may consider moving away from these offending companies for financial reasons. Either way, the reporting is beneficial - and easy to skip over if you don't think it is.
