FCC blocks two gadgets over hidden Huawei-made AI processor
The agency issued its first bans under a new rule targeting specific silicon rather than brand names, citing a HiSilicon chip found in a dashcam and video transmitter.
By Gabriel Qureshi ·

The Federal Communications Commission has stopped the sale of a dashboard camera and a wireless video transmitter in the United States. This action marks the first time the agency has banned specific products under a rule adopted recently that focuses on the internal components of devices rather than their external branding or model numbers.
Both products contain a HiSilicon Smart Vision system on a chip. HiSilicon operates as a subsidiary of Huawei, a company listed on the FCC's Covered List of entities deemed a risk to US national security. The specific processor involved is the Hi3516CV610 UHD Smart Vision SoC, which integrates WiFi, Ethernet, video encoding hardware, and an Arm Cortex-A7 processor.
The central issue for regulators is the chip's neural processing unit, or NPU. The FCC classifies this as a logic-bearing smart component made by a covered entity. According to technical documentation, the NPU powers an Intelligent Video Engine that utilizes a built-in multimodal large model. This software allows the device to track objects across video frames, maintaining focus on subjects such as pets, faces, human figures, and parcels.
While the data sheet suggests these features help users distinguish between a pet and a person, the FCC argues the same AI logic could be leveraged for broader surveillance. The agency expressed concern that the technology could be used to survey US citizens and log facial data for foreign monitoring purposes. This new approach aims to close a loophole that previously allowed rebranded products containing restricted Chinese parts to remain on the market.
Huawei has faced scrutiny in the US before, including a recent incident where it used shell companies to secure AI chip manufacturing from TSMC despite export restrictions. Those previous controversies contributed to the push for stricter hardware regulations.
Public reaction to the ruling has been divided. Some observers criticized the move as protectionist, while others questioned whether the FCC's authority extends to wired devices. One commenter noted that the Communications Act of 1934 grants the agency power over both wired and wireless communications. Another argued that targeting silicon directly was long overdue due to the many regional variants a single product can have.
The FCC's decision applies immediately to the two identified products. The agency will continue to monitor the market for other devices containing chips from entities on the Covered List.
Source: Tom's Hardware





