
Lexmark now named in new report by the U.S. Inspector General dated July 30th 2019, U.S. Department of Defense/Report No.DODIG-2019-106, please check this link: https://media.defense.gov/2019/Jul/30/2002164272/-1/-1/1/DODIG-2019-106.PDF
Ninestar the Chinese parent company of Lexmark h ttp: //w ww.n inestargroup.com/ is now promoting Lexmark printer directly on their website along with knock-off Chips and of course cloned toners. Knowing what we now know about this new report do you really want to stock Toners and chips made by Ninestar? is it now possible that The Trump Administrations is Investigating Lexmark because of ties to their parent companies in China, Ninestar, Apex, Zhuhai Seine Printing Technology Co., Ltd and Zhuhai Wanlida Electric Co., Ltd.?
https://media.defense.gov/2019/Jul/30/2002164272/-1/-1/1/DODIG-2019-106.PDF
At Tonernews.com we are concerned about the Chips used in all the toners that Ninestar and Apex sell in the U.S. and around the world since it looks like the Chinese Government might be getting data back from these chips?.
By Kelsey Reichmann From c4isrnet.com
In 2018, the department bought more than 9,500 commercial printers, computers and cameras despite warnings that adversaries could use the products to infiltrate networks and spy on personnel, according to an inspector general audit. The procurements, which totaled roughly $33 million, expose significant shortcomings in the department’s supply chain security policies that persist to this day, auditors said in a redacted report published Tuesday.
More Than 8,000 Lexmark Printers Totaling $30 Million Were Bought in 2018.
Lexmark printers contain supply chain vulnerabilities from China that were identified in a Congressional report. Lexmark has connections to the Chinese military, nuclear, and cyber espionage programs, according to the report. Lexmark has 20 listed cybersecurity vulnerabilities on the National Vulnerabilities Database. These include storing and transmitting sensitive network access credentials in plain text and allowing malicious code on a printer.
The report finds the Defense Department continues to use these products within its networks because it does not have an organization to deal with cybersecurity risks to commercial off-the-shelf technology or controls to prevent purchase of such technology with known cybersecurity risks. The Pentagon also hasn’t adjusted acquisition policies or established an approved products list to prevent vulnerable products from being purchased.