Chinese telecoms firm Huawei saw a sharp jump in revenue in the first half of the year but warned of “difficulties ahead”.
Several countries have raised concerns that Huawei equipment could be used by China for surveillance, although the company has vehemently denied the allegations.
The US raised the stakes in its tensions with China in May, when the US Commerce Department added Huawei to its “entity list”.
The move bans the company from acquiring technology from US firms without government approval.
Since that took place towards the end of the financial reporting period, the results showed a muted impact so far.
“Given the foundation we laid in the first half of the year, we continue to see growth even after we were added to the entity list,” said Liang Hua, Huawei’s chairman, in a statement.
“That’s not to say we don’t have difficulties ahead. We do, and they may affect the pace of our growth in the short term.”
The results showed Huawei’s 5G ambitions remained intact, even as the US has urged allies to shun the firm in their next-generation networks.
Huawei said it had secured 50 commercial 5G contracts and shipped more than 150,000 base stations to markets around the world.
While Huawei has remained largely sanguine in the face of US pressure, it has already issued some warnings.
In June, Huawei founder Ren Zhengfei said international sales of the firm’s handsets had sunk 40% in the past month and said the firm expected this to have an impact on annual revenue of up to $30bn (£24.9bn).
Facebook’s founder Mark Zuckerberg has said he does not think it is right for a company to censor politicians or the news in a democracy.
Last week, Senator Elizabeth Warren paid to run an intentionally misleading advert on its platform that claimed Mark Zuckerberg had personally endorsed Donald Trump for re-election.
She said she had done so in protest against the firm’s decision to allow politicians to run ads containing” known lies”.
“When profit comes up against protecting democracy, Facebook chooses profit,” she claimed.
A spokesman for Joe Biden had previously criticised the firm for refusing to remove a video posted by Donald Trump’s re-election campaign which promoted an unproven conspiracy theory involving the former vice president and his son.
“It is unacceptable for any social media company to knowingly allow deliberately misleading material to corrupt its platform,” Mr Biden’s press secretary said.
Mr Zuckerberg has also faced recent criticism from some of his Silicon Valley peers.
On Wednesday, Salesforce chief executive Marc Benioff described Facebook as being the “new cigarettes – it’s addictive, bad for us, and our kids are being drawn in”.
He also said that the company should be broken up to prevent it gathering so much data on the public.
“Why they can’t say that trust is our highest value is beyond me,” he added.
Apple’s Tim Cook has also criticised Facebook in the past. He has claimed it lets people’s personal data be patched together and used against them, and suggested that its cryptocurrency plans go beyond the bounds of where private companies should operate.
However, he has done so without mentioning the social media’s firm by name.
I think Mark Zuckerberg may have prepared by watching Barack Obama’s speeches.
The Facebook chief gave emphasis to his key points by delivering them in short bursts.
“At least we can… disagree!”
“That’s what freedom of expression…is!”
I could almost hear the 44th president’s accent.
There was a time, of course, when we thought Mr Zuckerberg fancied himself as a future president. But if it’s no longer likely he’ll lead the US, he perhaps sees a chance to lead on a defining issue: the changing nature of free expression.
Progressive regimes in history, he noted, have allowed more speech, not less. And, in what will play well in the corridors of western power, he repeated his view that restricting what people say on the internet – he meant Facebook – could cede power of the internet to China’s tech giants rather than Silicon Valley’s.
I often flip between thinking Mr Zuckerberg is right to say Facebook should take a light-touch approach to limiting what people can post, and seeing a chief executive who is reneging on a responsibility to fix his creation.
Ultimately, I believe, a big part of the problem isn’t that people use Facebook to express themselves, but that it then tends to amplify the most outrageous, divisive content.
Even so, Mark Zuckerberg has achieved some important things today. First, he’s clearly and openly asked for help.
And second, he’s elevated the current debate on online speech into one of historical importance, a “crossroads” in line with the American civil rights struggle.
A hero of that movement, Congressman Elijah Cummings, died on Thursday – and Mr Zuckerberg paid tribute.
Cummings was a legendary advocate of free speech – but also a man who called loudly for Mr Zuckerberg to get his house in order.