Or, it could be both. It could have been a real attack vector that didn't actually infiltrate the companies in question due to having been caught upstream. Bu

Or, it could be both. It could have been a real attack vector that didn't actually infiltrate the companies in question due to having been caught upstream. But as "attempted attack" sounds far less sexy than "actual attack," the sources may have exaggerated the impact/discovery to further trade negotiation objectives with the spin. In fact, the BS discovery part of the story might be an attempt to parallel construct a reason it was discovered to cover for a program that might do independent testing of hardware which, if revealed, would give attackers some sense of sampling methodology to be able to counter. That would explain the vehement denials from the companies allegedly compromised and yet the realistic attack vector published along with the US entity bans on using Chinese hardware around that time.