I agree that the definition of "evidence" they use isn't obvious, and I'm not at all familiar with where the rules for cabin electronics come from. I'm not say

I agree that the definition of "evidence" they use isn't obvious, and I'm not at all familiar with where the rules for cabin electronics come from. I'm not saying they can't do it, they obviously can (and just did.) All I'm saying is that there has to be some evidence that the crash is for a reason that implies other aircraft are affected. And obviously the standard for transport category aircraft is higher than for smaller airplanes. But it can't just be "we gotta be sure", because then you can't let anything fly at any time. Imagine if every time someone had an accident in the same model car you own, the DOT prohibited that model car on the roads "out of an abundance of caution" until it was proven that it was not a design fault in the car. While there arguably would be an improvement in safety, it would also be incredibly disruptive. What standard of risk would you apply? Because you have to draw the line somewhere.