Given numerous examples from the past this is what "no trust" equals to. I'm not advocating publicly accusing them of being evil without evidence, but assuming

Given numerous examples from the past this is what "no trust" equals to. I'm not advocating publicly accusing them of being evil without evidence, but assuming they are when deciding if and how to use their services is at least reasonable. In other words in public my opinion on them is "neutral" until I have some information/data/signs to form/change my opinion, but internally I assume they are doing[0] something evil until proven otherwise. [0] or at least assume they are capable of doing something evil and there is a non-zero chance that they will engage in evil-doing. (but again, not accusing them publicly until there are reasons to do so; I'm just describing internal thought-process)