As @svane pointed out, "Hacking Team" are exactly one of the companies that are on my personal list of companies where if you work for them, you lose (my) benef

As @svane pointed out, "Hacking Team" are exactly one of the companies that are on my personal list of companies where if you work for them, you lose (my) benefit of the doubt. From your comment I do take the point that maybe not everyone is aware of all of these actors. But if you sign a contract with them, you either know what you're doing and are cool with it, or you didn't care enough to google them. (And I have a very hard time believing the latter.) The former I find morally wrong, the latter I find negligent (note the "I find", indicating personal choice here) and I do think both should be disqualifying if not explained well. Edit: even though my personal attitude towards this doesn't matter in the grand (or even small) scheme of things, I'd consider this a situation where I'd invert the burden of proof. Yes, being associated with these companies should put a burden on the person working there if they want a different job. They should have to think about that before they sign. High-skilled people who consider their offers should have a strong incentive to decline.