4 ms·

Can't see what they'd ever gain from going public. Counter-intelligence is their job and I'd be highly surprised if they'd alert their opposition simply for so

Can't see what they'd ever gain from going public. Counter-intelligence is their job and I'd be highly surprised if they'd alert their opposition simply for some free PR. Far better to try work out what has been compromised and try feed misinformation into that data exfil for as long as possible. That's what we pay them to do, not gallivant around in the media tooting their own horn.

michaelt 6y ago
> Can't see what they'd ever gain from going public 0. It went public with the initial Bloomberg article, so it was lost as a misinformation channel years ago. 1. To get the security problem fixed, thus protecting US interests 2. To support US foreign policy goals like "Europe should reject Huawei 5G equipment" with concrete evidence 3. To demonstrate that, if a US company thinks they've discovered a different supply chain attack attempt, that they're interested, competent to help, and able to speak to you. 4. To show potential hires that that they're protecting the country from real threats, and that there are opportunities to do work that's neither illegal nor unethical 5. To demonstrate to the taxpayer that they're doing their job