Page 4 of the IBM white paper says: In 2005 the FCC ruled that CALEA applies to broadband Internet providers So yes, it was mandated. You may disagree with t

Page 4 of the IBM white paper says: In 2005 the FCC ruled that CALEA applies to broadband Internet providers So yes, it was mandated. You may disagree with the ruling, but ISPs were required to do something, and Cisco enabled this on products for ISPs. Did they have it beforehand? Yes. However, this product only existed on certain products, and other countries required this before the 2005 FCC ruling (again, from IBM white paper). But of course, this still isn't "Cisco put in back doors for the NSA". This is "Cisco putting in back doors for law enforcement, including even local police". Further to that, everyone was aware of this. You can't have a 2010 white paper by IBM, before the Snowden leaks even(2013), if it was secret. And realistically, a "back door" isn't quite that, if it is well known. It's just another access point in a product. Secondly the 'Snowden' leaks, which had everyone quite pissed, including Google (whom I hate, but...) starting the big push for SSL everywhere, were not caused by these specific back doors. Heck, this white paper is from 2010, and this 'law enforcement' "back door" was well known, AND!, not in all Cisco products! How, then, could Google be surprised by this revelation. That this back door existed? How could anyone? It was not a secret. It was not in all products. No, Cisco routers were infiltrated in two ways. Undisclosed vulnerabilities, which the NSA was aware of, and used against all router vendors to install NSA malware. And again, by intercepting shipments to end-users, installing NSA backdoors and malware, then resealing and shipping the product onward. This is what the Guardian Snowden leaks talk about! The big differences between China(and your whataboutism), and the US, is that if you don't let the Chinese government into your company, do precisely what it says, and install all the backdoor software it wants? You don't have a company any more, your freedom, and maybe even your life. Meanwhile, the NSA, has been acting illegally, and does NOT have the support of US tech vendors. In fact, US tech vendors are hostile to NSA's attempts to subvert their products, including lobbying US politicians to stop this sort of behaviour. There is a vast difference between these two things, and in all of the above, Cisco did not willingly put "back doors" in anything for the NSA. So in reasons to your question? Yes, I know something you don't. History. Factual, actual, history. Not revisionist. I'm happy to re-examine any of this, if you can provide links to data showing Cisco allowing NSA agents into its midst, and installing NSA spyware for its products at the factory. On purpose. Which aren't open, and were hidden from everyone. Or something similar to this. Because otherwise, your statement is absolutely, positively, not factual. How can I say otherwise? And yes my original response was firm, because I've seen others say this sort of thing. We must be factual in our claims, not hyperbolic!