> I see this kind of cyber weaponry as a simple subset of the above complex. This is exactly my point. I think that NSO should be just as responsible for the o

> I see this kind of cyber weaponry as a simple subset of the above complex. This is exactly my point. I think that NSO should be just as responsible for the outcomes as any other arms manufacturer. And I'm not waving away the government's responsibilities. Just the opposite - cyber weaponry is equivalent to other types of weaponry and should be treated as such. This is why I feel that the discussion around NSO itself misses the point. It's like discussing Colt's responsibility whenever a government uses an M-16 to shoot a human rights activists. Colt may be responsible in some cases, but the important question is who bought the weapon and why did they use them against that specific target. Also, should the buyer be sanctioned and forbidden from purchasing such weapons in the future.