Considering it's Boeing, there's a 50-50 chance that the leaked parts data is a shambling pile of DFARS violations. They can get up to some stuff when it comes

Considering it's Boeing, there's a 50-50 chance that the leaked parts data is a shambling pile of DFARS violations. They can get up to some stuff when it comes to classifying things as "new". Check out the financials. BGS is always swimming in money compared to the other divisions - that cash flow almost certainly helped along by pushing returned assemblies back out as "more new than they probably actually are, and should be according to the contract docs". And there's just a joyous brown fountain of horse puckey when it comes to "equivalence", a whole other pile of dead fish. The stuff that the PLs claim is "electromechanically equivalent" makes my brain hurt. Like, does it have wires sticking out? "Oh, that's an ARINC 600 connector for sure!". It's harder to nail someone for false equivalence, though, since it's a pretty nebulous thing to define. Unlike "yo, this new part is actually old and busted". I should add that Boeing isn't really alone here. Lot of suppliers do this stuff too, and Boeing, the damn fools, probably get caught covering for suppliers and subsidiaries.