> All the evidence I've seen suggests that the programs were explicitly designed to stay within the bounds of the law (as it exists now, not as technologists wi

> All the evidence I've seen suggests that the programs were explicitly designed to stay within the bounds of the law (as it exists now, not as technologists wish it were). So how does that undermine the government's credibility with regards to the rule of law? I think the more accurate question would be "So how does that undermine the government's credibility?" The "with regards to the rule of law" part is more or less irrelevant when dealing with international politics. For several years now the United States and the UK have been warning about Chinese hacking/spying/electronic espionage. Now the US has been exposed to having conducted the same operations they accused China of, on a possibly even greater scale. Obviously this has damaged their credibility, and is why they are so angry.