3 ms·

I agree, and I think Cisco, for example, is almost as bad as IBM was then, by being the architects of the "lawful intercept" [1] (backdoor [2]) protocol for the

I agree, and I think Cisco, for example, is almost as bad as IBM was then, by being the architects of the "lawful intercept" [1] (backdoor [2]) protocol for their routers in China and elsewhere, which then facilitates the government's catching, torturing or killing of the dissidents. At the very least Cisco is as bad as the Hacking Team. [1] - https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3924 https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3924 [2] - https://www.blackhat.com/presentations/bh-dc-10/Cross_Tom/BlackHat-DC-2010-Cross-Attacking-LawfulI-Intercept-wp.pdf https://www.blackhat.com/presentations/bh-dc-10/Cross_Tom/Bl... There are other, much more loved, tech companies that do similar things, too. They know who they are. I just hope history won't be kind to them.

MichaelGG 11y ago
No. It's important to separate technology creators and users. Physicists should bear no blame for the use of atomic weapons. Cisco, IBM and others are, likewise, just technology providers. Google, OTOH, actively uses its technology.
- Buge 11y ago
  If Cisco has people onsite helping to install their products and providing support for China's operations, and takes feature suggestions and implements stuff specifically to help China that's more than simply being a technology provider. Yes Google is intentionally using its technology to serve ads, but it's not intentionally using its technology to give information to the NSA, and is in fact trying to get everything encrypted to specifically stop the NSA.