Not saying it is okay. Pointing out that even if hypocritical there’s generally a strategic reason for countries to deter international spying. Would be quite a puzzling decision for any country to provide an open door for other countries to spy on them.
Trying to set barriers seems logical when it comes to outsiders. But, spying by its nature is constant attempts to sneak past barriers, so attempts aren’t going to stop. It’d just be called collaboration instead of spying if information was shared freely and spying would be unnecessary.
Maybe we have a different definition of deter. I don’t see it as stop, but trying to make it less easier. Why would spies stop trying to spy? I don’t expect that number to change. If it did that would be some pitiful spies.
That’s with trusted parties where that type of collaboration is less likely to happen between parties that are hostile to each other. I would not expect blank country to trust any blank adversary countries software and instead be wary of their motives and back doors, and they would be smart not to with both sides seeking each other harm.
I don’t think you understand that I am viewing this from how sides that see each other as potential threats view and treat each other. Not talking about countries that are already collaborating as if they were allies.
In case you don’t understand. I am not claiming that countries do not spy on their own citizens and seek methods to spy even more on them. I’m talking about how countries can react to countries they label as adversaries.
we should not be OK with that
Not saying it is okay. Pointing out that even if hypocritical there’s generally a strategic reason for countries to deter international spying. Would be quite a puzzling decision for any country to provide an open door for other countries to spy on them.
What makes you think this’ll deter international spying?
Trying to set barriers seems logical when it comes to outsiders. But, spying by its nature is constant attempts to sneak past barriers, so attempts aren’t going to stop. It’d just be called collaboration instead of spying if information was shared freely and spying would be unnecessary.
Maybe we have a different definition of deter. I don’t see it as stop, but trying to make it less easier. Why would spies stop trying to spy? I don’t expect that number to change. If it did that would be some pitiful spies.
Happens all the time, the NSA can’t spy on US citizens to it asks GCHQ to do it for them, and vice-versa.
Kaspersky’s software had been known for flagging US 3-letter-agencies’ malware, so there’s that…
That’s with trusted parties where that type of collaboration is less likely to happen between parties that are hostile to each other. I would not expect blank country to trust any blank adversary countries software and instead be wary of their motives and back doors, and they would be smart not to with both sides seeking each other harm.
I don’t think you understand that I am viewing this from how sides that see each other as potential threats view and treat each other. Not talking about countries that are already collaborating as if they were allies.
In case you don’t understand. I am not claiming that countries do not spy on their own citizens and seek methods to spy even more on them. I’m talking about how countries can react to countries they label as adversaries.
I’m certainly not OK with it.