• HeartyBeast@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    8 months ago

    If I’m (say) the UK intelligence service and I want to spy on (rolls dice) a group of people in Switzerland- it much easier for me to intercept their packages and patch them in transit then having to talk to Apple.

    • FooBarrington@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      8 months ago

      I disagree. If the packages aren’t routed through UK, you’d have to work with other countries secret service, distribution companies, and you have much more legal troubles to consider.

      • HeartyBeast@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        8 months ago

        Because clearly a secret service of one country could never infiltrate FedEx’s distribution depot in another.

        • FooBarrington@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          8 months ago

          Because the secret service of one country acting in another country where they don’t have jurisdiction is an international political crisis that could lead to war. Don’t play dumb.

          One means a country forcing a company acting inside that country to do something. The other means one country having to ask another country to be allowed to force a company acting inside the other country to do something. See where one is much easier?

          • HeartyBeast@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            8 months ago

            Don’t play dumb.

            The irony is strong in this one. But if you really want to believe that intelligent agencies don’t work covertly overseas, I’ll leave you to it.