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.
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.
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?
I didn’t say that, not sure what you’re arguing against?
The idea that it’s in any way easier to monitor for your targets ordering new phones, then covertly moving personnel into that specific shipping facility, having them find the package, open it, flash it, close it and sending it back on its way while hoping they don’t install a new software update, compared to going to a company and saying “deploy this update to that phone” makes absolutely no sense, but you do you.
Why would they attempt to go through unsold iPhones? They can simply force Apple to push updates to all existing iPhones.
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.
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.
Because clearly a secret service of one country could never infiltrate FedEx’s distribution depot in another.
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?
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.
I didn’t say that, not sure what you’re arguing against?
The idea that it’s in any way easier to monitor for your targets ordering new phones, then covertly moving personnel into that specific shipping facility, having them find the package, open it, flash it, close it and sending it back on its way while hoping they don’t install a new software update, compared to going to a company and saying “deploy this update to that phone” makes absolutely no sense, but you do you.