Is this just a way of spinning that out of 1400 people targeted by this spyware, ONE was an actual suspected terrorist?
Edited to show that the person was only suspected of terrorism.
Edited to show that the person was only suspected of terrorism.
I have the disadvantage of not being able to read the article, but the headline, at least, says he's a suspected terrorist, not an actual terrorist.
I know this was in western Europe, not the US, but in the US, the distinction between "suspected" and proven is really very important, because we have a strong track record of suspecting innocent people of being terrorists.
> "No, that can't be right. Why would they do that?" the official said he asked his contact, thinking it a joke.
Maybe don't buy spyware from malicious actors. It's ridiculous that investigators with this amount of power to invade on suspects most intimate areas of life aren't close to sufficiently briefed.
Does somebody have a source on which agency the European official is supposed to be from? Using spyware that's also used by authoritarian regimes must be a bad joke. Not that our German homebrewn spyware would be any more ethical but I'd have thought that EU level agencies would at least do some level of due diligence.
I don't think the article made any reference to EU level agencies, though. It seemed to only talk about "European officials", "Western agencies", etc., which could be EU-level or local.