I kind of wish they had forced the governments hand and made them do it. Just to show the public how much interference is going on.
They say it wasn't related. Like every thing that has happened across tech/media, the company is forced to do something, then issues statement about 'how it wasn't related to the obvious thing the government just did'.
Makes perfect sense!!
If a company is deemed a "supply chain risk" it makes perfect sense to compel it to work with the military, assuming the latter will compel them to fix the issues that make them such a risk.
It is not about disciplining them to get better.
1. So one option is about forcing them to produce something. You must build this for us.
2 The other option is saying they are compromised so stop using them all together. We will not use what you build for us at all because we don't trust it.
So . Contradictory.
If they’re operating under a different definition of supply chain risk, I don’t have a clue.
Or, more likely, adding the "core safety promise" was just them playing hard to the government to get a better deal, and the government showed them they can play the same game.