but it can create situations like this.
Only if proper vetting of the contractor isn’t done. That part of the process should happen regardless of who the contractor is.
Comment on Counterfeit Cisco gear ended up in US military bases, used in combat operations
RobotToaster@mander.xyz 6 months agoThere are often companies that specialise in sourcing obsolete hardware, who just buy shit off Amazon/eBay and issue the correct paperwork.
kent_eh@lemmy.ca 6 months ago
rottingleaf@lemmy.zip 6 months ago
I’m sorry, but such things happen in countries with no preference to small businesses and veterans etc.
I’m almost confident that somebody involved in choosing that supplier got a cut.
After all, US military budget is so ridiculously big that not having such kinds of corruption would be weird.
Transporter_Room_3@startrek.website 6 months ago
It’s insane to me all the different ways the government procures things.
Just get it straight from the manufacturer. Then if anything ever goes wrong there isn’t the “who is REALLY to blame on this long chain of people” it’s “hey this shit is broken, YOU are responsible for it”
Of course sometimes they do it as a form of opsec, if you distribute parts across many small time sellers it’s easier to hide something than one big order from the primary source.
RobotToaster@mander.xyz 6 months ago
I suspect the plausible deniability of responsibility is a feature not a bug to many of the bureaucrats.
CheeseNoodle@lemmy.world 6 months ago
The beurocracy must expand to meet the increasing needs of the growing beurocracy.
rottingleaf@lemmy.zip 6 months ago
And more complexity is always good for corruption, since every additional kind of complexity introduces gray areas where it’s unclear who’s to blame.
catloaf@lemm.ee 6 months ago
Did you not read the comment you’re replying to? They mentioned obsolete hardware. Cisco does not sell obsolete hardware.