but then any company making networking equipment sold to oppressive regimes should be equally responsible, why did you single out Cisco?
obviously Cisco is the market leader and probably more of their equipment ends up everywhere (I'm not so sure though, for example Alcatel-Lucent equipment might be more welcome by anti-US regimes, than same equipment from US companies. A-L is also known UN sanctions violator).
or do you have any evidence that Cisco is specifically marketing for oppressive regimes?
obviously Cisco is the market leader and probably more of their equipment ends up everywhere (I'm not so sure though, for example Alcatel-Lucent equipment might be more welcome by anti-US regimes, than same equipment from US companies. A-L is also known UN sanctions violator).
or do you have any evidence that Cisco is specifically marketing for oppressive regimes?