The New York Times reports that a human rights advocacy group has filed a complaint in reference to Cisco network surveillance product marketing material.
The group’s evidence includes documents that the group says were part of Cisco’s marketing pitch to Chinese organizations and government agencies, including a page from a PowerPoint presentation boasting that Cisco’s technology can “recognize over 90% of Falun Gong pictures†in e-mail traffic. Another document, which the group says was used by Cisco’s sales teams, described a broad public security database that would contain information on Chinese citizens, including “key personnel of ‘Falun Gong’ evil cult organization.†That database would in turn be connected to a system of firewalls and monitoring systems that could be used to filter content that the Chinese government considers to be sensitive.
There are many odd details in this case. Why would Cisco make a direct reference to Falun Gong instead of an indirect reference, for example. Did they have to say Falun Gong pictures could be recognized? That seems unusually tailored for a customer pitch. And why would Cisco be headed into this market/sales pitch when they are at the end-of-life for their entire security product line (MARS, ASA, etc) everywhere else? But the much larger question this case raises, beyond any specific presentation or sales pitch, is whether any tech company could be sued on the same basis for selling to the Chinese.
