[hnbad]

Where do you think the line should be drawn?

Arguably if your client is IDF your devices are more likely to exclusively end up in the hands of military personnel whereas if your client is "Hezbollah" (whatever legal entity acted on their behalf in this case) an attack would be (and has been) far more likely to injure, maim or kill civilians and non-militants, not just because of the higher likelihood of harming bystanders and family members.

Would a supply chain attack like this against Toyota be justified because of the large market share in after-market "technicals" used by terrorist and insurgent groups?