Absolutely not. In my world, a disclaimer is the line between merely "not OK", and "criminal hacking punishable by prison time".
That's how users of RAT* software are treated - what makes this different? A legal notice they hid as best they could? Currently, that might make it legal, but morally it makes no difference.
But I didn't suggest a prominent notice because that makes it better (though it does - if I were spied on, I'd want to know). I suggested it because that would make the victims of surveillance fight it. You can't rebell against what you don't know about.
