They should have a public first contact and then use an exclusive and private contact for each source. A cheap samsung or huawei. iphones can't be inexpensive.
It sounds like suing a gun manufacturer after a shooting. NSO software might not be used ethically but it certainly can be used legally. They have no responsibility to disclose anything.
Selling and/or using NSO and similar software in the US, with certain exceptions about use by the government, is very arguably a violation of a couple of different US laws, including the CFAA.
COGlory|3 years ago
Schroedingersat|3 years ago
unknown|3 years ago
[deleted]
AtlasBarfed|3 years ago
alvarezbjm-hn|3 years ago
They should have a public first contact and then use an exclusive and private contact for each source. A cheap samsung or huawei. iphones can't be inexpensive.
thakoppno|3 years ago
One time pads over hf seems like a decent avenue but practically eliminates all sources except for trained intelligence operatives.
CaptainZapp|3 years ago
throwaway349902|3 years ago
doomrobo|3 years ago
topkai22|3 years ago
It seems reasonable that this might prevail in court given the arguments in the post. No guarantee, but as they say, that’s why we have the trial.
lesuorac|3 years ago
Uh maybe, but you make it sound like the sue-er will lose. I would count a settlement as a win in this instance [1].
> They have no responsibility to disclose anything.
[Citation Needed]
Refusal to disclose information is why Alex Jones lost his lawsuit.
[1]: https://www.cnbc.com/2022/02/15/remington-agrees-to-settle-w...
JohnFen|3 years ago