NSO vs. Citizen Lab: U.S. Court Battles over Pegasus Spyware Investigations(theintercept.com)
theintercept.com
NSO vs. Citizen Lab: U.S. Court Battles over Pegasus Spyware Investigations
https://theintercept.com/2024/05/06/pegasus-nso-group-israeli-spyware-citizen-lab/
13 comments
I'm half of the mind that the intercept like a lot of other generic mainstream "alternative" news outlets just exists to depersonalize or frustrate anyone that can see through their shoddy reporting.
The Intercept has gone through a lot of drama lately: https://www.kenklippenstein.com/p/why-im-resigning-from-the-...
Shouldn't this lead to a broader question of whether spyware should be allowed to be sold to governments? Especially repressive ones which will obviously use it for nefarious reasons?
Or, what's the provision that allows these companies and actors to be exempted from CFAA?
If this was used on any US citizen who has been killed and the Fed doesn't prosecute because it's been tacitly approved as an armament in war, isn't that akin to another "collateral murder" situation?
If this was used on any US citizen who has been killed and the Fed doesn't prosecute because it's been tacitly approved as an armament in war, isn't that akin to another "collateral murder" situation?
How would you define spyware in a way that doesn’t require state approval to have overseas users for any application or service?
Your privacy is very important for us. /s
Works like a charm.
Works like a charm.
Which government would qualify as repressive though? Pegasus is made in a place, where apartheid is the norm. The only qualifying criteria for that regime is if the other government is against them or not? And would they give pretty penny for it?
I’m not a lawyer, but at least in the United States at the minimum probable cause and a warrant should be required prior to their use per the 4th Amendment…
“The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”
“The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”
The only time the U.S has cared about spying on their citizens is when snowden dropped the big leak and they were pissed they got caught with pants down.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010s_global_surveillance_di...
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010s_global_surveillance_di...
> I’m not a lawyer, but at least in the United States at the minimum probable cause and a warrant should be required prior to their use per the 4th Amendment…
You do realize that FAANG are collecting user data and are more than happy to supply it to the government, don't you ? /s
You do realize that FAANG are collecting user data and are more than happy to supply it to the government, don't you ? /s
Yes, but that is legally different than a government agency breaking the encryption on our devices without a warrant.
Legally, yes. But the government does not break the encryption. Neither your favourite online provider. You just agreed to let them spy on you (TOS) and gave them access to your passwords.
Yes, they (companies) promise they won't sell your data and only give it to government with a warrant.
Yes, they (companies) promise they won't sell your data and only give it to government with a warrant.
[deleted]