Pegasus Spyware Seller: Blame Our Customers Not Us For Hacking (bbc.com) 104
The maker of powerful spy software allegedly used to hack the phones of innocent people says blaming the company is like "criticising a car manufacturer when a drunk driver crashes." From a report: NSO Group is facing international criticism, after reporters obtained a list of alleged potential targets for spyware, including activists, politicians and journalists. Investigations have begun as the list, of 50,000 phone numbers, contained a small number of hacked phones. Pegasus infects iPhones and Android devices, allowing operators to extract messages, photos and emails, record calls and secretly activate microphones and cameras. NSO Group has said the software is intended for use against criminals and terrorists and made available to only military, law enforcement and intelligence agencies from countries with good human-rights records. But a consortium of news organisations, led by French media outlet Forbidden Stories, has published dozens of stories based around the list, including allegations French President Emmanuel Macron's number was on it and may have been targeted.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
It's more like when an illegal gun-runner sells weapons to a drug-dealer and then the drug-dealer kills someone with that weapon..
It's actually more like Raytheon selling missiles to the US government, then the US government uses that missile in a drone strike. Still (potentially) morally ambiguous, but not inflammatory like the above hyperbole (well, the drone strike is going to cause some fires, you but know what I mean...)
I've heard that excuse before... (Score:5, Funny)
"Once the rockets are up, who cares where they come down? That's not my department!" says Wernher von Braun.
https://tomlehrersongs.com/wer... [tomlehrersongs.com]
Re: (Score:1)
And me without modpoints...
Re: (Score:2)
Right? And it got modded funny. SMH
Re: (Score:3)
bad car analogy (Score:3)
Bad analogy (Score:5, Insightful)
This software is bought to be used as a hacking tool....as intended.
Re: (Score:2)
When you're talking about equipping governments to spy on *other* governments' citizens or officials, you are outside the realm of normal legal proscriptions and protections and into the realm of espionage.
So you'd better be careful who you sell to, because it can trigger a response up to and including assassination.
Re: (Score:2)
Well they can always pretend the buyer bought it to fight against terrorists and whatever.
What needs to be made illegal is selling a tool which relies on hacking personal equipment like phones, as well as knowing about a security flaw and not reporting it to the manufacturer within X days (aggravated if making money out of it).
Obviously this is not going to make security agencies happy, but just like there is no "decryption key just-for-the-good-guys", there is no "spying tool just-for-the-good-guys".
Re: (Score:2)
This. But you could go a little further because some bozo will want to say that guns are used to kill people. No, guns are primarily used to defend oneself. What you should say is that the only purpose of this software is to hack. It can't be used to prevent someone from hacking you.
Second amendment. (Score:2)
The maker of powerful spy software allegedly used to hack the phones of innocent people says blaming the company is like "criticising a car manufacturer when a drunk driver crashes."
Or a gun maker being sued for their product being involved in a mass-shooting.
Re: Second amendment. (Score:1)
Any questions, simply refer to the Den nis Leary song. ;)
Re: (Score:2)
The maker of powerful spy software allegedly used to hack the phones of innocent people says blaming the company is like "criticising a car manufacturer when a drunk driver crashes."
Or a gun maker being sued for their product being involved in a mass-shooting.
The primary purpose of a car is not to crash. Guns are designed around how well they can put ammunition into people.
Re: (Score:2)
> The primary purpose of a car is not to crash. Guns are designed around how well they can put ammunition into people.
The primary purpose of a car is transportation. The primary purpose of a gun is to equalize the application of deadly force.
Cars help the crippled travel a hundred miles and a gun helps a petite woman resist an attacker. Both of these are unalloyed goods.
The primary purpose of Pegasus is to violate the fundamental human right to privacy. This is nothing but predation.
The analogy fails.
Re: (Score:2)
The primary purpose of Pegasus is to violate the fundamental human right to privacy. This is nothing but predation.
You'll note there's no expressed right to privacy. [umkc.edu]
Re: (Score:2)
UN Declaration of Human Rights (most countries including the US have signed)
Article 12
No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honour and reputation. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks.
Re: (Score:1)
Arbitrary being the key (weasel) word in the sentence.
arbitrary -based on random choice or personal whim, rather than any reason or system.
If a government decides to do something it is not an arbitrary action.
Re: (Score:2)
Depends on if you are the government or a citizen.
Cars versus guns versus hacking tools (Score:5, Interesting)
Guns are intended to be used to kill or injure. However, there are both valid and invalid reasons to do this. Valid reasons include hunting, self-defense, and putting down tyrants. Invalid reasons include just about everything else. This is why they're a lot more controversial.
Hacking (or cracking, if you prefer) tools are intended to be used primarily for something unethical. There may be ethical applications of compromising computer systems, but the vast majority of applications are unethical, as is the typical use case. That's why they're almost universally seen as unethical and why making them makes you a bad guy.
Re: (Score:3)
Hacking (or cracking, if you prefer) tools are intended to be used primarily for something unethical.
Overthrowing a totalitarian government that uses technology to cement it's power.
Re: (Score:2)
Still drunk from one of the greatest New Year's eve parties ever. Why, did anything important happen?
Re: Cars versus guns versus hacking tools (Score:1)
This is why they're a lot more controversial.
If they were actually controversial, TPTB wouldn't be so desperate to manufacture controversy.
Re:Cars versus guns versus hacking tools (Score:4, Insightful)
Your reasoning does not seem especially sound.
Shooting someone: sometimes ok
Hacking their phone: never ok
You don't see the disconnect there?
Re: (Score:1)
Not really. Humans can be nuisances and getting rid of them may be a good solution, while technology... what did the poor phone do to you to deserve being hacked?
Re: (Score:3)
Guns are a natural analogy. As it turns out, selling a gun to a known felon is a felony. There are also a variety of laws in place that make it a crime to be willfully ignorant of the buyer's felony status.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Well, that depends on the hacking tool.
IDA Pro is one of the tools I use on a regular base. Yes, this program can be used to crack programs and remove the copy protection scheme. It can also be used to do security audits of programs and analyse malware to see what it does and how to counter it.
There are very few tools that are by definition evil. What matters is the person using it.
We blame you (Score:4, Informative)
We blame you because apparently you vetted your customers before you sold the software so the responsibility is on you. If you did your jobs properly and did your research then you would know that you would not want them to have/use the software.
Who knows, maybe they used the software on you guys and you didn't even know.
Or perhaps you guys don't use iphones or android and are still on Blackberries? :-)
Re: (Score:2)
We blame you because apparently you vetted your customers before you sold the software so the responsibility is on you.
All those mass-shootings where the person went through a vetting process. [abc10.com]
Re: (Score:2)
The thing about people is this:
A persons day to day mood is dynamic. Today might be going great for you and you're walking on the clouds.
Tomorrow you might get sick, fired, a friend may pass away, the economy can collapse, or all of the above.
Just because you were vetted and determined to be ok at the time of purchase doesn't mean you'll still be in the
same frame of mind when the World starts piling shit on you.
It's really just human nature and, tbh, I don't really see how anything can be done about it wit
Re: (Score:3)
False equivalency is false (Score:2)
blaming the company is like "criticising a car manufacturer when a drunk driver crashes."
Cars are used primarily to get people to and from work, pick up and deliver goods, take people to hospitals, etc. Spy software is used primarily to violate people's privacy, often illegally. Cars are available, for purchase, or at least for use, to almost everyone. NSO's spyware is "made available to only military, law enforcement and intelligence agencies from countries with good human-rights records".
So on the one hand we have cars which are readily available to the general public and having universal uti
Weapons are a better analogy (Score:1)
But we all know that guns don't kill people, people kill people, right? RIGHT?
Re: (Score:2)
Right.
The dozen or more guns within my safe for the past few decades have neither killed nor threatened anyone.
Have never done anything more nefarious than punch holes in paper actually.
They're not just going to hop out, run down the street and gun down a bus full of nuns on their own.
You have to add the Human Variable into this equation before guns become something problematic.
( Our species tend to F just about everything up that we touch actually )
Re: (Score:3)
"Look at what we’d kill: Mosquitoes and flies. ‘Cause they’re pests. Lions and tigers. ‘Cause it’s fun! Chickens and pigs. ‘Cause we’re hungry. Pheasants and quails. ‘Cause it’s fun. And we’re hungry. And people. We kill people ‘Cause they’re pests. And it’s fun!"
--George Carlin
DrugDealers and human trafficers say the same (Score:1)
Identical argument applies to drug dealers...
I their customers weren't using drugs - nothing bad would happen...
Or human trafficers...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
They sure seem to be. Police get those things to deal with the most hardened of criminals, but like a degenerate drug addict, they are soon enough making excuses for themselves using them indiscriminately against people who probably aren't even committing a crime.
Re: (Score:2)
To some governments, they sure are.
There is no proof by ananology (Score:2)
Comparing their product with automobiles isn't a strong analogy. Because the Drunk Driver isn't trying to crash their Car, as well cars have a lot of safety features built in to protect the passengers as well the victims as much as possible while keeping the general positive utility in tact.
If you are going to get an analogy, I would compare it to the Gun industry While this industry rightly or wrongly has a lot of legal liability protection granted by the government. Is creating a product that its purpos
Re: (Score:2)
As I said elsewhere, it is also a felony to furnish a gun to a known felon.
I kinda wonder (Score:3)
Considering where that company is located, do they feel the same about IG Farben and their culpability concerning the production of Zyklon B?
Re: (Score:2)
^^MOD THIS UP^^
Good Human-Rights Records (Score:2)
Their apparent definition of "good" is a bit too loose for my taste.
Re: (Score:3)
"Good" in this case is usually followed by "credit rating".
Re: (Score:1)
Thoughts and prayers (Score:2)
"Spyware doesn't spy, people do"
A company that purpose-builds a product to perform a very specific task cannot be held responsible when someone buys that product and uses it to perform that very specific task.
Where have we heard this argument before?
Car Keys to Drunks (Score:2)
"The maker of powerful spy software allegedly used to hack the phones of innocent people says blaming the company is like "criticising a car manufacturer when a drunk driver crashes"
And who is handing out car keys to the drunks? Could it be "The maker of powerful spy software" ?
Guns do not kill people... (Score:2)
Technically true, but guns make it possible for one asshole to kill a lot of people in a short time. If you run amok with a knife, an ax or a sword, you will get stopped by regular people after a few kills at the most. Guns are massive amplifier and that makes them a problem. Same for this spyware. If they had to hack every phone individually, not many would get hacked. With this software it becomes easy and cheap to do it on mass-scale.
The weapon-maker and weapon-trader _is_ complicit. There is no moral ar
Re: (Score:2)
" Guns are massive amplifier and that makes them a problem. "
Incorrect.
Stupid, desperate and / or mentally ill people with guns can become a problem.
The sane ones have never caused any issues.
Besides, look at the flip side.
Guns also tend to prevent mass shootings as those who like to partake in the mass-murder profession rarely target places where folks shoot back.
( See: Police Stations )
Re: (Score:2)
You are cull of crap. An amplifier is an amplifier. People that are willing to do harm to others on mass-scale are a fact that cannot be removed. End of story. Seriously.
Also please cite 3 valid examples (outside of war) where civilians have actually "shot back" to any real effect. Because exactly the converse to your claim seems to be the truth, namely that easy gun availability amplifies the frequency of mass-shootings.
Re: Guns do not kill people... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
A coincidence??!? (Score:2)
But NSO Group said it had no knowledge of how some phones on the list contained remnants of spyware.
It could be "a coincidence", the spokesman said.
That sounds more like the punchline of a Monty Python sketch than a serious comment to the press.
are car manufacturers (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I found a loophole in the law. I only drink while waiting at a red light, not while driving.
Re: are car manufacturers (Score:2)
You. I like your style of thinking.
Re: (Score:2)
I like my style of drinking.
What ? (Score:2)
"criticising a car manufacturer when a drunk driver crashes.”
No, it's more akin to criticising a car salesman who sells a car to someone who doesn't know how to drive a car. The outcome is obvious so why do it ?
Or the bartender who keeps feeding you alcohol, knowing you have to drive home, well after it has become obvious you've had too much.
These folks create a thing that governments and intelligence agencies all salivate over fully knowing it's going to be abused to hell and back.
Because: $
See: W
Cars aren't designed for... (Score:2)
Terrorists (Score:1)
NSO Group is founded by, and for, terrorists. You can call them "ex-spies" or whatever other titles their employees previous had if you want, but they are 100% currently, and factually, terrorists. And because they are terrorists, they are also giant pussies. So they stay and hide behind the Isreali governement (also terrorists), because if that company moved out of Isreal, it would be destroyed.
Their customers are equally at fault for misusing the product as the company is for selling it to them.
"Oh..uh, I
NSO BS: NSO monitored how Pegasus was being used (Score:4, Insightful)
Once the phone numbers started coming in NSO could see that the targets were dissidents and journalists. NSO should have pulled the Pegasus plug on the offending government and told the targets.
And yet, Israel uses it (Score:2)
It's truly amazing how much Israel has borrowed from the Nazi apparatus. Pegasus allows them to spy on anyone who says any bad word about Israel, especially about their apartheid policies.
If I were Ben and Jerry, I'd get new phones, because according to Israel, they're now terrorists [hamodia.com] for not allowing their ice cream to be sold in occupied territories.
Re:And yet, Israel uses it (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The right-wing of the Israeli public doesn't care who you are. If you say a single bad word about Israel, in any context, you are considered an enemy of the state and anti-semitic.
NSO is a danger to national security (Score:2)
Sure, in theory these are countries western nations readily sell weapons to. Cyber weapons are special though, they don't just use these on regional power struggles. They hit western targets with this, western targets which higher IQ intelligence agencies would be a little more careful with.
We really don't want to push the end to end messaging paranoiacs to start developing high visibility open source minimalist cryptophones. It would be a massive boon to criminals.
It obviously needs a warning label (Score:2)
Ah, so the Sackler crime family's argument, eh? (Score:2)
We just created this ridiculously addictive pill that is easily fatal if you crush it, cut it, or in any other way damage the time-release coating. Then we marketed the holy hell out of it, and sent heaps of samples to doctors to hand out (The first hit is always free, just like on the street.). And then we flooded the distributors and supply chains, to the point that there have been individual towns that literally are receiving and distributing thousands of pills per resident per month. And then we turn
Indeed (Score:2)
"criticising a car manufacturer when a drunk driver crashes."
Or criticizing Boeing when a pilot crashes his plane, preposterous!.
Sure, (Score:1)
To take their analogy further... (Score:2)
So blaming the company is like criticising a car manufacturer when a drunk driver crashes?
Maybe so, but then reguiar car manufacturers don't build their vehicles to Mil Spec for the specific purpose of causing repeated crashes with guaranteed occupancy survivability, build in target acquisition and swerve-to-hit software, and then market it specifically to alcoholics.
Level playing field (Score:1)
How about another take on this: It levels the playing field for everyone. All you need to do is afford a product, not an entire industry. You can be a small country with almost no 3-letter capabilities, yet can have access to this massive tool.
Everyone can spy everyone. Another step to a "perfect information" world.
I don't think this is a world I want though, I'll keep my dumbphone.
Re:Blame these governments first, Apple second (Score:5, Insightful)
The maker of powerful spy software allegedly used to hack the phones of innocent people says blaming the company is like "criticising a car manufacturer when a drunk driver crashes.”
If the car manufacturer equipped their car with heavy artillery and auto tracking radar for target acquisition, then yes. I would blame the car manufacturer.
These guys are seriously delusional if they think they have clean hands.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
The maker of powerful spy software allegedly used to hack the phones of innocent people says blaming the company is like "criticising a car manufacturer when a drunk driver crashes.”
If the car manufacturer equipped their car with heavy artillery and auto tracking radar for target acquisition, then yes. I would blame the car manufacturer.
These guys are seriously delusional if they think they have clean hands.
I'm thinking we're more seriously delusional trying to compare a weaponized tool, to a car.
I know we nerds love our car analogies, but this is more akin to a weapons manufacturer, and you're not dragging Glock into a courtroom anytime soon no matter what the thug behind the trigger does with it. Same tends to apply here.
If you want to blame the tool, then make the tool illegal. Plain and simple. Otherwise, put the blame where it belongs; the abusive corporations buying and using said tool.
Re: Blame these governments first, Apple second (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
I blame NSO group. Exploits should be reported by all good citizens to the manufacturers to protect your fellow citizens. This is akin to collecting weak points in bank vault security systems and selling those weaknesses to the highest bidder, rather than inform the bank of the flaw (or the bank vault vendor). Fuck them. This should be illegal.
Oddly enough reading your complaint made me instantly think of the TMZ business model. Seems they have no issues whatsoever collecting vulnerable/private information on celebrities from the highest bidder and publishing them, rather than inform the celebrity.
And they certainly should know what's legal. Harvey's a former lawyer.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Blame these governments first, Apple second (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3)
The correct analogy would be "criticising a car manufacturer that installs a minibar in the dashboard when a drunk driver crashes."
Re: Blame these governments first, Apple second (Score:1)
Re:Blame these governments first, Apple second (Score:5, Informative)
NSO group (at least from what I'm reading) seems to be more responsible than various other "white hat" hackers and security researchers who post exploit code publicly leading to 0day hacks,
I call bullshit on that one. White hat hackers don’t post 0-day hacks.
Re: (Score:2)
NSO group (at least from what I'm reading) seems to be more responsible than various other "white hat" hackers and security researchers who post exploit code publicly leading to 0day hacks,
I call bullshit on that one. White hat hackers don’t post 0-day hacks.
Speaking of bullshit, isn't it weird how we innocently sit back and assume that a security professional working in the vulnerability reporting department for a major company, could never possibly be an insider threat, capable of turning a White Hat submission into a Black Hat zero-day in a matter of minutes?
Guess those are like unicorn farts. They simply don't exist, right?
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Blame these governments first, Apple second (Score:1)
If I, say, invented a device for looking up women's skirts, I reckon I'd still have to shoulder a fairly big chunk of the blame
Should be easy if you're not having to lug around any self respect - that's the real burden.
Re: (Score:1)
Re:Blame these governments first, Apple second (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't normally blame screwdriver manufacturers for car thefts, but when their screwdrivers say, "Guaranteed to start all model year Toyota's.", well, that's different. Hard for me to fault Toyota in that case.
There is bounty money to be made in bug hunting. There is even more money to be made in bug hording and exploiting. NSO made their own decisions on which way to go.
Re: Blame these governments first, Apple second (Score:1)
I don't normally blame screwdriver manufacturers for car thefts, but when their screwdrivers say, "Guaranteed to start all model year Toyota's.", well, that's different. Hard for me to fault Toyota in that case.
A much better comparison than some of the bullshit above...