It looks like NSO is backed up by the Israeli government. They say their software is only sold to governments which were previously vetted, but the reality is that most of the time they sell to authoritarian states which monitor and persecute people opposing the regime.
This strategy mostly works because the major operating system suppliers refuse to implement requested lawful intercept solutions for their consumer products. Instead, we end up with companies that try to fill the gaps, making a business of exploiting security flaws. It's possible for the OS vendors to completely dry this swamp, by offering competing services to law enforcement using the interfaces they already have (automated software updates, for example). The reputable clients would migrate rather quickly. These companies would be left with just the shady clients, making it much more difficult to justify their continued existence.
I don't even need to invent a scenario for this: you can buy the TSA master keys off Amazon right now. The only reason why it's not a huge problem is that TSA locks are a special thing you buy and use solely for airline luggage that is already in TSA custody anyway. If you use TSA locks on anything else, however, you're just asking for it to be stolen because the locks don't actually provide any security.
The shady clients will get their hands on any intercept key provided by law enforcement, because it's legally unreasonable for Apple or Google to only provide intercept capability to some of the countries they operate in. e.g. if you give the US and UK a decryption key you also have to give it to Saudi Arabia[0]. Hell, in some countries the shady and legit clients are part of the same government - e.g. you can't give the key to just the FBI but not the NSA or CIA.
[0] The Saudis have one very big lever they can use to force the west to do what it wants: gas prices.
The United States gets most of its petroleum from Canada.
Saudi Arabia accounts for only 7% of U.S. petroleum and crude oil imports.
Source: https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/oil-and-petroleum-produc...
2nd is Saudi Arabia then Russia. However it happens that US is also the largest consumer and their production doesn't meet the demand so they have to import from other countries like Canada and Saudi Arabia
So Saudi Arabia most definitely does have a lever, and so does Russia since the rest of the world including US allies like Japan, South Korea, Australia, NATO countries depend on their lovely black gold to have functioning economies.
https://www.api.org/news-policy-and-issues/blog/2018/06/14/w....
Have you been following the news for the past two years? Russia's sanctioned up the wazoo. No NATO country is buying Russian oil. India is now their number one costumer.
https://www.aljazeera.com/amp/news/2023/5/16/eu-to-curb-indi...
If the US was like Saudi Arabia where they exported half of their oil, and could supply most of the world at competitive prices, Russia would have really felt the Sanctions.
But right now Russia doesn’t feel the Sanctions. They’re more isolated and Putin’s propaganda has somewhat worked at making the general population anti-west and support the Ukraine invasion.
No way any reputable OS vendor would agree to enable, for example, Dutch intelligence services spying on Russian citizens living in the UK.
That is a slippery slope though, because the OS vendors could offer Law Enforcement everything today, and there will be a special request made for a little something extra tomorrow.
os-vendors are predominiantly us-american and the rest of the world has to get their lawful interception on the free market, no?
It generally continues to be immoral and illegal when governments do it. Except it also becomes more outrageous, because governments are supposed to protect us from this sort of thing.
The government is given power over people in order to protect us from other people and this is one tool to do it. They have cops with guns and soldiers with tanks, they can break in, search and seize, they can lock people in prison. All of these things are tools and it's they way they're used that decides what's immoral or outrageous.
The bigger problem here is that a private company has these tools and can use and sell then with no oversight.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizen%27s_arrest#United_Stat...
Indeed, legally, private individuals and companies are allowed to act in emergencies. For example, I generally should not break into my neighbor’s home. However, I am legally allowed (and morally obligated) to forcibly enter their residence if their house is on fire, or they’re being attacked by a burglar, etc. and I am able to prevent some of the harm.
Of course, if we assume we’re talking about situations where the government needs a warrant, the legality becomes more complicated. At what point does something become an emergency? I would say it’s not an emergency if there is time to inform the government and to let the government prevent the injury. If we assume the government is unwilling or unable to act, then the window for action should expand by some measure.
Private companies having arrest rights is just a nonstarter of an idea (putting it kindly).
However, they look very different. The major distinction is that when a private party requests an injunction allowing them to e.g. trespass on their neighbor’s land, the court will require notice and a hearing for the defendant. So, if a chemical plant needs to do earth works on a neighbor’s land to prevent a collapse, etc. the judiciary may well issue an order requiring the neighbor to let the company enter.
Frankly, notice and hearing should probably be required for some criminal warrants too. I can think of a few indictments and arrest warrants that have recently been issued where there is a genuine question as to probable cause and the alleged illegality of the conduct. It’s not fair for people who are not a flight risk to be arrested (and often imprisoned) with no opportunity to defend themselves.
How far do you really expect any tech outfit to vet the legitimacy of the warrants issued?
https://freedomhouse.org/countries/freedom-world/scores
My point being that there’s precedent for restrictions - we don’t sell nukes to anyone, and the companies which make advanced weapons systems have to get things like ITAR approvals. What would be especially powerful would be revocation: if a country is found abusing their access to this tool, they are blocked from purchases of any sort for a decade. Unfortunately, given Israel’s current politics it’s extremely unlikely that anything would happen since there’s no way to write a policy which would continue to allow their own usage.