Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Apple sues NSO Group to curb the abuse of state-sponsored spyware

apple.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 477 posts

Re: Apple sues NSO Group to curb the abuse of state-sponsored spyware

#231

Post by mike_d »

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #216
SQueeeeeL wrote: post #208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I like how suddenly the intense legal minuate are the most important details of a system as if we're in a contract law class, as opposed to the obvious point that in general these agreements are fairly obvious

Making up rules without thinking about the consequences of those rules is a Bad Idea.

What happens to contractual obligations when companies are acquired or dissolved is a matter that is settled law. It has been well thought out and is probably in scope for literally dozens of legal cases a day.

Just because something is new to you, doesn't mean that professionals that deal with this every day have never thought about it.

(The actual answer depends on the State, entity type, if it was dissolved or suspended, if a bankruptcy is involved, etc. and you should just consult a contracts lawyer)

Re: Apple sues NSO Group to curb the abuse of state-sponsored spyware

#232

Post by fortran77 »

Sporktacular wrote: post #106

We need to target the pos engineers and management at NSO, Finfisher, Hacking Group etc. who sell their souls for a fast buck. These pricks are likely already setting up the next corporate front for when this one collapses. Let's make the mercenary business a cripplingly expensive line of work.

"target them"? What are you proposing?

Re: Apple sues NSO Group to curb the abuse of state-sponsored spyware

#233

Post by FDSGSG »

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #226
FridayoLeary wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>0) The defendant's can be sued under California law because they accepted the EULA The Court has personal jurisdiction over Defendants because, on information and belief, they created more than one hundred Apple IDs to carry out their attacks and also agreed to Apple’s iCloud Terms and Conditions (“iCloud Terms”), including a mandatory and enforceable forum selection and exclusive jurisdiction clause that constitute…

> they created more than one hundred Apple IDs to carry out their attacks Maybe the most interesting thing about this is how it proves that their code signing system is worthless. If the same bad actor can get a hundred Apple IDs to sign literal malware with, why are they imposing this burden on random small developers?

When did anyone mention code signing or developer accounts?

Re: Apple sues NSO Group to curb the abuse of state-sponsored spyware

#234

Post by AnthonyMouse »

FDSGSG wrote: post #233
AnthonyMouse wrote: post #226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> they created more than one hundred Apple IDs to carry out their attacks Maybe the most interesting thing about this is how it proves that their code signing system is worthless. If the same bad actor can get a hundred Apple IDs to sign literal malware with, why are they imposing this burden on random small developers?

When did anyone mention code signing or developer accounts?

What did you suppose they needed a hundred Apple IDs for?

Re: Apple sues NSO Group to curb the abuse of state-sponsored spyware

#235

Post by SQueeeeeL »

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #229
SQueeeeeL wrote: post #228

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Edge cases aren't consequences; they're trivia. And at the the of day, our legal system is governed by humans who interpret and argue. Until humans are perfect, we'll never write a perfect law.

"Perfection is impossible, therefore don't try" is a dodge.

We're not making the laws, we are observers commenting on the status quo. I'm sure no one's losing sleep over hacker news commenters being upset

Re: Apple sues NSO Group to curb the abuse of state-sponsored spyware

#236

Post by eganist »

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #229
SQueeeeeL wrote: post #228

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Edge cases aren't consequences; they're trivia. And at the the of day, our legal system is governed by humans who interpret and argue. Until humans are perfect, we'll never write a perfect law.

"Perfection is impossible, therefore don't try" is a dodge.

Are you a practicing attorney?

Re: Apple sues NSO Group to curb the abuse of state-sponsored spyware

#237

Post by rendaw »

TillE wrote: post #221
FridayoLeary wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>0) The defendant's can be sued under California law because they accepted the EULA The Court has personal jurisdiction over Defendants because, on information and belief, they created more than one hundred Apple IDs to carry out their attacks and also agreed to Apple’s iCloud Terms and Conditions (“iCloud Terms”), including a mandatory and enforceable forum selection and exclusive jurisdiction clause that constitute…

Nerds always want to interpret the law in some strict pedantic fashion, but in practice this is almost never how it works. Law is not applied stupidly or mechanically, you can't fashion yourself some ad hoc workaround unless you're extremely certain about what you're doing, preferably with a mountain of precedent behind you.

"NSO can be sued under California law because they accepted the EULA" seems like a mechanical, strict, pedantic application of law though.

Re: Apple sues NSO Group to curb the abuse of state-sponsored spyware

#238

Post by bjourne »

einpoklum wrote: post #212
technobabbler wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Beyond merely selling their products to Israel, the NSO Group itself is an Israeli firm, founded by ex-Israeli intelligence, and whose products are subject to Israeli national export controls. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NSO_Group That's a level of sponsorship way beyond simply being a customer... that's state espionage served with a side of profit. It's evil when the USA does it, it's evil when the Russians do it,…

> Israeli national export controls A crash course in Israeli national export control: 1. You can sell everything except for nuclear tech (and maybe even that, I don't know). 2. If the client is not officially an enemy of Israel then do whatever you want, we don't give an f'ing f'. 3. If the client _is_ officially an enemy of Israel, then all sales must be conducted through official (secret) state channels. Independen…

Are you sure about that? The English translation of the export control law seem to imply that companies exporting defense equipment must have a license and that that license can be revoked whenever for almost whatever reason: http://www.exportctrl.mod.gov.il/Documents/%D7%97%D7%95%D7%A... I may be misunderstanding it though.

Re: Apple sues NSO Group to curb the abuse of state-sponsored spyware

#239

Post by appleflaxen »

TillE wrote: post #221
FridayoLeary wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>0) The defendant's can be sued under California law because they accepted the EULA The Court has personal jurisdiction over Defendants because, on information and belief, they created more than one hundred Apple IDs to carry out their attacks and also agreed to Apple’s iCloud Terms and Conditions (“iCloud Terms”), including a mandatory and enforceable forum selection and exclusive jurisdiction clause that constitute…

Nerds always want to interpret the law in some strict pedantic fashion, but in practice this is almost never how it works. Law is not applied stupidly or mechanically, you can't fashion yourself some ad hoc workaround unless you're extremely certain about what you're doing, preferably with a mountain of precedent behind you.

Your argument loses weight with the ad homonym attack.

Re: Apple sues NSO Group to curb the abuse of state-sponsored spyware

#240

Post by [deleted] »

Adamantisa wrote: post #224

Court has no jurisdiction over NSO. At most, it was foreign international persons who accepted iCloud's terms and conditions. They'd have to identify them, prove that they are linked to NSO, and in fact acting on behalf of NSO in their official capacity. And even after that, they'd just not travel under their real names, or even not travel at all, and that's that.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN