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

271–280 of 477 posts

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

#271

Post by woah »

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #205
eganist wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 50 years from now if someone is doing software archaeology and they go to install some software from a long gone company, who does clicking the button form an agreement with? Will it be legal to try that software? Can existing software companies list people they have click-through agreements with? These things seem like a bad joke in practical terms. I mean, this seems pretty easily addressed: I can't sign a contra…

There are some practical problems with this. Suppose that Small Co sells the assets of a business unit to Big Co. Do you now have a contract with Small Co. or Big Co.? Small Co. no longer has the rights to the software. Big Co. may not agree to the terms of the old license. Suppose someone dies and their assets go to their heirs. Do you now have a contract with the heirs? What if there are no heirs, so the assets go…

What are the problems here?

> Suppose that Small Co sells the assets of a business unit to Big Co. Do you now have a contract with Small Co. or Big Co.? Small Co. no longer has the rights to the software

That's right, that's what they sold.

> Big Co. may not agree to the terms of the old license.

Then I guess maybe they shouldn't have bought it.

> Suppose someone dies and their assets go to their heirs. Do you now have a contract with the heirs?

Yes. They inherited the deceased's assets.

> What if there are no heirs, so the assets go to the government? Do you now have a contract with the government?

You'd probably have to ask an estate planning attorney about the specifics of this, but so what if you did?

> I can think of some fun terms to add to a software license from someone on their deathbed if that's the case.

You should totally do it lol

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

#272

Post by cronix »

> to hold it accountable for the surveillance and targeting of Apple users.

What exactly does that mean? Fine them? Get them to stop? Have them publicly say, "my bad?" I suspect the larger goal is to find out exactly how NSO is bypassing Apple's very expensive security and plugging it? Is that specific info the type of thing Apple can get their hands on (actual code, etc) for this type of trial?

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

#273

Post by woah »

mike_d wrote: post #231
AnthonyMouse wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 sus…

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

When you apply the immense brainpower of a web developer browsing HN to a subject, amazing things can happen.

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

#275

Post by ls612 »

sam-2727 wrote: post #200
threeseed wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> has some cringe worthy descriptions of technical things Par for the course when trying to explain things to non-technical people. People joke but you can see the thought process in explaining to a politician that the internet is a "series of tubes" for example.

Reminds me of when the Oracle v. Google case was argued in front of the Supreme Court on a series of metaphors, among other things comparing Java to football teams: https://www.theverge.com/2020/10/9/21506172/oracle-google-ja...

The justices clearly boned up on the technical aspects of the case though as their opinion shows a good grasp of what is going on in the underlying dispute over Android.

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

#276

Post by miki123211 »

strict9 wrote: post #7

It is great to see this happen. It's also fascinating that the crux of the Apple's case against NSO hinges on NSO engineers that accepted iCloud's terms and conditions. From related NYT article: > The sample of Pegasus gave Apple a forensic understanding of how Pegasus worked. The company found that NSO’s engineers had created more than 100 fake Apple IDs to carry out their attacks. In the process of creating those a…

Were those engineers authorized to act on NSO's behalf?

If I sign an agreement with Apple on behalf of , even as, let's say, an intern at that FAANG company, Apple should probably sue me, not the FAANG.

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

#277

Post by danaris »

Caligatio wrote: post #199
ziddoap wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Agreed. That's exactly what it seems like. And that sounds like immoral, unjustifiable, sickening hell. That Apple gets to hold all the cards, no one else on the planet gets any say in how a device might be used. I'm not a big proponent of IP, but you're basically saying it is immoral, unjustifiable, and sickening as hell that Apple enforces the rules that Apple wants on Apple products/services, which were created…

Replace "Apple" by any traditional car company and you should immediately become concerned. Shouldn't a car company have absolute, one-sided control over the cars they sell? Like should the car stop working if you agreed to obey the speed limit but then sped? Or stop working if you didn't use their branded fluids?

Except, as I understand it, this case is not about a EULA on the iPhones themselves, but rather on Apple's services.

They agreed to the EULA on the services, then, in part, abused their access to those services to hack into other people's iPhones.

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

#278

Post by danaris »

catlikesshrimp wrote: post #185
ziddoap wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Agreed. That's exactly what it seems like. And that sounds like immoral, unjustifiable, sickening hell. That Apple gets to hold all the cards, no one else on the planet gets any say in how a device might be used. I'm not a big proponent of IP, but you're basically saying it is immoral, unjustifiable, and sickening as hell that Apple enforces the rules that Apple wants on Apple products/services, which were created…

The law works fine when there is no monopoly. But since Apple has 50% of the market share, the law doesn't work well anymore.

...50% of what market?

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

#279

Post by SubjectToChange »

technobabbler wrote: post #48
badRNG wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One could interpret this as the software is "sponsored" by the governments that finance their operations and purchase their products. This would be countries like Saudi Arabia, Mexico, Germany, and Kazakhstan, not necessarily Israel. Though the fact the US has sanctioned an Israeli business does seem to have potential implications on Israeli policy. [1] [1] https://www.reuters.com/technology/us-blacklists-four-compan…

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,…

the NSO Group itself is an Israeli firm, founded by ex-Israeli intelligence, and whose products are subject to Israeli national export controls.

All this means is that the NSO Group is an Israeli company staffed by Israeli citizens. I don't know what export controls have to do with anything since those apply categories of products, regardless of whether or not you have business with the Israeli government.

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

#280

Post by JumpCrisscross »

monocasa wrote: post #230
freejazz wrote: post #218

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The federal court could only ever do what a federal court could do which is levy sanctions or judgments against NSO property.

Against US based NSO property, practically speaking.

> US based NSO property, practically speaking

Nope. Not only does Israel have an extradition treaty with the U.S., their civil systems are quite tightly linked.

[1] https://www.state.gov/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/07-110-Isra...

Post reply on HN