Cybersecurity

5687 readers

50 users here now

c/cybersecurity is a community centered on the cybersecurity and information security profession. You can come here to discuss news, post something interesting, or just chat with others.

THE RULES

Instance Rules

Be respectful. Everyone should feel welcome here.
No bigotry - including racism, sexism, ableism, homophobia, transphobia, or xenophobia.
No Ads / Spamming.
No pornography.

Community Rules

Idk, keep it semi-professional?
Nothing illegal. We're all ethical here.
Rules will be added/redefined as necessary.

If you ask someone to hack your "friends" socials you're just going to get banned so don't do that.

Learn about hacking

Hack the Box

Try Hack Me

Pico Capture the flag

Other security-related communities !databreaches@lemmy.zip !netsec@lemmy.world !cybersecurity@lemmy.capebreton.social !securitynews@infosec.pub !netsec@links.hackliberty.org !cybersecurity@infosec.pub !pulse_of_truth@infosec.pub

Notable mention to !cybersecuritymemes@lemmy.world

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

kid@sh.itjust.works

Lanky_Pomegranate530@midwest.social

U.S. Judge ordered NSO Group to hand over the Pegasus spyware code to WhatsApp (securityaffairs.com)

submitted 8 months ago by vikingqueef@lemmy.world to c/cybersecurity@sh.itjust.works

3 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] Ajen@sh.itjust.works 1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

They need to know how they were hacked so they can fix the vulnerability. NSO broke the law when they hacked whatsapp, it seems reasonable that they're forced to share details to prevent others from using the same method.

I'm wondering on what grounds is NSO allowed to keep the names of their co-conspirators (AKA clients) secret?

[–] sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 1 points 8 months ago

I think it's reasonable to require them to share details, but source code is a copyright issue and shouldn't be given up. I'm guessing the source has a lot more than just the one attack.

But yeah, I'm also surprised they're not obligated to reveal the names of anyone involved in planning or ordering the attack. Surely that could be subpoenad.