- Meta awarded $168 million in damages after a U.S. jury found NSO Group illegally used WhatsApp to deploy spyware.
- Landmark ruling signals accountability for spyware developers implicated in global human rights violations.
- Trial revealed rare details about NSO’s operations, including a $50M research budget and clients like Saudi Arabia and Mexico.
Meta Platforms has emerged victorious in its years-long legal battle against NSO Group, securing a $168 million judgment in a landmark spyware case. The decision brings closure to a dispute that began in 2019 when Meta, through its subsidiary WhatsApp, sued the Israeli surveillance company for exploiting a vulnerability in the messaging app to deploy spyware on users’ devices.
A California jury awarded Meta $444,719 in compensatory damages and an additional $167.3 million in punitive damages, marking a significant legal win for the tech giant and a broader warning to companies developing and selling digital espionage tools. This outcome follows a previous ruling in December that concluded NSO had unlawfully accessed WhatsApp to distribute its spyware to surveillance clients.
NSO, known globally for its Pegasus software, has long claimed its tools are used to combat crime and terrorism. However, human rights groups and investigative reports have linked the firm’s technology to widespread abuse, including surveillance of activists, journalists, and political dissidents in countries such as Mexico, Saudi Arabia, and Poland. The verdict has been hailed by digital rights advocates as a pivotal moment in holding spyware manufacturers accountable.
The trial also offered rare insights into NSO’s inner operations, revealing a research team of 140 employees and a $50 million budget dedicated to finding and exploiting mobile security flaws. While NSO kept most of its client list secret, the court heard acknowledgments that governments in Saudi Arabia, Mexico, and Uzbekistan had purchased its tools.
Despite the verdict, the case underscored how little is still known about NSO’s surveillance network. The company refused to fully comply with court-ordered discovery, prompting judicial criticism and hindering transparency. While the ruling represents a step forward for tech companies and privacy advocates, much of NSO’s activities and clientele remain hidden from public scrutiny.
