NSO Group must pay more than $167 million in damages to WhatsApp for spyware campaign

Tech Crunch - May 6th, 2025

Spyware maker NSO Group has been ordered to pay over $167 million in damages to WhatsApp following a jury ruling over a 2019 hacking campaign that targeted more than 1,400 users. This legal victory for WhatsApp concludes a five-year battle, with damages including $167,256,000 in punitive damages and $444,719 in compensatory damages. WhatsApp's representatives hailed the decision as a historic win against illegal spyware that threatens user privacy and security globally. The ruling is seen as a significant deterrent to the spyware industry, which has been accused of violating privacy rights and security.

This case highlights the ongoing challenges faced by technology companies in safeguarding user data against unauthorized surveillance. The lawsuit, filed by WhatsApp in 2019, accused NSO Group of exploiting a vulnerability in WhatsApp's audio-calling feature to target individuals such as dissidents and journalists. This case has shed light on the practices of NSO Group, revealing customer identities and the scope of their operations. The ruling may have broader implications for the spyware industry, setting a precedent for accountability and legal repercussions for companies that engage in similar activities.

Legal Battle Security Privacy Spyware Nso Group Whats App Hacking Punitive Damages

Story submitted by Fairstory

RATING

7.2

Fair Story

Consider it well-founded

The news story provides a comprehensive overview of a significant legal battle between WhatsApp and NSO Group, focusing on the implications for privacy and security. The article is accurate in its reporting of the legal outcome and damages awarded, though some details could benefit from further verification. The story is well-balanced, presenting perspectives from both WhatsApp and NSO Group, though it could include more diverse viewpoints. The use of credible sources and clear language enhances the article's reliability and accessibility. The topic is timely and of broad public interest, with potential implications for policy and public opinion. Overall, the article effectively informs readers about an important issue while encouraging further discussion and exploration of related topics.

Accuracy

The news story accurately reports the outcome of a legal battle between WhatsApp and NSO Group, detailing the damages awarded and the nature of the hacking campaign. The reported figures for punitive and compensatory damages align with other sources, such as the $167,256,000 in punitive damages and approximately $444,719 in compensatory damages. The story correctly identifies the legal basis for the lawsuit, mentioning breaches of federal and California hacking laws and WhatsApp's terms of service. However, some details, such as the specific nature of the audio-calling vulnerability and the full scope of revelations from the trial, would benefit from further verification to ensure comprehensive accuracy.

Balance

The article primarily presents the perspective of WhatsApp and its representatives, highlighting the company's victory and the implications for privacy and security. While it includes a brief response from NSO Group, stating their intention to potentially appeal the decision, the article could offer a more balanced view by exploring NSO Group's defense or rationale during the trial. Additionally, the perspectives of the affected users or other stakeholders in the spyware industry are not included, which could provide a more rounded understanding of the issue.

Clarity

The article is well-structured and presents information in a logical order, beginning with the verdict and then providing background on the legal battle and reactions from involved parties. The language is clear and concise, making the story accessible to a general audience. However, the article could benefit from additional context or explanation of technical terms, such as 'audio-calling vulnerability,' to aid comprehension for readers unfamiliar with cybersecurity issues.

Source quality

The article cites statements from key figures involved in the case, such as WhatsApp's spokesperson and John Scott-Railton from Citizen Lab, which adds credibility. However, it lacks direct quotes from legal documents or court officials, which would strengthen the reliability of the reporting. The inclusion of third-party expert opinions, like those from Citizen Lab, enhances the authority of the article, but a more diverse range of sources, including legal experts or independent analysts, would improve the depth of coverage.

Transparency

The article provides a clear overview of the legal battle and its outcome, but it lacks detailed context about the methodology used to determine damages or the specific legal arguments made by both parties. The story does not disclose any potential conflicts of interest or the basis for some of its claims, such as the exact nature of the revelations about NSO Group's operations. Greater transparency regarding the sources of information and the process of reporting would enhance the reader's understanding and trust.