Recent investigations have exposed the widespread use of mobile phone spyware in various armed conflicts worldwide, including in Iran, Gaza, Ukraine, Nagorno-Karabakh, and Syria. This evolving phenomenon raises pressing concerns about legal frameworks governing spyware deployment during warfare and its impact on human rights protections.
What Happened
Multiple documented cases reveal the deployment of spyware for military intelligence, espionage, and psychological operations during recent wars. For instance, Israeli forces reportedly used spyware to locate high-level Iranian officials for targeted airstrikes in June 2025, exploiting compromised mobile phones of their bodyguards. In Gaza, Israeli agencies employed NSO Group’s Pegasus spyware after the October 7 Hamas attack to track movement signals. Ukraine has faced spyware attacks from Russian cyber groups targeting military units since 2016. Investigations in Nagorno-Karabakh and Syria uncovered Pegasus and SpyMax spyware targeting government officials and military personnel. Additionally, reports indicate that Iran deployed spyware as part of psychological operations against Israeli civilians fleeing missile strikes. These cases highlight the multifaceted military use of spyware against personnel and civilians in conflict zones.
Key Facts
- Incidents span conflicts involving Iran, Gaza, Ukraine, Nagorno-Karabakh, and Syria in recent years.
- Commercial spyware such as NSO Group’s Pegasus and Android surveillance tool SpyMax were actively used.
- Legal frameworks invoked include international humanitarian law (IHL), international criminal law, and human rights law.
- International humanitarian law forbids targeting civilians and protected persons.
- Some countries like Ukraine have formally derogated from certain human rights obligations during conflict.
- Counterintelligence risks surfaced in the US after spyware was found on phones of defense personnel in Israel.
- Spyware use during war often occurs without judicial authorization or established oversight mechanisms.
Why It Matters
The deployment of spyware in wartime challenges existing legal and ethical safeguards, particularly relating to privacy, freedom of expression, and the protection of civilians. Without adequate judicial oversight or compliance with the principles of necessity and proportionality under IHL, spyware can facilitate war crimes, including disproportionately targeting civilians or interfering with justice processes. These developments also present significant counterintelligence risks and raise concerns about the erosion of human rights during armed conflicts.
Background
International humanitarian law is the primary legal regime governing conduct during armed conflicts, emphasizing protections for civilians, prisoners of war, and humanitarian actors. While the use of spyware is not prohibited outright, its deployment must not violate prohibitions against targeting protected individuals. International human rights law usually applies alongside IHL unless derogated during declared states of emergency, as Ukraine has done. Prior investigations into Pegasus spyware revealed its role in espionage and surveillance during peacetime, but its wartime implications are a growing area of concern.
Analysis
Natalia Krapiva, Senior Tech-Legal Counsel at Access Now, explained that spyware use must comply with international humanitarian law’s requirements forbidding harassment and targeting of protected populations. She noted that while spyware itself is not a war crime, it may constitute part of conduct amounting to crimes against humanity or war crimes if used to persecute civilians or protected groups. The difficulty in detecting spyware during conflict further complicates enforcement and accountability, potentially enabling widespread abuse without recourse.
Who Is Affected
- Civilians and protected persons in conflict zones potentially targeted or surveilled by spyware.
- Military personnel and government officials targeted for intelligence and counterintelligence operations.
- Human rights defenders, journalists, and public figures, as shown in Nagorno-Karabakh cases.
- Countries involved in recent conflicts deploying or defending against spyware tactics.
What Remains Unclear
- The full extent of spyware deployment in armed conflicts remains unknown due to the covert nature of these tools and investigative limitations in war zones.
- Details about the legality and extent of judicial or supervisory authorization for wartime spyware use are largely unconfirmed.
- The potential for legal precedents addressing wartime spyware use is still undeveloped, with few cases or rulings available.
- Independent verification of some reported incidents, such as the CIA’s alleged use of Pegasus in an Iranian deception operation, lacks confirmation.
What Comes Next
This information was not confirmed in the reviewed sources.
Sources
This article is based on reporting and publicly available information from the following source:
Read more World News stories on Goka World News.