NSO Group’s Transparency Report Under Scrutiny Amid U.S. Market Ambitions
NSO Group, a prominent and contentious developer of government surveillance software, recently unveiled a new transparency report, signaling what it describes as a new phase of accountability. This move comes as the company seeks to re-enter the U.S. market following its acquisition by a consortium of American investors.
A Shift in Leadership and Strategy
In the past year, NSO Group has undergone significant transformations. The company was acquired by a group of U.S. investors, leading to notable changes in its executive team. Former Trump administration official David Friedman has been appointed as the new executive chairman. Concurrently, CEO Yaron Shohat stepped down, and Omri Lavie, the last remaining founder actively involved with the company, also departed. These changes are perceived as part of NSO’s broader strategy to align itself more closely with U.S. interests and to facilitate its removal from the U.S. Commerce Department’s Entity List, which currently restricts American companies from engaging in business with NSO.
Transparency Report: Promises Without Proof?
The latest transparency report from NSO Group has been met with skepticism. Unlike previous disclosures, this report lacks specific details regarding the number of clients the company has rejected, investigated, suspended, or terminated due to human rights violations associated with its surveillance tools. While the report emphasizes commitments to human rights and outlines mechanisms to ensure client compliance, it falls short of providing concrete evidence to substantiate these claims.
In contrast, earlier reports offered more transparency. For instance, the 2024 report disclosed that NSO initiated three investigations into potential misuse, resulting in the termination of one client relationship and the implementation of remedial measures for another. Additionally, the company claimed to have declined over $20 million in new business opportunities due to human rights concerns. The absence of such detailed information in the current report raises questions about the company’s commitment to genuine transparency.
Critics Voice Concerns
Experts and watchdog organizations have expressed doubts about the sincerity of NSO’s recent transparency efforts. Natalia Krapiva, senior tech-legal counsel at Access Now, a digital rights organization, remarked, NSO is clearly on a campaign to get removed from the U.S. Entity List, and one of the key things they need to show is that they have dramatically changed as a company since they were listed. She further noted that while leadership changes and transparency reports are steps in the right direction, they are insufficient without tangible evidence of reform.
John Scott-Railton, a senior researcher at The Citizen Lab, echoed these sentiments, stating, Nothing in this document allows outsiders to verify NSO’s claims, which is business as usual from a company that has a decade-long history of making claims that later turned out to be misrepresentation.
A History of Controversy
NSO Group’s reputation has been marred by numerous allegations of its spyware being used to target journalists, activists, and political dissidents. In 2025, a jury ruled that NSO must pay over $167 million in damages to WhatsApp for a 2019 hacking campaign that compromised more than 1,400 users. This legal battle highlighted the potential misuse of NSO’s technology and underscored the need for stringent oversight.
Furthermore, in 2025, a Barcelona court ruled that NSO’s co-founders could be indicted as part of an investigation into the alleged hacking of a Catalan lawyer. These incidents have contributed to the company’s contentious standing on the global stage.
U.S. Market Ambitions and Regulatory Hurdles
NSO’s aspirations to penetrate the U.S. market are evident. The appointment of David Friedman, a former U.S. official, as executive chairman is seen as a strategic move to navigate the complex regulatory landscape. However, the company’s inclusion on the U.S. Commerce Department’s Entity List poses a significant barrier. Despite lobbying efforts, NSO has yet to convince U.S. authorities to lift these restrictions.
The recent transparency report appears to be part of a broader campaign to rehabilitate the company’s image and demonstrate a commitment to ethical practices. However, without concrete actions and verifiable data, skepticism remains.
The Path Forward
For NSO Group to gain credibility and achieve its goal of entering the U.S. market, it must go beyond surface-level commitments. Transparency reports should include detailed accounts of client vetting processes, instances of misuse, and corrective actions taken. Engaging with independent auditors and allowing third-party verification of its practices could also bolster trust.
Moreover, the company must address past grievances and demonstrate a clear break from previous practices that led to human rights violations. Only through genuine reform and accountability can NSO hope to rebuild its reputation and establish itself as a responsible player in the surveillance technology industry.
