by In a recent ruling, a judge outlined extensive and Habitual Phone hacking by reporters working for Mirror Group Newspapers, the parent company of several UK-based newspapers, between 1999 and 2006, with some instances continuing through 2011. The judge stated that this illegal news gathering involved paid private investigators and may have resulted in Prince Harry’s phone being hacked to some extent.
According to Aanjhan Ranganathan, an assistant professor at Khoury College of Computer Sciences, during that period, cellular technology underwent significant advancements, transitioning from the relatively insecure years of the 1980s and 1990s to the slightly more fortified but still vulnerable early 2000s. Common forms of cell phone hacking during this time ranged from eavesdropping on calls to accessing voicemails, text messages, and other user data by intercepting communications through false base stations.
Ranganathan explains that the initial generation of cellular networks operated purely on analog, meaning there was minimal security in terms of confidentiality and integrity. However, Christo Wilson, an associate professor of computer sciences, believes that the notion of phone hacking in this case may be somewhat misleading. Instead, Wilson suggests that the remote services connected to Prince Harry’s phone were likely compromised rather than the physical device itself.
Wilson further emphasizes that there are compelling indications that the data was somehow stolen in this instance. This revelation is not the first proven case of phone hacking by the British press. Notably, Rupert Murdoch’s now-defunct News of the World, along with other British newspapers, engaged in hacking to obtain information about celebrities, politicians, and the royal family in the 2000s and beyond.
As hacking techniques continue to evolve, Ranganathan speculates that more organizations with technical expertise will explore this realm. Public documents have revealed instances where news organizations and large corporations have utilized “zero-click attacks” for purposes such as corporate espionage. Ranganathan clarifies that a zero-click attack refers to a method of accessing a smart device without requiring any action from the user. Once the malicious package is sent, the attacker gains access to the device’s data.
The judge’s ruling also highlights that phone hacking remained prevalent in the kind of journalism practiced at the Mirror, the Sunday Mirror, and The People from 2006 to 2011. However, during this period, the hacking was more controlled and no longer carried out as habitually since August 2006.
Prince Harry, who recently stepped back as a working member of the royal family, was awarded $180,000 in the lawsuit. Alongside nearly 100 others, Harry filed a lawsuit against Mirror Group Newspapers, the publisher of the Daily Mirror, the Sunday Mirror, and the Sunday People tabloids. The plaintiffs alleged that the company engaged in an industrial-scale effort to hack the phones of prominent individuals dating back to 1991 and that executives and senior editors gave their approval.
The judge acknowledged that not all of the British press’ oppressive behavior towards Prince Harry, the Duke of Sussex, constituted unlawful activity. He stated that the Mirror Group was only partially responsible for the Duke’s suffering, as much of the press’s oppressive behavior was within legal boundaries.
In conclusion, the ruling sheds light on the extensive phone hacking practices carried out by a British tabloid company. These revelations raise concerns about the vulnerability of personal data and the potential misuse of advanced hacking techniques in various sectors.
*Note:
1. Source: Coherent Market Insights, Public sources, Desk research
2. We have leveraged AI tools to mine information and compile it
