Paragon in Italy: lessons from a problematic use of spyware software

Recently, a particularly significant episode has highlighted Italy's difficulties in managing advanced surveillance technologies, specifically the controversial spyware called Paragon. This program, developed with high-level Israeli technologies, was adopted by the Italian government with the intent of monitoring activities deemed dangerous to national security. However, it seems that its incorrect use and inadequate management have led to the opposite result. In response to these issues, the Israeli authorities decided to revoke the license and terminate cooperation with their Italian counterparts, thus emphasizing the importance of responsible and transparent use of such sensitive tools. This case raises fundamental questions about balancing security and privacy, as well as indicating how the improper application of technologies can undermine the very security goals they aim to achieve.

The Paragon spyware and its role in italian security strategies

Paragon represents one of the most sophisticated surveillance software available on the market, capable of intercepting communications, collecting digital data, and monitoring suspicious activities in a deep and detailed manner. Italy acquired this tool to strengthen its intelligence capabilities and counter threats such as terrorism, organized crime, and cybercrime. However, the Italian management of Paragon showed numerous operational and strategic problems. Among these, a lack of coordination between the various agencies involved, insufficient training of operators, and the absence of an adequate legal framework regulating the use of the tool emerged, factors that compromised the software's effectiveness. In fact, instead of becoming a valuable asset in the fight against crime, Paragon raised concerns about the risk of abuses and the protection of citizens’ rights. The inadequate oversight fueled an atmosphere of insecurity regarding the direction and intent of the surveillance activities.

The role of israeli authorities and the decision to suspend collaboration with Italy

The Israeli authorities managing the technology underlying Paragon closely monitored its use in Italy. Upon confirming that the software was not only being used inefficiently and not in compliance with current security standards but also risked improper application, they decided to take drastic action. Their choice was to suspend service delivery and withdraw access to the main functionalities of the software for the Italian agencies. This measure represented a severe blow to Italy’s ambitions in the field of technological surveillance and immediately halted an activity that, although born with the purpose of protecting citizens, had proven counterproductive. The Israeli decision highlights how the responsibility for the use of such technologies is not only technical but also ethical and regulatory, requiring transparency and rigor—qualities that had been lacking so far in the Italian context.

Implications for the future of surveillance technology in Italy and lessons to be learned

This Paragon episode has highlighted a series of critical issues that the Italian system will necessarily have to address to avoid similar failures in the future. First, it will be essential to establish a clear and stringent regulatory framework to govern the use of spyware, setting strict limits and controls to protect privacy and prevent abuses. Second, international cooperation in the field of security must be founded on mutual trust and respect for rules, with transparent management of data and the technologies employed. Moreover, investing in training and specialization of operators tasked with managing these tools becomes fundamental, ensuring advanced technical skills and a deep ethical sensitivity regarding surveillance use. Finally, the Paragon case can represent an opportunity for reflection for Italian institutions: to strengthen internal technological governance, improve decision-making processes, and increase public participation to ensure that surveillance technologies effectively serve citizens and democracy, rather than becoming a source of further tensions and risks for society.