US courts to reveal how often FBI uses spyware starting in 2029
The FBI has relied on hacking tools and spyware since at least 1998, yet no public data has ever been released on how frequently federal agencies deploy these techniques. That is about to change — at least when it comes to wiretapping someone's real-time communications.
Starting in 2029, the U.S. judiciary will be required to disclose exactly how many times judges authorized wiretaps carried out with hacking tools and spyware. In federal terminology, these fall under the category of network investigating techniques, or NITs.
For nearly two decades, the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, which oversees the operations of the judicial branch, has published annual Wiretap Reports. These documents detail how many wiretaps were authorized each year, broken down by whether federal or state judges issued them, which states conducted the wiretaps, what type of crime was under investigation, and other data points.
Wiretaps grant police real-time access to a person's calls, messages, and other communications. Because of how deeply they intrude on privacy, law enforcement must meet a high evidentiary bar — showing that a crime is being committed — before a judge will approve a live tap. As a result, wiretaps are authorized far less often than search warrants, but they can still sweep up enormous volumes of communications. Years ago, for example, a single wiretap enabled a massive surveillance operation that collected millions of text messages over the course of three months.
The annual wiretap reports already break down the types of interception used, but they have never separately counted cases where hacking tools or spyware were involved. The new rule closes that gap by adding a dedicated category for NITs to the reporting. This will give the public its first real look at how widely spyware is used in criminal investigations, and how often judges sign off on such invasive methods.
The change responds to growing concerns about the government's use of surveillance technology and the lack of transparency around it. Advocacy groups and civil liberties organizations have long pushed for more disclosure, arguing that the public has a right to know how often authorities deploy tools capable of bypassing encryption and gaining covert access to devices. The judiciary's decision to publish these figures is seen as a step toward accountability, though it will take several years before the first data becomes available.
