1. Home
  2. |Insights
  3. |Tele-Hacking: Video Conference Hijacking and Steps You Can Take To Mitigate The Risk and Respond

Tele-Hacking: Video Conference Hijacking and Steps You Can Take To Mitigate The Risk and Respond

Client Alert | 1 min read | 04.03.20

The world’s shift to video-teleconferencing (VTC) in the wake of COVID-19 has presented an opportunity for sophisticated hackers to infiltrate digital meetings and access confidential and proprietary information. This expanding threat has important implications for everyone in the public and private sectors using any VTC platform. 

Privacy and security issues in VTCs may pose immediate business, economic, and national security risks. For example, reports suggest a world leader shared screenshots of national security issues during a VTC, raising concerns that national secrets may be compromised. For the private sector, the risks could also be significant. A tele-hacker could obtain access to and trade on inside information, steal trade secrets, or publicly disseminate sensitive and confidential information (or hold that information hostage for a sizeable ransom). To protect against these threats, public and private sector actors should revisit their cybersecurity policies, coordinate with VTC vendors, and ensure a mitigation plan is in place.

For businesses making such services available, redoubling cybersecurity and compliance efforts, and communicating best practices to customers, and users alike, is critical.

Law enforcement is also monitoring these trends. The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) recently released guidance specific to mitigating the risk of tele-hacking with VTC, which businesses may use to benchmark their efforts:

  • Make meetings private by requiring a password or controlling the admittance of guests.
  • Limit distribution of teleconference links.
  • Limit screen sharing to “Host Only” to prevent people and unintended participants from taking over and sharing images or content that is inappropriate or alarming.
  • Constantly monitor for software updates.
  • When selecting a VTC vendor, consider what security measures those vendors offer, such as end-to-end encryption.

If you believe you are a victim of a tele-hack, it is important to execute your incident response plan and consult technical and legal professionals to help with remediation and analyzing any disclosure obligations to the government, customers, or others.

Contacts

Insights

Client Alert | 5 min read | 12.12.25

Eleventh Circuit Hears Argument on False Claims Act Qui Tam Constitutionality

On the morning of December 12, 2025, the Eleventh Circuit heard argument in United States ex rel. Zafirov v. Florida Medical Associates, LLC, et al., No. 24-13581 (11th Cir. 2025). This case concerns the constitutionality of the False Claims Act (FCA) qui tam provisions and a groundbreaking September 2024 opinion in which the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida held that the FCA’s qui tam provisions were unconstitutional under Article II. See United States ex rel. Zafirov v. Fla. Med. Assocs., LLC, 751 F. Supp. 3d 1293 (M.D. Fla. 2024). That decision, penned by District Judge Kathryn Kimball Mizelle, was the first success story for a legal theory that has been gaining steam ever since Justices Thomas, Barrett, and Kavanaugh indicated they would be willing to consider arguments about the constitutionality of the qui tam provisions in U.S. ex rel. Polansky v. Exec. Health Res., 599 U.S. 419 (2023). In her opinion, Judge Mizelle held (1) qui tam relators are officers of the U.S. who must be appointed under the Appointments Clause; and (2) historical practice treating qui tam and similar relators as less than “officers” for constitutional purposes was not enough to save the qui tam provisions from the fundamental Article II infirmity the court identified. That ruling was appealed and, after full briefing, including by the government and a bevy of amici, the litigants stepped up to the plate this morning for oral argument....

View All Insights