Daniel Feldman claims Vantage Intelligence paid hacker to intercept privileged communications in legal dispute
A New York attorney, Daniel Feldman, has accused a UK-based private intelligence firm, Vantage Intelligence, of hiring an Israeli hacker to undermine his court battle in a major legal case. The lawyer filed a legal motion on Thursday in Manhattan federal court, alleging that Vantage Intelligence employed hacker Aviram Azari, who was previously convicted for his role in a hacking scheme, to intercept his privileged communications with his attorneys.
The hacking allegedly occurred between 2016 and 2018 during Feldman’s legal battle with clients of Vantage Intelligence, which included entities linked to the now-defunct Russian oil conglomerate Yukos. Feldman claims that the interception of confidential communications between him and his legal team gave his opponents an unfair advantage during the trial.
The Allegations and the Court Case
Feldman was embroiled in a legal dispute with Yukos-related companies, who accused him of self-dealing and breaching his fiduciary duties. In 2019, he was found liable for these claims, though the jury ruled there was no evidence of financial harm, and he was slapped with a nominal $5 fine. Despite this verdict, Feldman’s law license was suspended for a year as a result of the decision.
Feldman now seeks to have the judgment overturned, arguing that the case was irrevocably tainted by the alleged hacking, which, according to him, compromised his ability to mount an effective defense. He contends that the hacked conversations were critical in shaping the outcome of the case.
In his motion, Feldman asserts that the UK intelligence firm Vantage Intelligence paid Azari to carry out the hacking on its behalf. Azari, who has a known history of involvement in hacking cases, reportedly intercepted privileged communications between Feldman and his attorneys, which could have provided his opponents with sensitive insights into his legal strategy.
Vantage Intelligence’s Role and Reactions
Vantage Intelligence has not publicly commented on the accusations, and attempts to reach their representatives for comment were unsuccessful. The firm is described in court filings as a private investigations agency based in London. While its reputation is largely untainted by any previous public legal controversies, the allegations now cast a dark shadow over its business practices.
Feldman’s motion, filed in the Southern District of New York, also names Azari directly as the hacker responsible for breaching his privacy. Azari, who had been previously convicted for similar offenses in a separate case, allegedly utilized his technical expertise to target the attorney’s confidential communications.
The stakes in the case are significant for Feldman, who maintains that his legal career was upended as a result of the judgment, which he now claims was unfairly influenced by illegal surveillance.
The Fallout of Hacking and Legal Implications
This case adds to the growing concerns around cyberattacks targeting individuals and entities involved in high-stakes litigation. Hackers have increasingly been used as tools in corporate and legal warfare, with privileged communications often becoming a focal point in attempts to gain an edge over adversaries.
If Feldman’s accusations are proven true, it would raise troubling questions about the extent to which intelligence agencies or private firms may be willing to go in order to achieve favorable legal outcomes for their clients. The use of mercenary hackers to undermine legal strategies would represent a gross abuse of power and a violation of legal and ethical standards.
Additionally, this case highlights the vulnerability of attorneys and their clients in the digital age. Confidential conversations, once assumed to be secure, are increasingly at risk due to sophisticated hacking techniques that allow bad actors to exploit the communications for their own gain.
A Wider Problem in Legal and Corporate Spheres
While Feldman’s case centers on a specific instance of alleged hacking, it’s part of a broader pattern of cyberattacks targeting the legal and corporate worlds. High-profile cases have seen lawyers, executives, and even entire firms fall victim to similar tactics, where confidential data is extracted and used for leverage in negotiations or court battles.
For now, Feldman is focused on securing a reversal of his prior legal loss, and his efforts could signal the start of a broader conversation about cybersecurity practices within the legal industry. If the court accepts his motion, it could set a precedent for how hacking allegations are handled in the context of legal disputes.
Despite the complexities of the case, the message is clear: the risks posed by cyberattacks in litigation are real and must be addressed. As technology advances, so too does the sophistication of the threats that lawyers and their clients face.
