This might be quibbling but true democratic process could be interpreted as direct democracy where the law is directly voted for and people give a specific assent to the law (which ancient Athens did do). This is more of a democratic republic where officials elected through democratic process then make decisions, which usually works more smoothly than a pure democracy, but it does mean that the population at large does not necessarily support this specific law (though they might).
> Is it sensitive to compromise a phone, now that there is a national law allowing it, passed through a democratic process?
The technology itself is sensitive, when you buy a full chain exploit like the ones that have the public bounty price above, if it gets burnt it's useless for everyone else who bought it after its patched.
Generally exploit brokers don't like it when you burn their exploits.
> In the US the major cities have police budgets of between $200 million and $5 billion
Yeah and most didn’t have this capability generally considering both the costs and the little amount of use you'd have for it.
You'd expect something more federal like the NSA, CIA or the FBI to have this kind of capability which is why its kinda a big deal when normal cops get it.
Is it sensitive to compromise a phone, now that there is a national law allowing it, passed through a democratic process?