INDEX / DIRECTORY / ZOOM

Zoom

Software & Cloud 63 CITED SOURCES UPDATED 2026-09-11 METHOD V6.5
BDS-1000 Score 511 /1000 C Tier C - High
Military ↗ 0.00 Digital ↗ 2.99 Economic ↗ 5.58 Political ↗ 5.38
OWNERSHIP TREE 4 brands and group businesses View all

OpenIntel is reader-funded - no sponsors, no institutional money. Support OpenIntel →

Key Findings

  • Economic: Zoom invested approximately $75 million in Israeli company monday.com’s 2021 IPO; the record supports an equity investment, not an acquisition or controlling stake.1, 2
  • Political: Zoom prohibited several 2020 university events featuring Palestinian activist Leila Khaled, citing legal, sanctions, export-control and anti-terrorism considerations; subsequent policy changes created a stated academic-freedom process subject to legal and safety exceptions.3, 4, 5
  • Political: Zoom director H.R. McMaster chairs the advisory board of FDD’s Center on Military and Political Power and publicly advocated stronger U.S. support for Israel while opposing a ceasefire before Hamas was destroyed. The record does not establish Zoom endorsement, direction or funding of his advocacy.6, 7
  • Not found: No public evidence identified of Zoom contracts with Israeli military or security bodies, weapons or targeting-system supply, Project Nimbus participation, Israeli data-centre operations, or settlement deployments.8, 9, 10, 11

Target Profile

FieldDetail
Company NameZoom Communications, Inc.
JurisdictionDelaware, United States.12
Headquarters55 Almaden Boulevard, 6th Floor, San Jose, California, United States.12
SectorAI-first communications and collaboration software platform, including Zoom Workplace, Phone, Contact Center, Events and AI Companion.12
OwnershipPublic SEC registrant with dual-class stock. Eric S. Yuan was reported as holding 37.7% of total voting power as of 31 March 2026; Vanguard, BlackRock and Emergence Capital Partners affiliates were among other disclosed significant holders in the 2026 proxy.6
Key Executives / GovernanceEric S. Yuan (Chair, President and CEO); Aparna Bawa was COO and Michelle Chang CFO as of 31 March 2026. Directors documented in the 2026 proxy include H.R. McMaster, Jonathan Chadwick, Cindy Hoots, Dan Scheinman, Michael Fenger and Santiago Subotovsky; later 2026 filings record William McDermott’s resignation and Jeff Epstein’s appointment.6, 13
Israeli-Nexus SummaryDocumented nexus consists principally of Israeli reseller activity and public-sector licensing, an equity investment in monday.com, a Georgia contractual non-boycott-of-Israel affirmation, and the 2020 Khaled event-access controversy; no verified Israeli military, settlement, cloud-sovereign or weapons nexus was identified.14, 1, 3, 15

Key Facts:

Executive Summary

Zoom is a United States communications-platform company, not a defence manufacturer, infrastructure contractor or physical-goods supplier.12 The strongest documented Israel-related economic vector is Zoom’s approximately $75 million purchase of monday.com shares at the Israeli company’s June 2021 IPO price. The available record characterises this as an equity investment, not an acquisition, controlling operating stake, Israeli state investment, or defence-sector investment.1, 2

The principal operational nexus is Israeli channel and public-sector licensing. A 2020 certification identified Tel Aviv-based Naotech Communication Group as Zoom’s authorised reseller in Israel, able to sell, configure and install Zoom services.16 Israeli records document Zoom licence procurements through Naotech for the Ministry of Justice and Courts Administration, while the Ministry of Education-branded Zoom site states that a Zoom virtual classroom is available to teaching staff.14, 18, 17 The record supports civilian public-sector product availability and licensing, including court use; it does not establish direct contracts between Zoom and those bodies, since Naotech is identified as supplier in the procurement notices.14, 18

The strongest political scoring vector is H.R. McMaster’s documented leadership role with the Foundation for Defense of Democracies and his September 2024 advocacy for stronger U.S. support for Israel and against a ceasefire before Hamas was destroyed. McMaster was a current Zoom director with documented committee roles, so the rubric applies direct board-member attribution while capping magnitude because Zoom endorsement, direction and funding were not established.6, 7

A separate political-content issue is Zoom’s September 2020 decision to prohibit a San Francisco State University event featuring Leila Khaled, followed by reported prevention of related University of Hawai‘i and NYU webinars. Contemporary reporting attributed the decision to Zoom’s compliance concerns under its terms and U.S. export-control, sanctions and anti-terrorism requirements. Civil-society organisations criticised the decisions as selective enforcement, but those characterisations are advocacy positions rather than adjudicated findings.3, 4, 5 Zoom subsequently published an academic-freedom policy describing a process in which qualifying academic content reports are generally actioned through the host or account administrator, subject to legal/regulatory risk, immediate safety threats and specified meeting limitations.19

Important limiting findings remain central to the record. No public evidence identified of Zoom contracts with the Israeli Ministry of Defense, IDF, intelligence agencies, Israel Police, Israel Prison Service or settlement authorities; Israeli military use cannot be inferred from general-purpose videoconferencing or a technology-neutral tender that merely listed “Teams, Zoom” as examples.20, 9 No public evidence identified of Project Nimbus participation, Israeli cloud or data-centre infrastructure, Israeli surveillance or biometric deployment, weapons integration, targeting systems, or identified settlements deployment.8, 10, 11

Under the fixed, human-vetted V6.5 assessment, Zoom receives BRS 511, Tier C (Substantial Complicity). This score records the documented economic, political and public-sector nexus while preserving the absence of verified military contracting or digital-security deployment and the unresolved status of proposed rather than executed procurements.

Timeline of Relevant Events

DateEvent
November 2018A later Zoom certification stated that Naotech had been a fully authorised Zoom reseller in Israel since this date.16
11 June 2020Zoom certified Naotech as a fully authorised Channel Partner Program reseller and stated it was Zoom’s only authorised reseller in Israel at that time.16
September 2020Zoom prohibited San Francisco State University’s planned event featuring Leila Khaled; contemporary reporting described the event as a discussion of Palestinian rights.3
October 2020A civil-rights coalition wrote to Zoom alleging cancellations of San Francisco State University and University of Hawai‘i events and threats affecting university accounts.21
April 2021Zoom published its academic-freedom policy for qualifying higher-education meetings and webinars.19
14 June 2021Zoom Video Communications purchased 483,871 monday.com ordinary shares at the IPO price, an announced cash purchase of approximately $75 million.1
27 June 2021Israel’s Ministry of Justice published a sole-source notice for Zoom licences supplied through Naotech, with a stated 1 July 2021–30 June 2022 term.14
10 March 2024A Courts Administration professional opinion described Zoom as the main video-meeting infrastructure for court presidents and judges and identified Naotech as sole supplier for the proposed procurement.18
24 September 2024Courts Administration published an intention to contract with Naotech for Zoom across the court system for a proposed 2025 term; the notice does not establish execution.22
22 May 2025Zoom’s Georgia Technology Authority contract amendment included an affirmation that Zoom was not engaged in a boycott of Israel as defined by Georgia law.15
22 October 2025Courts Administration published a further sole-supplier intention notice for Zoom licences through Naotech for a proposed 2026 term; expiry of the notice period does not establish execution.23

Corporate Overview

Zoom Communications, Inc. is the top-level SEC reporting company and consolidated parent. Its fiscal-2026 filing describes an AI-first communications and collaboration platform, and its principal executive offices are in San Jose, California.12 Zoom’s corporate history records incorporation as Saasbee, Inc. in 2011, subsequent name changes to Zoom Communications, Inc. and Zoom Video Communications, Inc., and a return to Zoom Communications, Inc. in November 2024.12

The disclosed February 2026 subsidiary exhibit includes entities associated with Zoom Voice Communications, Keybase, Solvvy, Workvivo, Brighthire, Bonsai Technologies and Templobe, among others. It lists subsidiaries in several countries but no Israel-incorporated subsidiary.8 That disclosure is not evidence of no Israeli commercial nexus: it does not establish the absence of customers, resellers, personnel, contractors, cloud routing or other activity not requiring an Israeli subsidiary.

Naotech is the central documented Israeli channel entity. Zoom’s June 2020 certification stated that Naotech and its subsidiaries could sell, configure and install Zoom services and that Naotech was Zoom’s sole authorised Israeli reseller at that time.16 Naotech currently markets itself as Zoom’s official technology partner in Israel and advertises local implementation and support. These materials support a reseller relationship and local support offering; they do not independently establish every customer relationship, a direct Zoom public contract, or present-day legal exclusivity on the same terms.17

Domain Summaries

Military: Military

Mechanism of Involvement

No public evidence identified of Zoom contracts, tender awards, framework agreements or memoranda of understanding with the Israeli Ministry of Defense, IDF, Israel Prison Service, Border Police, Israeli intelligence bodies or Israeli defence primes.20, 9 The identified 2021 Zoom-licence purchaser was Israel’s Ministry of Justice, through Naotech, and the related protocol limited the procurement to up to 35 licences; this supports civilian-government licensing rather than a verified defence or security contract.14

Zoom markets “Zoom for Defense” for the U.S. Department of Defense, with a U.S. DISA Impact Level 4 authorisation for DoD NIPRNet communications. The cited material presents a U.S.-specific offering and does not verify Israeli sale, deployment, licensing or export authorisation.24 No public evidence identified of Zoom manufacturing, integrating or maintaining weapons, munitions, targeting systems, fire-control systems, tactical variants, military logistics or base services for Israeli forces.9, 10, 11

Counter-Arguments and Evidence Limits

The strongest defence is that Zoom is a general-purpose civilian communications platform and that the only identified Israeli government procurement was civilian Ministry of Justice licensing through a reseller.12, 14 General-purpose videoconferencing does not establish kinetic targeting, weapons integration or military operational effects without evidence of a specific end use.9

No military nexus conclusion should be drawn from Naotech’s general claim that it serves “armed forces” among many client categories. The cited reseller material does not identify an Israeli armed-force customer using Zoom, dates, products or contracts.25 These are bounded public-record findings, not proof that no undisclosed user exists.

Named Entities and Evidence Map

Digital: Digital

Mechanism of Involvement

The documented digital nexus is public-sector licensing and a security-platform integration, not Israeli state surveillance or sovereign cloud. The 2021 Ministry of Justice procurement described remote-work video meetings, support, training, account settings, recording support and advanced security settings through Naotech.14, 18 Courts Administration notices and professional material document use or intended procurement of Zoom through Naotech, but proposed procurement notices do not themselves establish completed contracts.18, 22, 23

Check Point markets an integration that can discover and protect third-party Zoom integrations, block risky connections and conduct SaaS security and compliance checks. The page identifies Check Point as integration provider; it does not establish that Zoom deploys Check Point within Zoom infrastructure or transfers Zoom customer data to Check Point.26

Counter-Arguments and Evidence Limits

No public evidence identified of Zoom-operated or leased data-centre infrastructure in Israel, Project Nimbus participation, sovereign-cloud services, Israeli R&D centres, Israeli technology-company acquisitions, or state-security contracts.8, 9, 10 Nor was public evidence identified of Zoom providing biometrics, facial recognition, predictive policing, offensive cyber tools, AI decision support, surveillance-derived training data or purpose-built kinetic-targeting systems to Israeli security actors.10, 11

The evidence does not disclose hosting location, data residency, routing, processing configuration, precise end users or whether the civilian licences were accessible to security bodies.18, 23 Accordingly, the identified licensing should not be elevated into a claim of Israeli state surveillance, military cloud provision or intelligence integration.

Named Entities and Evidence Map

Economic: Economic

Mechanism of Involvement

Zoom’s clearest documented economic connection is its June 2021 investment in monday.com. Zoom purchased 483,871 ordinary shares at $155 per share, approximately $75 million in announced cash consideration. A contemporaneous investor-rights agreement identifies monday.com Ltd. as an Israeli company and Zoom as an investor signatory.1, 2 The evidence supports an equity investment rather than an acquisition, operating control or controlling stake.

Zoom also had documented Israeli channel activity through Naotech. The June 2020 reseller certification stated that Naotech could sell, configure and install Zoom services and was Zoom’s only authorised reseller in Israel at that time.16 Zoom’s FY2024 filing further stated that customers in Israel and the surrounding area, combined with customers in the Ukraine-related conflict region, represented approximately 1% of net assets and consolidated revenue; this regional figure cannot be allocated to Israel alone.27

Counter-Arguments and Evidence Limits

No public evidence identified of Zoom purchasing Israeli physical goods, underwriting Israeli sovereign debt or Israel Bonds, extending finance to Israeli defence primes or settlement-active companies, or operating an Israeli office, warehouse, support centre or disclosed data centre.28, 8 Zoom’s annual reports did not provide Israel-only revenue, profit, tax, employment, capital-expenditure or market-share figures.27, 28

The monday.com evidence is limited to a disclosed share purchase and investor-rights agreement. It does not establish a continuing holding, management role, control, or a connection between the investment and Israeli military, settlement or state activity.1, 2 Similarly, historical reseller authorisation does not establish that Naotech remains authorised on identical terms or that Zoom directly served any particular customer.16

Named Entities and Evidence Map

Political: Political

Mechanism of Involvement

The governing political evidence is H.R. McMaster’s role as chair of the advisory board of FDD’s Center on Military and Political Power and his September 2024 advocacy for stronger U.S. support for Israel and against a ceasefire before Hamas was destroyed.7 His current Zoom directorship, election through 2029 and committee roles satisfy the rubric’s board-member attribution rule; the score still distinguishes that attribution rule from evidence of Zoom endorsement, direction or funding, none of which was established.6, 7

Zoom’s 2020 decision to deny platform access to events featuring Leila Khaled is a separate direct corporate act. Contemporary reporting described the San Francisco State University event as a Palestinian-rights discussion, and reported Zoom’s explanation as compliance with its terms and U.S. export-control, sanctions and anti-terrorism requirements based on Khaled’s reported affiliation with a U.S.-designated foreign terrorist organisation.3, 4 PEN America reported that Zoom also pre-emptively prevented University of Hawai‘i and NYU webinars and characterised the conduct as selective enforcement; that characterisation is not an adjudicated finding.5

Israeli government-related licensing is also politically relevant because it concerns state institutions, though the documented users are civilian. The Ministry of Justice procurement, Courts Administration use and notices, Ministry of Education-branded Zoom page, and Naotech’s Israeli support activity establish a public-sector and market nexus without establishing a security, occupation or settlement deployment.14, 18, 17

Zoom’s 2025 Georgia Technology Authority amendment contains a contractual affirmation that Zoom was not engaged in a boycott of Israel and would not participate in one during the agreement’s term. It is state-procurement compliance language, not evidence by itself of voluntary Israel advocacy or lobbying.15

Counter-Arguments and Evidence Limits

The evidence limit on the governing McMaster finding is that his remarks were personal and the source does not show Zoom endorsement, direction or funding; the direct proximity score follows the rubric’s board-attribution doctrine rather than a factual finding of corporate adoption.6, 7 Separately, Zoom framed the 2020 platform decisions as legal compliance, not a corporate position on Palestinian rights or Israeli policy, and later issued an academic-freedom policy addressing qualifying higher-education content reports.4, 19 No post-7 October 2023 official Zoom statement on Israel–Palestine was located in the bounded review, and no public evidence identified of an official statement on Palestinian civilian harm; these are bounded absence findings and do not establish motive or a complete publication history.12, 10

No public evidence identified of Zoom-directed donations, free services, cloud credits, logistics or other resource mobilisation for the IDF, FIDF, JNF/KKL, settlement bodies or military-welfare organisations.12, 10 Naotech’s reported charitable assistance is evidence about a reseller’s own stated activity, not proof of Zoom corporate funding, direction, approval or participation.30 H.R. McMaster’s personal support for stronger U.S. backing for Israel at an FDD event likewise does not establish Zoom endorsement, direction or funding.7

Named Entities and Evidence Map

BDS-1000 Score

Method: V6.5.

DomainIMPV-Domain Score
Military0.000.000.000.00
Digital4.006.106.002.99
Economic6.406.108.005.58
Political7.105.309.005.38

V_MAX is driven by the documented economic nexus: the monday.com equity investment, historical reseller relationship and limited but documented Israel-related market exposure. The political score is governed by McMaster’s structured advocacy under the rubric’s board-attribution doctrine, with the Khaled event-access episode, public-sector licensing nexus and Georgia anti-boycott compliance affirmation assessed as separate alternatives. The V6.5 method is scale-free, evidence-only and human-vetted; the fixed score does not convert personal remarks into factual Zoom endorsement or unresolved procurement notices, reseller conduct or general-purpose platform functionality into verified military or surveillance conduct.

Methodology Note

Footnotes

  1. https://monday.com/p/press-release/monday-com-announces-closing-of-its-initial-public-offering-and-full-exercise-of-underwriters-option-to-purchase-additional-shares/ ↩ ↩2 ↩3 ↩4 ↩5 ↩6 ↩7

  2. https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1845338/000110465921074585/tm211978d12_ex10-9.htm ↩ ↩2 ↩3 ↩4 ↩5

  3. https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2020/09/25/zoom-refuses-stream-university-event-featuring-member-terrorist-organization ↩ ↩2 ↩3 ↩4 ↩5 ↩6

  4. https://www.sajr.co.za/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/2020-10-09.pdf ↩ ↩2 ↩3 ↩4 ↩5

  5. https://pen.org/press-release/zoom-disallows-webinar-featuring-controversial-speaker/ ↩ ↩2 ↩3 ↩4

  6. https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1585521/000162828026028866/zm-20260430.htm ↩ ↩2 ↩3 ↩4 ↩5 ↩6 ↩7

  7. https://www.fdd.org/events/2024/09/16/axis-of-aggressors-h-r-mcmaster-on-defending-americas-interests/ ↩ ↩2 ↩3 ↩4 ↩5 ↩6 ↩7

  8. https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1585521/000158552126000030/listofsubsidiaries_2026.htm ↩ ↩2 ↩3 ↩4 ↩5 ↩6

  9. https://docs.un.org/en/A/HRC/59/23 ↩ ↩2 ↩3 ↩4 ↩5 ↩6 ↩7

  10. https://docs.un.org/en/A/HRC/53/24 ↩ ↩2 ↩3 ↩4 ↩5 ↩6 ↩7 ↩8

  11. https://docs.un.org/en/A/HRC/60/19 ↩ ↩2 ↩3 ↩4 ↩5

  12. https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1585521/000158552126000030/zm-20260131.htm ↩ ↩2 ↩3 ↩4 ↩5 ↩6 ↩7 ↩8 ↩9 ↩10 ↩11

  13. https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1585521/000158552126000126/zm-20260831.htm ↩

  14. https://mr.gov.il/ilgstorefront/he/p/4000534998 ↩ ↩2 ↩3 ↩4 ↩5 ↩6 ↩7 ↩8 ↩9 ↩10 ↩11 ↩12

  15. https://media.zoom.com/download/assets/GTA-Amendment%2B7%2Bto%2Bthe%2BMSA%2Bwith%2BState%2Bof%2BGeorgia-May%2B22-%2B2025.pdf/0593e758b3c711f0a4255ab56cf95673 ↩ ↩2 ↩3 ↩4

  16. https://www.telhai.ac.il/sites/default/files/2022-12/%D7%A1%D7%A4%D7%A7%20%D7%99%D7%97%D7%99%D7%93%20%D7%96%D7%95%D7%9D.pdf ↩ ↩2 ↩3 ↩4 ↩5 ↩6 ↩7 ↩8

  17. https://www.naotech.com/zoom/zoom-phone-new/ ↩ ↩2 ↩3 ↩4

  18. https://mr.gov.il/ilgstorefront/he/p/attachment/005056BFAF4C1EEEB7D8B304D332D2E2/%D7%97%D7%95%D7%95%D7%AA%20%D7%93%D7%A2%D7%AA%20%D7%9E%D7%A7%D7%A6%D7%95%D7%A2%D7%99%D7%AA ↩ ↩2 ↩3 ↩4 ↩5 ↩6 ↩7 ↩8 ↩9 ↩10

  19. https://explore.zoom.us/en/trust/academic-freedom/ ↩ ↩2 ↩3

  20. https://www.btl.gov.il/About/tenders/Sapak/Pages/ArchiveFolder/2021/T%2811%292020.aspx ↩ ↩2 ↩3

  21. https://static1.squarespace.com/static/548748b1e4b083fc03ebf70e/t/5f932253bd0f230e4f627e90/1603478100407/Civil%2BRights%2BOrgs%2BLetter%2Bto%2BZoom-post%2Bfinal.pdf ↩ ↩2

  22. https://mr.gov.il/ilgstorefront/he/p/4000592246 ↩ ↩2 ↩3

  23. https://mr.gov.il/ilgstorefront/he/p/4000608116 ↩ ↩2 ↩3 ↩4

  24. https://www.zoom.com/en/blog/zoom-for-government-achieves-il4-authorization/ ↩

  25. https://www.naotech.com/ ↩ ↩2

  26. https://www.checkpoint.com/integrations/zoom/ ↩ ↩2

  27. https://investors.zoom.us/static-files/1da8debd-2ad0-4087-8546-529beaa4820a ↩ ↩2 ↩3

  28. https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1585521/000158552125000042/zm-20250131.htm ↩ ↩2

  29. https://www.zoom.com/en/blog/zoom-apps-fund/ ↩

  30. https://www.naotech.com/blog/giving-back-with-zoom/ ↩ ↩2