Disclaimer: This article may contain the personal views and opinions of the author.
Billionaire Elon Musk has likely never been accused of being understated or inaudible. The already infamous sage between him and social media giant Twitter just seems to keep evolving.
The legal system has become involved as well.
It is now being reported by msn.com that:
Elon Musk has subpoenaed Twitter Inc (NYSE: TWTR) whistleblower, Peiter “Mudge” Zatko, seeking documents and communications on the company’s spam and alleged security vulnerabilities, according to a court filing obtained by The New York Times on Monday.
In a nearly 200-page document sent in July to regulatory agencies and the Justice Department, Mudge, a former Twitter security executive and well-known hacker, said that a number of security oversights by the social media business may have misled the board of directors, shareholders (including Musk) and the public.
According to the Times, both Musk and Mudge have accused the micro-blogging platform of fraud, but the claims are not identical.
Musk alleges Twitter deceived his team about the number of spam bots on the platform and withheld other crucial information.
#BREAK A former Twitter executive, its head of security, has turned whistleblower.
— Donie O'Sullivan (@donie) August 23, 2022
He alleges grave security problems at the company that he says are a risk to national security and democracy.
His first TV interview here:https://t.co/QU823RBnN1 pic.twitter.com/krh7WVOrhe
Mudge accuses Twitter of maintaining relations with authoritarian nations, permitting risky security flaws and a host of other allegations.
Musk would need the court’s approval to modify his countersuit against Twitter to accept Mudge’s arguments, according to The Times. But considering that the trial is only eight weeks away, the amendment to the countersuit may not be possible.
According to The Times, Musk’s other course of action would be to sue Twitter on the basis of federal securities fraud, making use of the laws governing the sale of securities and providing him the option to renege on the arrangement.
In an earlier Delaware hearing, Musk’s attorney Alex Spiro made a passing reference to the possibility that Musk would contend that Mudge’s concerns ought to have been mentioned in Twitter’s most recent annual report.
It was just last week that Twitter executives were forced to respond to claims that were made by Mudge and were whining that there was a false narrative that was being created.
It was further reported by The New York Times that:
At its weekly companywide meeting, Parag Agrawal, Twitter’s chief executive, addressed a whistle-blower complaint made by Peiter Zatko, the former head of security, who was fired in January. Mr. Zatko’s complaint, in which he accused Twitter of lying about its security practices and violating a 2011 agreement with the Federal Trade Commission, was made public on Tuesday.
“This complaint that was filed yesterday is foundationally, technically and historically inaccurate,” Mr. Agrawal told employees at the meeting, which The New York Times listened to. “There are accusations in there without any evidence and many points made without important context.”
Other executives — including Sean Edgett, the general counsel — echoed Mr. Agrawal. The privacy and security executives Damien Kieran and Lea Kissner spoke about improvements the company had made to its security.
“We have never made a material misrepresentation to a regulator, to our board, to all of you,” Mr. Edgett said. “We are in full compliance with our F.T.C. consent decree.” He added that an external auditor reviews Twitter’s compliance with the decree every two years.
So, the epic saga of Musk and Twitter continues. However, there seems to have been a string of victories for Musk in recent months. In fact, just earlier this month, we reported that a judge in Delaware ruled that Twitter was obligated to hand over additional information regarding its bot accounts over to Musk. In that instance, the judge specifically requested Twitter to give Musk information on how many users it has that are bots and, indeed, further data on how bots are being used. It was reported that Twitter has until December 4th of this year to respond.
That victory was immediately after yet another victory last week when a former executive for Twitter, the aforementioned Pieter “Mudge” Zatko. He was the former head of security for Twotter and has recently came forward. We reported that Zatko is claiming that Twitter did lie to Musk about the bot problem on the social media platform. He also said that Twitter’s cybersecurity is a potential national security threat. Alex Spiro, an attorney for Musk, said, “We have already issued a subpoena for Mr. Zatko, and we found his exit and that of other key employees curious in light of what we have been finding.” So, the victories are continuing to pile up.
