SAN FRANCISCO, CA- When billionaire Elon Musk decided to pull out of his deal to buy Twitter, it should have raised significant alarm bells. After all, Musk is alternately among the top 2-3 richest men in the world. One might think he knows a little bit about business.
Now, we may be finding out the truth as to why Musk backed out.
According to a whistleblower, Twitter is primarily comprised of millions of “bots” whose mission is to engage in what he calls “social conditioning,” NewsPunch reports.
The man, Peiter “Mudge” Zatko says the problem is so pervasive that company executives ignore the issue and are clueless as to how many bots are actually active on the social media platform.
Zatko claims that the board has been covering up its “extreme, egregious deficiencies” which make the company a huge risk to national security and democracy.
Zatko should know that of which he speaks. He is the former head of security for Twitter and made the bombshell revelations to Congress and federal agencies last month.
He complained that the far-left social media company is mismanaged and noted that thousands of staff are given access to “central controls” as well as extremely sensitive information without adequate oversight.
According to the Daily Mail, Zatko, a direct report to former CEO Jack Dorsey and his replacement, Parag Agrawal, said the company’s senior executives had been “covering up” the biggest vulnerabilities on the platform and further claimed that either one or multiple employees may also be engaged as spies for foreign intelligence assets.
Zatko further claimed that Twitter executives had misled the board of directors about the company’s security flaws which have left it exposed to hacking, manipulation and disinformation. Moreover, he claims that Twitter executives have no idea nor the resources to definitively know how many bots actually infect the site.
The unknown number of bots on the site was the primary reason cited by Musk, Tesla’s CEO, for the reason he backed out of the purchase. Musk claimed that Twitter hadn’t been honest about the number of bots and fake accounts on the site, which boasts 238 million daily users.
In addition to bots and phony accounts, Zatko, who previously worked at Google and the Department of Defense, says the company doesn’t “reliably” delete user data after a user cancels an account, usually because staff lost track of it.
Zatko said his findings show “egregious deficiencies, negligence, willful ignorance, and threats to national security and democracy.”
Zatko started what the Mail describes as a “colorful” career in the 1990s, when he worked conducting classified work for a government contractor, while serving as among the leaders of a hacking group—Cult of the Dead Cow—which sought to force Microsoft into improving security by releasing Windows hacking tools.
He began working for Twitter in order to recommend changes to the platform in order to bolster security after a number of high-profile hacks, including accounts of Barack Obama, Joe Biden and Musk himself.
When he was appointed to Twitter, he promised to examine” information security, site integrity, physical security, platform integrity—which starts to touch on abuse and manipulation of the platform—and engineering.”
When he was fired this past January, Zatko was told it was because of poor performance, however he isn’t buying that excuse. He said he was fired in retaliation for raising concerns about security lapses to the board of Twitter before he went public.
For a previous story we published about Musk’s proposed takeover of Twitter, we invite you to:
DIG DEEPER
If nothing else, the move by billionaire entrepreneur Elon Musk to purchase Twitter has ripped the mask off the hostility to free speech by the mainstream media and leftists across the board.
Where 50 years ago liberals were all about free speech, that is no longer the case, and Musk’s bid for Twitter has proven it.
According to a piece in Revolver News, Musk’s move to purchase Twitter and turn it into the free-speech public square it was intended to be has exposed the left as being the abject hypocrites they are. In essence, “free” speech is fine so long as it pushes leftist narratives.
Read More : HERE
source
