A new filing cites former Twitter security chief Peiter Zatko’s disclosures in latest bid to nix the deal
Twitter didn’t just distort the number of bots and spam accounts on its platform, it deceived regulators about its vulnerability to security threats, Elon Musk’s attorneys have charged. The allegations are part of the Tesla tycoon’s latest effort to tear up the deal he made in April to acquire Twitter for $44 billion.
The billionaire’s legal team filed a subpoena for “documents and communications” to support some of the claims made by former Twitter security chief Peiter ‘Mudge’ Zatko, who was fired from the company earlier this year before becoming a whistleblower.
Zatko asserted that Twitter infringed on a Federal Trade Commission 2011 consent decree concerning data privacy. He also disregarded it. “obligations under data privacy, unfair trade practice, and consumer protection laws and regulations.” The company supposedly gave agents of the Indian government access to confidential user data, an act so egregious it could constitute a “A negative effect on company material” and scuttle the deal, Musk’s lawyers wrote.
Zatko could provide any information that would interest the legal team. “Twitter’s tracking and measurement of user engagement.” A hacker who became a cybersecurity expert claimed that Twitter had deceived regulators concerning its antispam and bot efforts as well as its ability protect the site from cyber threats.
“If true,” Musk’s lawyers wrote in Monday’s termination letter, Zatko’s allegations “demonstrate that Twitter has breached” Many of the terms of the Musk agreement, such as its insistent compliance with law and honesty with regulators are included.
This second termination letter builds on the July initial filing that was filed to stop the purchase. Musk claimed Twitter deliberately misled him. “miscounting”For more information, please contact them via blocking or fake spam accounts.
Musk’s lawyers pointed out in Monday’s letter that the social media giant is already facing multiple congressional inquiries, potential Department of Justice and FTC probes, and investigations by European data privacy regulators since Mudge went public. They are expected to present their arguments at Delaware Chancery Court in October.