Whistleblower statement on anomalies at time of DOGE work at NLRB [pdf]

Any opinions from cybersecurity experts? Is this concerning or over-hyped drama?

> This declaration details DOGE activity within NLRB, the exfiltration of data from NLRB systems, and – concerningly – near real-time access by users in Russia. Notably, within minutes of DOGE personnel creating user accounts in NLRB systems, on multiple occasions someone or something within Russia attempted to login using all of the valid credentials (eg. Usernames/Passwords). This, combined with verifiable data being systematically exfiltrated to unknown servers within the continental United States – and perhaps abroad – merits investigation.

> Furthermore, on Monday, April 7, 2025, while my client and my team were preparing this disclosure, someone physically taped a threatening note to Mr. Berulis’ home door with photographs – taken via a drone – of him walking in his neighborhood. The threatening note made clear reference to this very disclosure he was preparing for you, as the proper oversight authority. While we do not know specifically who did this, we can only speculate that it involved someone with the ability to access NLRB systems. This “meat space” action – where a threat was physically delivered to my client’s home – is absolutely disturbing in its manner and the implications suggested therein. Accordingly, and we have been and will continue to be coordinating with appropriate law enforcement agencies.

Obviously you have to trust the guy, but if you do this part is already extremely damning.

>received a call during which an ACIO stated instructions were given that we were not to adhere to SOP with the doge account creation in regards to creating records. He specifically was told that there were to be no logs or records made of the accounts created for DOGE employees. DOGE officials required the highest level of access and unrestricted access to internal systems. They were to be given what are referred to as “tenant owner” level accounts

If you seek the opinion of a "security expert" I'd recommend reading the sworn affidavit in Exhibit A. He seems competent, and perjury there seems less likely than here on HN. It's quite well formulated.