11th Oct: 'How the Hell Did Document Leak?' – Meta Internal Mail Belies 'Fabricated' Charge Against The Wire https://thewire.in/tech/meta-xcheck-internal-email-watchlist
15th Oct: Meta Said Damaging Internal Email is ‘Fake’, URL 'Not in Use', Here's Evidence They're Wrong https://thewire.in/tech/meta-andy-stone-email-xcheck
Basically, ruling party in India is exploiting XCheck program to curb any dissent.
Looks like The Wire got fooled by their source OR is lying.
We reiterate the faith we have in our sources, whose identities and positions in Meta are known to us. Our reporters have had a productive relationship with them for some time already, prior to the Instagram story. Meta’s suggestion that sources who don’t know each other have teamed up to “hoax” The Wire is ludicrous.
Source: https://thewire.in/media/statement-by-the-wire-on-metas-resp...The emails have been verified to be authentic by The Wire and 2 independent experts, one of whom works at Microsoft. Further proof of the "instagram URL" has been shared.
Even if we assume that the "instagram" workplace portal is the "weakest" evidence and a "fake" (as you and others claim), than Meta should be easily able to identify the person who created the "fake" instance and populated it with all the "fake" tickets. This is what Alex Stamos too tweeted:
If The Wire is wrong, then Meta has all the evidence they need. While you could create a whole fake Workplace, the easier move is to just create a free trial instance, meaning those fake notes are sitting in Meta's databases along with the metadata of whomever created them.
I think, at this point, it's on Meta to write-up a detailed response with whatever technical evidence they have. This will not go away just by ignoring it.
The fact is that The Wire have an obligation to protect their source and so are limited in the evidence they can share publicly (unless taken to court). So this begs the question that if Meta and you and other FB employees) are so sure of the evidence being fabricated, why do you think The Wire hasn't been sued yet to take down the "fake" articles? (Note that you do not even need to identify who faked the evidence, to sue them, as long as you can prove that it is fake, which should be easy to do so according to all the claims made by Meta, you and other FB employees).LMFAO. The only problem supporters of the ruling party in India (includes me) have with the ruling party in India is that it does literally nothing to curb dissent (or acts so late it is practically useless). The so called "Farmers Protests" (mostly carried out by rich farmers of Punjab, Haryana and UP backed by Khalistani Terror Organizations in Canada) ran for more than a year. They even blocked main roads and highways. For an entire year. So much so that Modi had to backtrack on the Progressive Farm Laws that had been enacted by the Parliament and set back India's Agriculture by 2 decades. So much for "curbing dissent".
Compare that to how quickly Trudeau crushed dissent, within weeks of it flaring up, by freezing bank accounts of protestors and censoring them. If Modi had done half of what Trudeau did (for both Anti-CAA protests and Farmer protests) he would have been labelled the "Progeny of Hitler" by the media cabal.
The Western Media propaganda has been in full swing for past 2 decades against not just the ruling party in India but also Modi. And it won't die down as long as there are people who will continue to keep spreading this propaganda.
As for the voters in India? The ruling party will come back with even bigger majority in 2024.
The West, their media cabal (both in and outside India) and their favorite Opposition Party (The Indian National Congress) are so disconnected from reality and totally missing the real pulse of the people on ground. Only to their own folly.
My reasoning is two fold - I haven’t shared anything that could be exploited by anyone. And second, Meta and others in the industry try to share information about how their integrity efforts work so we can learn from each other.
that does not exist, they can’t understand that
you are fine, thank you for the post
This Supreme Court is not big-tech-friendly; good time to shift up the precedent.
If you think that Facebook wouldn't enforce an NDA, especially on something sensitive like this, I think you are incorrect.
Also, nobody likes a tattle tale.
I haven’t said anything that could be exploited by bad actors. As for competitors, there are no competitors in integrity. The entire industry goes to great lengths to share knowledge on what works and what doesn’t. We all win when we combat abuse well.
I wouldn't expect Meta to actually do anything about this blog post but I wouldn't have felt comfortable posting it.