A whistleblower’s explosive allegations have thrust Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) and the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) into the center of a major cybersecurity controversy, raising urgent questions about the protection of sensitive federal data and the integrity of government oversight.

Whistleblower Details Sweeping Access and Data Exfiltration

Daniel Berulis, a veteran IT specialist at the NLRB, has come forward with a sworn affidavit alleging that DOGE personnel—reportedly led by Musk—were granted “extraordinarily sweeping access” to the labor agency’s computer systems in early March. According to Berulis, DOGE staff insisted on “god-tier” administrative accounts, bypassing normal security protocols and disabling monitoring systems that track user activity. Within days, Berulis detected a highly unusual spike in outbound data transfers—approximately 10 gigabytes—leaving the NLRB’s secure databases, which historically almost never occurs.

The data allegedly removed includes confidential information on union activities, ongoing legal cases, proprietary business secrets, and private affidavits—material that labor law experts say could be exploited by private companies or foreign adversaries.

Russian Login Attempts Heighten Security Concerns

The whistleblower’s concerns escalated further when, minutes after DOGE accounts were created, the NLRB’s systems recorded a series of login attempts from a Russian IP address. Notably, these attempts used newly created DOGE credentials and the correct username and password, suggesting that access may have already been compromised. The agency’s geolocation restrictions blocked the attempts, but the incident raised alarms among cybersecurity experts, who noted that such near real-time, credentialed attempts are rare and troubling.

Obstruction, Retaliation, and Calls for Investigation

Berulis claims that when he and a colleague prepared to escalate their findings to the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), their investigation was abruptly halted by superiors without explanation. Shortly after, Berulis received a threatening note at his home, including aerial photographs of him in his neighborhood—a move his legal counsel described as clear intimidation.

The whistleblower’s disclosures were submitted to the Senate Intelligence Committee, prompting calls from lawmakers for a formal investigation into DOGE’s activities and the potential exposure of sensitive federal data. Andrew Bakaj, chief counsel for Whistleblower Aid, underscored the national security implications, emphasizing the risk posed by the apparent real-time access foreign actors may have gained.

Official Responses and Denials

The NLRB has publicly denied that DOGE was granted access to its systems or that a breach occurred, citing the findings of an internal review. A White House spokesperson described DOGE’s mission as transparent and focused on rooting out inefficiency, but did not directly address the whistleblower’s claims of data exfiltration or the Russian login attempts. Representatives for Musk and DOGE have not responded to requests for comment.

Broader Implications and Ongoing Fallout

Labor experts warn that the exposure of NLRB data could have far-reaching consequences, potentially undermining union organizing efforts and giving competitive advantages to corporations—some of which are owned by Musk himself. The incident has reignited debates over the role of DOGE, the security of federal systems, and the vulnerability of sensitive labor data to both domestic and foreign exploitation.

A top House Democrat has called the episode “technological malfeasance,” and pressure is mounting for independent investigations and congressional oversight. As the story develops, the NLRB, DOGE, and the administration face growing scrutiny over their handling of sensitive information and the safeguards in place to protect the rights of American workers.