Blog Tesla Sues Former Employee for Hacking Trade Secrets

Tesla has filed a lawsuit against a former employee alleging he “unlawfully hacked the company’s confidential and trade secret information and transferred that information to third parties.”

The company is seeking $1 million from the former employee, Martin Tripp, who worked as a process technician.

According to the petition, Tesla says Tripp admitted to writing software to hack the company’s manufacturing operating system and transferring “several gigabytes” of data, including photos and videos, to outside entities. Tesla says Tripp also made false claims to the media about the information he stole.

“Tripp claimed that punctured battery cells had been used in certain Model 3 vehicles even though no punctured cells were ever used in vehicles, batteries or otherwise,” the petition says. “Tripp also vastly exaggerated the true amount and value of ‘scrap’ material that Tesla generated during the manufacturing process, and falsely claimed that Tesla was delayed in bringing new manufacturing equipment online.”

Tesla says Tripp’s actions were retaliation for being assigned a different role at the company.

According to the lawsuit, Tesla has only begun to understand the full scope of Tripp’s illegal activity.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1009484066159144962

Tesla Chief Executive Elon Musk tweeted Wednesday about the lawsuit. “There is more, but the actions of a few bad apples will not stop Tesla from reaching its goals,” he wrote.

The full petition is available here.

 

[mongo]

So stuff about precisely 732 Model 3's being outfitted with battery cells that had been punctured in the production process is not something he's pulling out of his ass

No, its something you are pulling from yours, since he didn't say they were installed. he said, per your linked article:

“I was able to determine that 732 of those modules are in Model 3 cars driving around right now, with the possibility... that [they have punctured cells,” he told Jalopnik.

Do you have any idea how implausible it its for a punctured lithium cell to be at all usable?

 

[darrelld]

Point being is Tripp had direct access to data that Tesla considered very sensitive. I don't think that is in dispute. So stuff about precisely 732 Model 3's being outfitted with battery cells that had been punctured in the production process is not something he's pulling out of his ass or heard from a friend of a friend of a friend that walked by the Gigafactory once.

A very public lawsuit played out in the courts for all to see can't be what Tesla really wants, especially when the discovery phase opens up. IMO all the huffing and puffing about the lawsuit is just Tesla trying to intimidate Tripp and get him to fold and agree to their terms. Though sounds like that is definitely NOT going to happen now.

Highly unlikely that damaged battery cells would survived dielectric breakdown during a supercharger session. 100+ KW would quickly expose any battery cell issues.

The other point is how Tripp stole data from Tesla to make his case. If he was really concerned he should have gone to the appropriate federal agency NHTSA with his allegations and let them deal with it.

If I work at a bank and suspect my bank is doing things improperly I don't steal the suspected improper money and give it to the media.

 

[bro1999]

No, its something you are pulling from yours, since he didn't say they were installed. he said, per your linked article:

OK, 732 Model 3's with cells that may or may not have been punctured. Are you happy now? I figure I shouldn't be surprised about the nitpicking after people took offense to me saying the words "better" and "superior" meant same thing.

 

[mongo]

OK, 732 Model 3's with cells that may or may not have been punctured. Are you happy now? I figure I shouldn't be surprised about the nitpicking after people took offense to me saying the words "better" and "superior" meant same thing.

Come on now, there is a huge difference between installed in cars and not installed in cars.

 

[bkp_duke]

If that's true, why didn't Tesla call the local PD or even FBI and lodge a criminal complaint against Tripp? Why only a civil lawsuit that will result in Tesla getting basically nothing even if they win, as how much money are they gonna receive from a former low level employee? Only thing they would really get is "bragging" rights over winning a lawsuit against a "saboteur". I think Tesla's ultimate goal is to try and try to "trip" Tripp up in court with legal fees, and to eventually force him to settle on their terms and have him sign a NDA while tossing him some hush money.

People are saying Tripp has a credibility issue, but he sure is handing out precise info nuggets (732 Model 3's on the road with punctured battery cells knowingly installed). He seems pretty confident for a "saboteur".
https://jalopnik.com/tesla-leaker-is-looking-forward-to-the-lawsuit-over-all-1827032982

The FBI under most circumstances will not confirm or deny an on-going investigation.

(political tapestry BS aside like what we see in Washington)

 

[bro1999]

Come on now, there is a huge difference between installed in cars and not installed in cars.

"A specific example for you: In February, a misprogrammed robot that handles battery modules repeatedly punctured through the plastic housing (called a clamshell) and into some battery cells, the employee said, adding that instead of scrapping all the modules, some were fixed with adhesive and put back on the manufacturing line. According to internal documents Business Insider reviewed, this foible affected more than 1,000 pieces.

A Tesla representative said that the incident affected far fewer parts and that none of the punctured ones were released back to the manufacturing process. But Business Insider reviewed an internal log that showed the parts were put into hundreds of vehicles. We sent Tesla an identification number for one of the cars, and the company would neither confirm nor deny that the piece was in a finished vehicle. It said only that if the piece were a safety concern, it would not be used."
Internal documents reveal Tesla is blowing through an insane amount of raw material and cash to make Model 3s, and production is still a nightmare

Tesla could have definitively denied back in February that none of the punctured cells were repaired and placed into production vehicles. Why did they just reply with a nebulous "it would not be used if it was a safety concern" statement instead of a bulletproof "We never use compromised battery components in vehicles period."?

 

[mongo]

Tesla could have definitively denied back in February that none of the punctured cells were repaired and placed into production vehicles.

Did you read what you posted?

A Tesla representative said that the incident affected far fewer parts and that none of the punctured ones were released back to the manufacturing process.

" Business Insider reviewed an internal log" is know fairly confidently known to be the docs Tripp provided which may or may not be accurate or properly interpreted.

For instance, they could have recycled the serial numbers of the damaged packs due to never becoming finished goods. (when i worked with such things, there was no number till after final testing was passed)

 

[Economite]

I call bull, why did you not give the genuine business based reasons?
Theranos, by analogy, has zero to do with this. Concider the existence of a working product on the Tesla side vs vapor on Theranos'.

Similarities with Theranos:

1. A charismatic CEO who makes all sorts of exaggerated predictions of product capability and delivery dates.
2. A huge and constant turnover in executive personnel.
3. A maximal interpretation of what constitutes "trade secrets" and a high tendency towards security/secrecy.
4. A PR department that cherry-picks information from non-public documents to make critics look evil/misleading (think "attack the customer" in AP accidents, Broeder , etc).
5. Constant use of misleading/made-up statistics rather than industry standard tests and QA practices.
6. Constant tendancy to need to "get something out" by a certain date due to pre-selling/pre-reserving things (like EAP/FSD or new models) that haven't actually been built/developed.
7. Aggressive use of lawyers, NDAs and severance agreements to chill employees and former employees (and sometimes even customers-- as with tour agreements and "free out-of-warranty service agreements) from communicating anything to press/public.
8. A CEO who is clearly paranoid about people "out-to-get" the company and is convinced that he/she is changing the world.

I agree that Tesla is not total-vaporware, like Theranos. Tesla does have a product. But it also exactly fits the profile of a company that is hiding something.

 

[sandpiper]

Similarities with Theranos:

1. A charismatic CEO who makes all sorts of exaggerated predictions of product capability and delivery dates.
2. A huge and constant turnover in executive personnel.
3. A maximal interpretation of what constitutes "trade secrets" and a high tendency towards security/secrecy.
4. A PR department that cherry-picks information from non-public documents to make critics look evil/misleading (think "attack the customer" in AP accidents, Broeder , etc).
5. Constant use of misleading/made-up statistics rather than industry standard tests and QA practices.
6. Constant tendancy to need to "get something out" by a certain date due to pre-selling/pre-reserving things (like EAP/FSD or new models) that haven't actually been built/developed.
7. Aggressive use of lawyers, NDAs and severance agreements to chill employees and former employees (and sometimes even customers-- as with tour agreements and "free out-of-warranty service agreements) from communicating anything to press/public.
8. A CEO who is clearly paranoid about people "out-to-get" the company and is convinced that he/she is changing the world.

I agree that Tesla is not total-vaporware, like Theranos. Tesla does have a product. But it also exactly fits the profile of a company that is hiding something.

I don't agree with all that you've written, but... I think the common thread is that Tesla behaves more like a Silicon Valley tech company than a rust belt automaker.

 

[Economite]

I don't agree with all that you've written, but... I think the common thread is that Tesla behaves more like a Silicon Valley tech company than a rust belt automaker.

I agree... And it worries me when folks who make cars, lab tests, or other "real world" products (or broker labor intense services, like Uber) start acting like folks who make apps/web services.

 

[omarsultan]

Similarities with Theranos:

1. A charismatic CEO who makes all sorts of exaggerated predictions of product capability and delivery dates.
2. A huge and constant turnover in executive personnel.
3. A maximal interpretation of what constitutes "trade secrets" and a high tendency towards security/secrecy.
4. A PR department that cherry-picks information from non-public documents to make critics look evil/misleading (think "attack the customer" in AP accidents, Broeder , etc).
5. Constant use of misleading/made-up statistics rather than industry standard tests and QA practices.
6. Constant tendancy to need to "get something out" by a certain date due to pre-selling/pre-reserving things (like EAP/FSD or new models) that haven't actually been built/developed.
7. Aggressive use of lawyers, NDAs and severance agreements to chill employees and former employees (and sometimes even customers-- as with tour agreements and "free out-of-warranty service agreements) from communicating anything to press/public.
8. A CEO who is clearly paranoid about people "out-to-get" the company and is convinced that he/she is changing the world.

I agree that Tesla is not total-vaporware, like Theranos. Tesla does have a product. But it also exactly fits the profile of a company that is hiding something.

You could say the same thing about Apple under Jobs. Tesla does have a bit of a siege mentality right now, but I also don't think it's unwarranted given the steady stream of clickbait reporting.

 

[Economite]

You could say the same thing about Apple under Jobs. Tesla does have a bit of a siege mentality right now, but I also don't think it's unwarranted given the steady stream of clickbait reporting.

Tesla seems to lash out at any negative reporting. Just because an article isn't framing things exactly the way Tesla would like doesn't make it "clickbait."

Besides, Tesla doesn't seem to mind when outlets use "clickbait" headlines to spread Tesla's vague pronouncements and press-releases (such as headlines making the vague announcement of the imminent release of some unspecified "Full Self Drive" features sound like Telsa will have a fully autonomous car in a month or two).

 

[Economite]

You could say the same thing about Apple under Jobs.

Yup... And Apple uses aggressive lawyering and extreme secrecy to crush/chill competitors, dictate how customers can use devices that the customers have purchased, and conceal illegal or unethical practices (ie antitrust violations to kill the availability of $9.99 books on Kindle and all manner of issues with working conditions at the offshore manufacturing plants they use).

Plus, Apple doesn't make products that can kill people.

 

[Economite]

I agree... And it worries me when folks who make cars, lab tests, or other "real world" products (or broker labor intense services, like Uber) start acting like folks who make apps/web services.

Which doesn't mean it's my opinion that these tactics are "ok" for silicon valley companies, only that these tactics (especially the most extreme versions of them) aren't appropriate at all in other sectors.

Highly secretive and litigious companies are a problem, whether they are Tesla, Blackwater, Uber, Theranos, or Apple. A big company with a big litigation war chest can get a away with a lot by scaring its employees and competitors with legal actions that cost peanuts for the rich company but would bankrupt small fry or individuals.

 

[Evoforce]

Which doesn't mean it's my opinion that these tactics are "ok" for silicon valley companies, only that these tactics (especially the most extreme versions of them) aren't appropriate at all in other sectors.

Highly secretive and litigious companies are a problem, whether they are Tesla, Blackwater, Uber, Theranos, or Apple. A big company with a big litigation war chest can get a away with a lot by scaring its employees and competitors with legal actions that cost peanuts for the rich company but would bankrupt small fry or individuals.

Have you ever noticed (in my opinion) that you have never sided with Tesla in 320 posts?

 

[Economite]

Have you ever noticed (in my opinion) that you have never sided with Tesla in 320 posts?

That wouldn't suprise me.

1. I really don't like the way Tesla behaves as a company.
2. Anything that's possible to say good about Tesla (and there certainly are good things to say about its products) gets said and repeated a zillion times. I'm not interested in posting me-toos.

 

[malcolm]

Plus, Apple doesn't make products that can kill people.

Give it time... Malaysian tech boss is killed 'when his phone explodes while charging'

 

[pyromatter]

Tesla fires back against alleged whistleblower: “he is nothing of the sort”

"Relying on the internal data that he hacked from Tesla’s manufacturing operations system, Tripp incorrectly stated that Tesla has generated nearly $150 million in scrap at the Gigafactory in 2018," the company wrote. "That number is wrong by more than a factor of two."

In addition, "he included large quantities that were not scrap from 2018 at all, but that were instead items such as materials from last year that had already been included in Tesla’s 2017 financials, or that were simply serial numbers assigned as part of routine system testing to components that were never even made."

Worse still, Tesla insisted, Tripp told company investigators "that he does not actually know the value of the scrap that he assigned dollar values to. He just guessed."

The statement also insists that "no punctured cells were every used in Model 3 vehicles in any way."

Tesla did acknowledge that a "robot" had damaged "some modules" in February 2018 at the Sparks facility, but that ultimately those cells were tossed.

"If there was even a sliver of doubt about whether a cell could pose a safety concern, it was not used in any vehicle," Tesla wrote. "Notably, there have been zero battery safety issues in any Model 3."

Further, the company insisted that Tripp’s allegations that Tesla has been reporting "the wrong production number" of Model 3s is "ridiculous."

"On all of these issues, Tripp is either not telling the truth or he simply has no idea what he is talking about," the statement concluded.

A spokesperson again asserted Friday that the company had indeed received such a call, but did not provide any further evidence as to what actions, if any, were taken by Tesla, to verify that a threat of violence had originated from Tripp.

This spokesperson denied that Musk had anything to do with the Wednesday evening call.

Tesla Statement

Tesla Friday

 

[Electroman]

If our judicial system cannot nail this guy for life, this country is toast.

Additionally if that criminal hack @Lopez who received and benefited from all these stolen goods and lies - which she has a responsibility to do some due diligence to check the veracity - goes scott free, SHAME on entire 4th estate and our judicial system.

Additionally if she gets a lot mileage hiding behind 'poor frail innocent woman being attacked by a billionaire and his fanatics' - shame on us as a society.

 

[Economite]

Additionally if that criminal hack @Lopez who received and benefited from all these stolen goods and lies - which she has a responsibility to do some due diligence to check the veracity - goes scott free, SHAME on entire 4th estate and our judicial system.

Additionally if she gets a lot mileage hiding behind 'poor frail innocent woman being attacked by a billionaire and his fanatics' - shame on us as a society.

Lopez has a bunch of leaked production reports and internal emails. Tesla has more or less admitted these are genuine, since it is claiming they are the result of a security breach. The only thing countering the information in these documents is a bald statement by Tesla that the documents are being "misinterpreted." Lopez's article included reactions from Tesla. I understand why you are upset at the leaker for taking Tesla's records, but I'm not sure why you are so quick to dismiss the accuracy of the reporter's reporting. The press doesn't exist just to parrot corporate press releases.