The testimony of a Rippling employee involved in espionage for Deel seems straight out of a movie.

On Wednesday, Rippling made public the affidavit of an employee who confessed to acting as a spy for Deel, the competitor of the human resources technology company. The story, which includes elements of a corporate espionage film, such as an undercover operation and a destroyed phone, is framed within the context of a recent lawsuit that Rippling filed against Deel. This conflict between the two companies has had several notable episodes.

Rippling, recognized as a work management platform, announced last week that it had sued Deel in relation to this alleged espionage. The accusations range from violations of RICO laws, typically used to prosecute members of the mafia, to misappropriation of trade secrets and unfair competition. At that time, the identity of the involved employee was not disclosed, but this changed on Wednesday with the publication of his affidavit, signed on April 1.

According to the document, Keith O’Brien was hired by Rippling in July 2023 in the global payroll and compliance department at the Dublin office. In early 2024, O’Brien interviewed for a position at Deel and, although he was not selected, he managed to connect with the founder of Deel through LinkedIn. He subsequently decided to start a payroll consulting business and proposed that Deel collaborate with him, informing them that he planned to leave Rippling to devote himself full-time to this new venture. During his testimony, O’Brien stated that Bouaziz and his father, Philippe Bouaziz, CFO of Deel, suggested that instead of resigning, he should spy on Rippling for them.

The employee claimed that he was offered €5,000 per month, starting with an initial payment of $6,000 and other transactions in cryptocurrencies. O’Brien admitted to conducting searches on Slack, Google Drive, and other Rippling resources to gather information and communicated with Deel about sales leads, product roadmaps, client accounts, and details about sanctioned countries.

The lawsuit asserts that the espionage activity lasted four months, during which O’Brien shared information about hundreds of companies that had requested a demonstration from Rippling, notes on sales prospects, and details of Deel's clients with whom Rippling was in negotiations.

Believing he was eliminating evidence, O’Brien realized that some screen recordings he took with his phone had been backed up to his iCloud account without his knowledge. According to the lawsuit, Rippling designed a trap to expose the spy by sending a threatening legal letter to Deel's management, claiming that Rippling employees were discussing information that could embarrass Deel in a Slack channel called "d-defectors." While this channel existed, it turned out to be a ruse.

Testimony reveals that O’Brien was instructed to investigate this channel, but shortly thereafter he was told it could be a trap. When visiting the office on March 14, a lawyer confronted him with a judicial order to review his devices, to which O'Brien responded by handing over his laptop but hiding his phone. He took refuge in the office bathroom, restarted his cellphone, and pretended to discard it. He then destroyed his old phone with an axe and threw it down the drain at his mother-in-law's house, according to his testimony.

Although a lawyer attempted to stop him by warning that he had to testify, O’Brien left and began exchanging messages with the CEO of Deel and others he believed represented the company. In one of the suggestions, it was proposed that O’Brien and his family fly to Dubai, given their extradition agreements. During these conversations, he was instructed to tell authorities that Rippling was facilitating payments to Russia and that he was being harassed for trying to be a whistleblower. Although O’Brien initially followed this advice, he later realized it was false.

Ultimately, he decided to hire his own lawyer and, after feeling anxious and uncomfortable with the situation, chose to cooperate with the authorities and tell the truth.

Deel has not responded to requests for comments, but their representative previously stated that Rippling is trying to divert attention from allegations of violations of sanctions laws in Russia with sensationalist claims. Rippling’s lawyer, for his part, maintains that they have compelling evidence implicating senior Deel executives in a clear corporate espionage scheme. The tension between these two companies continues, and some voices within the industry are supporting Rippling's action.