Landon Winkelvoss writes about fraud prevention and cybersecurity, sharing practical guidance on scams, phishing, and protecting consumers and businesses. Winkelvoss's posts also describe Backgrounder’s scam-reporting and protection tools.
Landon Winkelvoss is most useful for practical fraud prevention content on scams, phishing, and reporting.
Best for
A fraud prevention or consumer protection platform wanting advisory content and practitioner education.
Not for
Enterprise security vendors wanting high reach or technical threat intelligence campaigns.
Key takeaways
Most scam victims never report; reducing friction is the fix.
For government impersonation scams, a firm callback rule beats judging the caller.
A phishing domain stayed up for 79 days after detection.
Check first: Confirm partnership terms and audience analytics before writing a plan.
Main ideas
Most scam victims never report; reducing friction is the fix · Impersonation is usually caught after the damage, so verification has to become a habit · Changing your password won’t remove an attacker from your email account
Landon Winkelvoss writes about fraud prevention and cybersecurity, focusing on how impersonation and phishing affect people and businesses.
The posts link practical advice—such as hanging up and calling an agency back using its published number—to broader problems, including scam reporting and delays in removing identified phishing sites.
They also describe Backgrounder and Ask Carmen as efforts to address these problems.
Follow this work for concrete scam examples and guidance that connects individual safety decisions to wider protection challenges.
The distinctive thread is the link between a specific incident and the practical rule or system problem it reveals.
A post about someone losing $1 million to government impersonation becomes a clear callback rule.
An Evite-themed phishing domain that remained active for 79 days illustrates the gap between detection and removal.
A report about a celebrity impersonation case expands to examples of fake executives, altered vendor payment instructions and social engineering affecting MSP customers.
The posts also examine why people do not report scams, including embarrassment and cumbersome forms.
Together, these examples offer readers both immediate steps and a clearer picture of how fraud spreads.
Landon Winkelvoss writes about fraud and scam prevention from the perspective of people responding to attacks: consumers, small businesses and IT providers.
Read more
Across these posts, the weak point is rarely technology alone: victims stay silent, password resets can leave attackers in place, fake identities are hard to catch before they’re used, and phishing sites can remain online even after they’ve been labeled. Each post typically starts with a real incident, draws a rule or checklist from it, then points to Backgrounder and its Ask Carmen tool for reporting, blocking and takedown.
Most scam victims never report; reducing friction is the fix
Landon Winkelvoss argues that scam victims stay silent less from ignorance than from friction and shame: embarrassment, the belief that nothing can be done, and the expectation that reporting a $200 loss means filling out a 90-minute IC3 form.
Read more
Underreporting helps fraud networks: early reports make it harder for a scam operation to rebrand and reuse the same infrastructure.
Backgrounder’s free reporting flow offers a practical alternative: send an email, Telegram message or investment pitch, describe the scam as much as you’re comfortable with, and get a research-backed answer in minutes—without a login wall, five-page form or fee.
The post also promises anonymity in the published answer and the option to alert others.
Backgrounder’s free reporting flow is compared with the Better Business Bureau’s, but reporters get an answer, remain anonymous in the post and can warn others. Landon cites the Loom-X / BitHarvest and Benoit Fontaine investment scams, posted about the month before, as examples of schemes early reporting could expose.
Impersonation is usually caught after the damage, so verification has to become a habit
The problem is structural: few people create profiles across the whole internet, so technology companies often detect impersonation only after it has been used—and scammers know it.
Read more
People contacted by a fake identity can’t rely on a platform to flag it in advance; they need to verify for themselves. Landon extends the point from high-profile cases to everyday attacks on consumers, small businesses and managed service providers.
A man accused of posing as a San Francisco 49ers player, alongside an accomplice posing as his financial adviser, allegedly defrauded more than two dozen women of roughly $1.3 million. Landon then turns to everyday examples: dating-app or investment scams targeting consumers; fake executives requesting wires, vendors changing payment instructions, or people impersonating trusted customers to target small businesses; and the same attacks reaching hundreds or thousands of customer employees at an MSP—with no malware, just social engineering.
Changing your password won’t remove an attacker from your email account
Landon Winkelvoss explains that attackers often leave forwarding rules, filters or active sessions in place so they can keep watching an inbox after a password change.
Read more
A reset closes one door, not the others, which is why incident responders check for persistence first.
The post offers three ways to check whether a Gmail or Outlook account is still compromised and links to a video walkthrough of next steps.
It’s a practical pick for anyone whose account was just breached and who doesn’t know what to inspect.
Landon says this comes up every time they give a scam-safety presentation, where some participants face exactly this problem, and that it’s the first thing any incident responder checks.
For government impersonation scams, a firm callback rule beats judging the caller
Trying to judge whether a caller sounds legitimate is the wrong defense, Landon Winkelvoss argues: scammers are practiced at applying pressure and offering reassurance.
Read more
Instead, they recommend a fixed rule that doesn’t depend on the victim’s judgment in the moment: hang up, look up the agency’s real number yourself and call back. Legitimate agencies expect and understand this, so ending the original call costs you nothing and breaks the scammer’s control of the conversation.
A person reportedly lost $1 million over seven months to criminals impersonating a federal investigator.
Using scare tactics, they walked the victim through “compliance procedures” before draining the account.
Landon lists three things no U.S. government agency will ever do: call and demand immediate payment, ask you to move money to “protect” it from an investigation, or tell you not to hang up or talk to family or your bank.
The post credits Landon’s friend Jessica Williford with quickly recognizing the scam; the observation is hers, not Landon’s.
Knowing a phishing site is fake doesn’t mean it gets taken down
Landon Winkelvoss argues that phishing defense falters not for lack of awareness but because of the time between identifying a malicious site and getting it removed.
Read more
A domain can be reported in the security community and labeled by security blogs yet still reach real users, because takedown depends on hosting and infrastructure providers acting on abuse reports.
That makes automated abuse reports a priority, bringing blocking and takedown closer to real time.
The post presents Backgrounder with Ask Carmen as a way to do that passively across devices and channels, and shows Landon highlighting team work rather than solo analysis.
The domain geteviteflow(.)com, used in a 4th of July Evite scam against a client, stayed up for 79 days.
It copied a Gmail log-in page to steal credentials and was widely reported in the security community and labeled a phishing site by multiple security blogs, yet still reached a user until Cloudflare and DigitalOcean were asked to remove it.
Backgrounder’s newest advisor, David W., is credited with the forensics and OSINT work; Landon frames the detection-to-takedown gap and points readers to remediation guidance on the Backgrounder blog.
If changing the password does not remove the attacker, what should you check?
Read more
This post turns that concern into concrete steps for someone whose email account has been compromised.
Landon Winkelvoss explains that changing a password does not necessarily kick an attacker out of an email account.
Attackers can leave forwarding rules, filters, or active sessions behind to keep watching the inbox.
The post outlines three easy ways to check whether a Gmail or Outlook account is still compromised and notes that this is a recurring issue in scam-safety presentations—and the first thing an incident responder checks.
It also points to a video walkthrough; ask for the transcript if you need to assess its details.
For brands planning a campaign
A thought-leadership partnership could build on this practical, high-intent topic: an email-security piece on post-compromise persistence, account recovery, and employee-facing checklists that gives brands a way to inform without relying on fear alone.
When someone claiming to be a federal investigator pressures you to move money or stay on the line, what should you do?
Read more
The post offers a memorable callback rule readers can use immediately.
Landon Winkelvoss describes a conversation about a person who lost $1 million to government impersonation.
A caller claimed to be a federal investigator, used scare tactics, walked the victim through compliance procedures, and drained the account over seven months.
A friend, Jessica Williford, recognized the scam quickly.
The post lists three things every U.S. government agency will never do: call and demand immediate payment, ask someone to move money to protect it from an investigation, or tell someone not to hang up or talk to family or their bank.
Its advice is simple: hang up, look up the agency's real number, and call back.
For brands planning a campaign
For a fraud-prevention or cybersecurity brand, this supports advisory content on government impersonation, elder fraud, and callback verification. Partners can turn its consumer-protection angle into checklists, training, or campaign messaging.
How can a known phishing site still reach a real user, and what can a protection team do about it?
Read more
This case illustrates the gap between detection and takedown.
Landon Winkelvoss describes a 4th of July Evite scam targeting one of their clients.
The domain geteviteflow(.)com was up for 79 days, copied a Gmail log-in page to steal credentials, was widely reported within the security community, and was labeled a phishing site by numerous security blogs.
Yet it still reached a user until it was reported to Cloudflare and DigitalOcean for removal.
The post credits David W., described as the newest advisor, with using forensics and OSINT skills.
It connects the case to Backgrounder with Ask Carmen, which addresses the problem through passive blocking across devices and channels, near real-time abuse reports and takedowns, and remediation guidance at backgrounder.com/blog.
For brands planning a campaign
A content partnership could use this example to discuss phishing-domain lifecycles, abuse reporting, and remediation. It gives brands a specific case for showing how threat intelligence can protect consumers and businesses in real time.
Why do most scam victims never report, and what could a lower-friction process look like?
Read more
The post explains the behavioral barriers as well as the fraud itself.
Landon Winkelvoss argues that most scam victims never report what happened.
Reasons include embarrassment, the assumption that nothing can be done, and the expectation that reporting means a 90-minute IC3 form for a $200 loss.
The post describes Backgrounder's free reporting flow: people can send an email, a Telegram message, or a too-good investor pitch; describe the scam as much as they are comfortable with; and get a research-backed answer in minutes.
It says there is no login wall, no five-page form, and no fee, and compares the service to the Better Business Bureau—with answers, anonymity in the post, and the ability to alert others.
Early reporting, the post says, makes the rebrand game harder for scam networks.
It cites Loom-X / BitHarvest and Benoit Fontaine investment scams as examples posted about the previous month.
For brands planning a campaign
This is a strong fit for a scam-detection or consumer-protection partnership focused on reporting friction, victim support, and early-warning networks. Brands can use it to explore service design through thought leadership or advisory content.
Why does an extreme impersonation story matter to ordinary consumers and businesses?
Read more
The post connects one headline case to dating, investment, vendor, executive, and MSP fraud scenarios.
Landon Winkelvoss describes a case in which a man was accused of posing as a San Francisco 49ers player and, with an accomplice posing as a financial adviser, defrauding more than two dozen women of approximately $1.3 million.
Stories like this make the news because they are brazen, the post says, but similar schemes happen every day.
Few people create profiles across the internet, so tech companies can often detect impersonation only after the fact—and scammers know it.
The post lists everyday examples: a consumer might encounter someone on a dating app or an investment opportunity; a small business might face a fake executive requesting a wire, a vendor changing payment instructions, or someone impersonating a trusted customer; an MSP might see the same attacks across hundreds or thousands of customer employees, with no malware, just social engineering.
The post says Backgrounder and Ask Carmen were built to address this problem.
For brands planning a campaign
This broadens a campaign beyond one scam category, supporting content on identity impersonation, social engineering, wire fraud, vendor fraud, and MSP protection. One story can speak to multiple buyer segments.
Approach: product-linked education from current cases5
The reporting gap in fraud prevention1
Government impersonation and callback verification1
Phishing takedowns and the lag in abuse reporting1
Email compromise persists after a password change1
Social engineering across consumer and business contexts1
The reporting gap in fraud prevention
Landon argues most scam victims never report what happened because of embarrassment, a belief that nothing can be done, and the expectation that reporting means a 90-minute IC3 form for a small loss.
Read more
They present Backgrounder’s free reporting flow as a direct answer: send the email, Telegram message, or investment pitch, describe the scam as much as feels comfortable, and get a research-backed answer in minutes with no login wall, five-page form, or fee. The post also promises anonymity and the option to alert others.
Opens with a behavioral diagnosis, then presents a product-specific reporting flow as the fix.
For brands planning a campaign
A scam-detection or consumer-protection partner can build thought leadership around lowering reporting friction, not just improving detection. The practical angle: early reporting can make scam-network rebranding harder.
Government impersonation and callback verification
Landon recounts a conversation about someone who lost $1 million over seven months to criminals impersonating a federal investigator.
Read more
The scammers used scare tactics and walked the victim through “compliance procedures.”
The post lists three things every U.S. government agency will never do: call and demand immediate payment, ask someone to move money to “protect” it from an investigation, or tell someone not to hang up or talk to family or their bank.
The recommended defense is a hard rule: hang up, look up the agency’s real number, and call back.
Uses a high-loss personal account and a short, memorable rule set readers can apply during a live call.
For brands planning a campaign
An advisory or thought-leadership partnership can focus on verification behavior and elder fraud, using a simple callback rule rather than broad awareness messaging. The six- and seven-figure loss framing suits higher-stakes audiences.
Landon describes a July 4 Evite scam that reached a client despite the domain geteviteflow(.)com being up for 79 days.
Read more
It copied a Gmail login to steal credentials and was widely reported in the security community and labeled a phishing site by security blogs.
The domain was removed only after reports to Cloudflare and DigitalOcean.
The post credits Backgrounder advisor David W. for forensics and OSINT work, and says Backgrounder with Ask Carmen will passively block the content across devices and channels and report it for removal in near real time.
Walks through a specific domain, its lifespan, its credential-theft tactic, and the remediation escalation.
Another advisor, not Landon, is credited with the forensic and OSINT work, making this an incident-response team example rather than a solo analysis.
For brands planning a campaign
A brand can frame the partnership around detection-to-takedown and automated abuse reporting. The domain’s specific lifespan gives the content a measurable hook beyond inbox blocking.
Landon warns that changing a password does not necessarily kick an attacker out of an email account.
Read more
Attackers can leave forwarding rules, filters, or active sessions behind to keep watching the inbox. The post points to three ways to check whether Gmail or Outlook is still compromised, noting that this is a recurring issue in scam-safety presentations and the first thing incident responders check.
Pairs checklist-style instruction with a video walkthrough.
The post covers Gmail and Outlook only; ask about coverage for other email services.
For brands planning a campaign
A partnership can target small-business and MSP audiences with post-compromise audit content. The practical angle is account inspection after a suspected breach, not just password hygiene.
Social engineering across consumer and business contexts
Landon uses a story about a man accused of posing as a San Francisco 49ers player, with an accomplice posing as his financial adviser, to defraud more than two dozen women of about $1.3 million.
Read more
The post explains that because few people create profiles across the internet, tech companies can only detect impersonation after the fact—and scammers know this.
Landon extends the problem to dating apps and investment opportunities for consumers; fake executive wire requests, vendor payment changes, and impersonated customers for small businesses; and the same attacks facing MSPs across hundreds or thousands of customer employees.
No malware is needed, just pure social engineering.
Starts with an extreme, news-like case, then moves through consumer, SMB, and MSP scenarios before tying the problem to Backgrounder and Ask Carmen.
For brands planning a campaign
A brand can treat impersonation as a cross-channel social-engineering problem, using one narrative for consumer, SMB, and MSP segments. The post supports content about human verification and payment-process controls.
Approach: product-linked education from current cases
Across the posts, Landon starts with a real incident or uncomfortable conversation, draws out a rule, checklist, or explanation, then connects it to Backgrounder or Ask Carmen.
Read more
The subjects center on scam reporting, impersonation, phishing, and email compromise.
Formats range from short instructional posts and concrete case details to occasional video.
The product link is consistent: reporting, blocking, and takedown are presented as the operational response to the problem.
Recurring structure: incident or conversation, explanation of why the scam works, practical rule or checklist, and product-linked response.
Ask for dated samples to assess how the topics and formats have changed over time.
For brands planning a campaign
A brand assessing Landon for thought leadership or advisory content should expect product-linked education built around concrete cases and actionable rules. The strongest fit is a partner comfortable with content that moves from a scam story to a specific protection workflow.
The posts describe Landon Winkelvoss's connection to Backgrounder, a scam-reporting and protection service, and its Ask Carmen tool.
Read more
Landon writes as part of the team that built the reporting flow.
Ask them to clarify whether their role is founder, employee, or partner.
No other brand relationships appear in the posts.
Backgrounder
Disclosed partnership
Landon writes in first person about building and operating Backgrounder and its Ask Carmen tool, saying “we built Backgrounder's free reporting flow” and “this is the problem we are solving at Backgrounder.”
Read more
Ask them to clarify whether their role is founder, employee, or partner.
Landon Winkelvoss covers fraud and scam prevention from the response side: what a person, small business, or IT provider should do after an attack or suspicious contact.
Read more
Start with the incident posts on email account persistence, government impersonation, and a phishing domain that stayed online, then read the reporting-friction post for the clearest statement of the underlying priority. The pattern is consistent: a real case or conversation, a short rule or checklist, and a product-linked answer through Backgrounder and Ask Carmen.
Both frame impersonation and fraud as operational security problems, not just awareness topics.
Read more
Salman Hussain's posts on executive impersonation and AI-enabled CEO fraud in the Gulf, and on browser AI privacy, translate incidents into organizational controls and verification habits.
Salman Hussain focuses on cybersecurity leadership and enterprise governance, including deepfake voice and video, business process controls, and CISO priorities. Landon Winkelvoss is closer to the victim and responder experience, covering scam reporting, consumer fraud, and phishing takedown workflows.
Both explain current cyber threats to business audiences and offer practical steps.
Read more
Carlton Brailey covers password manager attacks and the rise in malware variants, then turns each topic into checklists on MFA, master passwords, patching, backups, and employee training.
Carlton Brailey covers password security, malware fundamentals, and SMB defense education. Landon Winkelvoss focuses on fraud reporting, impersonation, email account persistence after a breach, and the lag between phishing detection and takedown.
Both use narrative and analogy to teach cybersecurity and human risk.
Read more
Alexander Oddo turns Jurassic Park into an AI safety argument and a soccer match into a phishing-awareness lesson, while Landon Winkelvoss draws on real scam stories to show why verification habits matter.
Alexander Oddo takes a big-picture view of AI risk, education, and cultural analogy. Landon Winkelvoss focuses on specific scam incidents, reporting flows, and remediation steps tied to Backgrounder and Ask Carmen.
These posts support one audience-relevance judgment: this is a small, topic-specific professional audience, not a reach play.
Read more
The LinkedIn account that carried them showed about 5,255 followers on 9 October 2026.
The five posts (19 June to 9 September 2026) address people who handle fraud and phishing problems — MSP staff who see the same attack across many customer mailboxes, small-business owners facing fake executives and changed vendor payment instructions, and individual consumers receiving scam calls or investment pitches — and assume readers may need to act on a suspicious message.
For a cybersecurity or fraud-prevention campaign built around scam detection and consumer protection, that framing suits thought-leadership or advisory placement where credibility with practitioners matters more than impressions.
Two short posts describe the author giving scam-safety presentations and point to a video walkthrough of checking Gmail and Outlook for leftover forwarding rules and sessions, suggesting an instructional format.
Before buying, ask Landon Winkelvoss for recent LinkedIn audience analytics — job titles, seniority, industries, company size, and top locations — plus engagement figures (impressions, comments, shares) on the last several scam-detection and consumer-protection posts at comparable depth.
For a campaign aimed specifically at security leaders or compliance decision-makers, also ask whether an audience survey or documented source covers employer, occupation, or seniority.
LinkedIn followers
5,255
LinkedIn profile audience count attached for the account that published the reviewed posts · 2026-10-09
Landon Winkelvoss's posts cover fraud prevention, phishing, and impersonation, focusing on Backgrounder and Ask Carmen, the scam-reporting and protection products they say they built.
Read more
They promote a free reporting flow, direct readers to a blog for remediation guidance, credit a team member's forensic work on a phishing domain, and argue for faster abuse reporting and takedowns.
The posts read as company and product communication, not an offer to outside brands, and disclose no paid partnerships, sponsored placements, or advertiser relationships.
A cybersecurity or fraud-prevention company considering a thought-leadership or advisory content partnership can view the posts as evidence of subject-matter expertise and an owned content channel, but should ask Winkelvoss or Backgrounder about formats, deliverables, pricing, disclosure practices, and approval processes before planning a campaign.
Good fit: A fraud-prevention or consumer-protection platform wants a thought-leadership or advisory content partnership on scam detection and reporting.
Read more
Decision: strong fit for advisory content, practitioner education, and campaigns that help people act on suspicious messages.
Winkelvoss turns real incidents and uncomfortable conversations into usable rules, checklists, and explanations, then links the lessons to Backgrounder or Ask Carmen.
Their posts cover the reporting gap for scam victims, a callback rule for government impersonation, a phishing domain that stayed up for 79 days, post-password-reset email-compromise checks, and impersonation across consumer, small-business, and MSP scenarios.
This approach suits a partner seeking specific, practical fraud-prevention content rather than broad awareness copy.
The LinkedIn account attached to the posts showed about 5,255 followers.
Formal partnership terms are unclear: no sponsorship policy, rate card, or partnership contact appears in the posts.
Confirm partnership terms and audience analytics directly before writing a plan.
When to choose a specialist
Poor fit: An enterprise security vendor wants a high-reach influencer-style campaign or technical threat-intelligence content on malware analysis, exploit research, or SOC detection engineering.
Read more
Decision: weak fit based on the posts.
Winkelvoss covers social engineering, scam reporting, impersonation, phishing takedown lag, and post-compromise email checks.
The posts do not establish expertise in malware reverse engineering, exploit development, or detection engineering; the phishing-domain post credits another advisor for the forensics and OSINT work.
Nor do they support a mass-reach or enterprise-buyer performance campaign: they show only a follower count of about 5,255, with no job titles, seniority, industries, company size, geography, impressions, comments, or shares.
The commercial format is also undeveloped: no sponsored-placement policy, rate card, deliverable menu, disclosure practice, or inquiry route appears in the posts.
A partner in a directly competing product category would also need to address the consistent product link to Backgrounder and Ask Carmen.
Before planning this kind of campaign, confirm technical credentials, audience data, and commercial terms directly.
A worked campaign example
Worked campaign angle for a fraud-prevention platform: a four-part advisory series called “Report it early.”
The platform would position Winkelvoss as the practitioner voice explaining why early reporting and quick verification can change the outcome.
Part 1: a short post and video on “a password reset is not enough,” covering forwarding rules, filters, and active sessions in Gmail or Outlook.
Part 2: a consumer-facing explainer on government impersonation, built around three rules: agencies do not demand immediate payment, ask someone to move money to “protect” it, or tell someone to stay on the line.
Part 3: a case-style post on the 79-day phishing domain, showing the gap between community reporting and actual takedown, then giving readers a simple abuse-reporting path.
Part 4: a live Q&A or webinar on why victims do not report, what a low-friction report should ask for, and how early reports make scam-network rebranding harder.
Deliverables: LinkedIn posts, one short video, a downloadable checklist, and a live session.
Judge the campaign by replies and comments from fraud-prevention practitioners, checklist downloads, and referrals into the partner’s reporting or protection flow.
Before committing, confirm audience analytics, the video transcript, disclosure expectations, and partnership terms.
Choose Salman Hussain when a campaign needs an executive-risk and governance framing rather than a consumer scam-reporting angle.
Read more
The posts address C-suite impersonation and CEO fraud in the Gulf, AI and deepfake voice/video in social engineering, and process controls such as verifying financial requests through an independent channel, dual approvals, segregation of duties, executive exposure assessments and BEC simulations.
A second post treats a reported silent on-device AI download in Chrome as a question of consent, privacy, supply-chain trust and AI governance.
This material suits a partner selling to CISOs, risk leaders or enterprises seeking a leadership-level take on impersonation and AI-enabled fraud, or a campaign targeting Gulf and broader enterprise audiences.
The tradeoff is format and proof.
Hussain's posts offer leadership guidance and news analysis framed as recommendations and open questions; they don't show a first-person incident, a reporting flow or a named product readers can act on.
Landon Winkelvoss's posts start with a specific loss, a live phishing domain that stayed up 79 days or a post-password-reset email compromise check, and connect to a free scam-reporting flow.
Choose Hussain when a partner wants policy and control language for a senior risk audience; choose Winkelvoss when a campaign needs an operational, consumer-facing reporting angle with case detail.
Choose Carlton Brailey when a campaign targets small businesses or IT providers and focuses on credential theft and malware hygiene.
Read more
The posts explain a reported threefold rise in malware targeting password managers, describe memory scraping, registry harvesting and cloud or local vault attacks, and explain why vaults are efficient targets.
They then offer a hardening list: unique passwords, multi-factor authentication, a strong master password, biometric login and business-grade vault administration.
A second post covers malware volume, encrypted threats, slow patching, endpoint protection, employee training and backups.
This structure suits a partner seeking plain-language teaching content with checklists for SMB owners, MSP audiences or employees.
The tradeoff is narrative depth and call to action.
Brailey's posts are explanatory articles built around a statistic and a numbered set of instructions; they rarely show a named incident, an accountable client story or a destination readers can use to report or verify a scam.
Landon Winkelvoss's posts draw on lived episodes and a specific reporting and takedown process readers can use.
Choose Brailey for repeatable educational content on malware and password security; choose Winkelvoss when a campaign depends on incident storytelling and a working reporting handoff.
Choose Alexander Oddo when a campaign wants accessible thought leadership connecting cybersecurity to wider business culture and current events.
Read more
One post builds an argument about AI behavior, testing, unintended paths and humility around a Jurassic Park analogy and a disclosed AI testing episode, while stating optimism about AI across business, healthcare, education and security.
The other uses a soccer loss to argue that cybersecurity should be taught early as a basic life skill, with lessons on recognizing suspicious messages, questioning unusual requests, protecting credentials and pausing before clicking.
This suits an awareness-culture campaign, a general business audience or a partner seeking an optimistic AI-and-risk voice rather than an incident-led one.
The tradeoff is operational specificity and measured claims.
Oddo's posts rely on analogy and opinion; they show no reporting mechanism, takedown process or concrete fraud case with named sums.
The AI post's claims come from third-party reports rather than observed work.
Landon Winkelvoss's posts offer three checks on a compromised mailbox, three rules on government impersonation and a phishing-domain timeline.
Choose Oddo for broad, memorable argument pieces; choose Winkelvoss when a campaign must teach a specific detection or reporting action readers can complete.
This profile draws on five LinkedIn posts by Landon Winkelvoss.
Together they cover post-breach email checks, a free scam-reporting flow, government impersonation, a 4th of July Evite phishing domain, and an impersonation scam involving a fake sports player and financial adviser.
The posts have no publication dates, so the page describes recurring arguments and priorities rather than how the themes developed over time.
A video referenced in one post has no transcript available, and the posts do not mention earlier signature work such as a book, show, or long-running series.
The posts do not provide engagement metrics, audience demographics, sponsorship policy, rate card, or partnership contact, and do not state whether the relationship to Backgrounder is founder, employee, or partner.
Where the posts provide little information, the page names the gap instead of filling it.
