This post is also available in:
עברית (Hebrew)
In a troubling intersection of technology and national security, sanctioned terrorist organizations and foreign propaganda actors are continuing to purchase premium services from the popular social media platform X. Despite official U.S. regulations, these groups have reportedly maintained access to features that enhance their visibility and messaging reach.
For a monthly fee of $8, users of X can subscribe to a premium tier that offers benefits like post-editing, extended video uploads, boosted algorithmic placement, and, of course, the verification checkmark. These services, originally designed to reward content creators and influential voices, are now being exploited by actors that U.S. law explicitly forbids from conducting business with American companies.
An investigation by the Tech Transparency Project (TTP) found that more than 200 accounts affiliated with sanctioned entities have active subscriptions to X’s premium services. These accounts are not limited to pseudonymous profiles or covert operators—they include individuals with known ties to globally recognized terrorist groups, such as The Houthis, Hezbollah, and Iran-aligned militia groups (IAMGs) in both Iraq and Syria.
This is not a new issue. A year ago, TTP flagged 28 such accounts, prompting X to suspend or remove their blue check marks. However, many resubscribed shortly afterward, with minimal long-term enforcement.
Alarmingly, some of these accounts have even passed X’s identity verification process, according to the New York Times. This involves submitting a government-issued ID and a selfie – suggesting either a lapse in vetting or a policy contradiction. Others have enabled monetization tools, such as tip buttons, raising concerns about indirect revenue flows to banned entities.
U.S. Treasury Department rules, enforced by the Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC), prohibit unlicensed transactions with sanctioned individuals. X’s own terms state that its premium features are off-limits to such users.
Yet, enforcement appears inconsistent, even as these groups utilize the platform to distribute propaganda and strengthen their digital presence. The situation raises urgent questions about oversight, accountability, and the responsibilities of technology platforms in safeguarding against misuse by hostile actors.
