Hum, reading that material, and seeing it also discussed on the HN frontpage, seemt to imply there was a an interest. From the public. Like, a public interest.

People seem awfully quick to say "zoom did the right thing here" or "what did you expect?" But these timelines look like people kept it quite for long enough that "oh they'll get around to disclosing it in due time" doesn't cut it. So yeah, "zoom was in their right to fire someone for raising legitimate concerns, bEcAuSe Of ThEiR BoToMlInE" is a stance you can take. But it also means putting corporate interest over public interest once more. Great...

Edit: don't get me wrong I'm not surprised companies would react like that. But "what did you expect" implies that the person would better not have done that, or doesn't have the moral high ground here when they say that the termination, lawful or not, was a dick move.