The revelation that the Twitter and Facebook accounts of Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra have been hacked has increased suspicions that other parts of the government apparatus have also fallen foul of cyber criminals.

An unknown hacker or hackers apparently got hold of the password for the PM’s social networking accounts and circulated the information on the internet where it was picked up by the hacking community (but not by the legions of cyber spies employed by a raft of government agencies).

It was then used by a 4th-year student at Chulalongkorn University (motto: SOTUS, or Steal Others’ Twitter to Upload Sarcasm) to post Twitter messages, supposedly from the Prime Minister, questioning government policies. There was also a jibe at the weak security that allowed him to do this.

The government is busy downplaying the issue. The Minister of Information and Communication Technology notes that while this is clearly an offence under the cybercrime law, he hopes the court will show leniency – something he has not requested for the hundreds of others prosecuted under the same law.

But government security experts are busy searching for further attacks on government communications. One promising line of investigation is focussing on a long-held suspicion that Deputy Prime Minister Chalerm Yubamrung’s brain has been hacked.

‘People who have known him for a long time,’ said a source close to the investigation ‘tell us that he is underneath a very simple soul, almost shy. It makes us wonder why he seems to have such a problem with his big mouth. We suspect that someone has hacked into the Broca’s area of his cerebral cortex and is somehow programming him to say destructive things.’

While the concept of brain hacking is not as well-known as computer hacking, neurologists believe that it might be feasible in a number of ways. Neurolinguists are particularly interested that it is Chalerm’s use of language that has been hi-jacked. They note that while Chalerm says a lot, and loudly, there is in fact very little substance in what he says.

‘A typical Chalerm speech is just bluster,’ says one analyst. ‘He repeatedly claims to be in possession of sensational information that he will reveal at some unspecified later date. Then either he fails to deliver on his promise, or he comes out with a very damp squib – something that is already in the public record.’

‘I once dared to ask him if he was hearing voices,’ a long-time associate confessed. ‘He said it was hardly likely since he’s virtually deaf.’

Some refute the brain-hacking allegations, pointing to the fact that his sons seem equally given to outbursts. This looks more like an inherited personality trait than control of an individual brain, they say.

The brain-hacking proponents will have none of this. They note that it is highly likely that weak cerebral security passwords run in families and it would about as easy to hack the whole lot of them as just the father.

Others argue that the sons’ verbal outbursts seem limited to a single phrase – ‘Do you know who my father is?’ – something quite different from their father’s lifetime career of shooting from the lip. Also, their wayward behaviour more often takes a physical rather then verbal form. Like shooting policemen, for example.

The brain hacking community understandably keeps a very low profile, and attempts by Prachatai to contact them for comment were very difficult. However, through a very oblique process, a spokesperson would neither confirm nor deny that Chalerm’s brain had been hacked.

‘It wouldn’t be that difficult,’ we learned from one brain-hacker. ‘Politicians are typically easy targets since they rarely know what they’re doing anyway. We’ve found it especially easy to get inside the brain of politicians who started out life as policeman and picked up a degree in law on the way, like Chalerm. That’s like no challenge.’

Government security experts are checking to see if there are any other former policemen with law degrees who have become politicians and then displayed erratic behaviour.