Muse challenges distrust in Meta

Article by Nacata Security, 28/09/2026

Would you let Meta control your credit card and your email?

That’s exactly what Muse, Meta’s new AI agent, is asking you to do.

While OpenAI and Anthropic race toward the enterprise market, Meta bet on something different: a personal, consumer-focused agent that lives on your phone.

The issue isn’t whether Muse works, but whether anyone would trust Meta with their banking data, their Gmail, and their active subscription history.

Muse did something useful on day one, and that was it.

The agent suggests concrete tasks from the moment you open it. One of them is scanning whether you have unclaimed funds in your name. The journalist who tested it found real money: a check on its way. It was a genuine ‘this actually works’ moment. But that discovery happens once and you can’t repeat it the following week.

The trick works once and then there’s nothing more.

For Muse to have sustained use, Meta proposes giving it access to your credit card and Gmail to detect duplicate charges or subscriptions you no longer use. It’s the promise of apps like Rocket Money, but inside Meta’s ecosystem. And that’s where the wall appears: not a technical one, but one of trust. Meta’s business is selling you advertising, and the more it knows about you, the more precise that becomes.

Meta wants your financial data to better refine its targeted ads.

What’s interesting is that Muse doesn’t open by immediately asking you to connect Instagram or Facebook. At first it treats you like a stranger. But as you use it, it begins to integrate all your context. That design is no coincidence: it’s Meta’s same old strategy, executed with more patience.

Meta’s patience comes at a clear price.

Other AI assistants also ask for access to your data. The difference lies in who’s asking. Someone who tried Muse admitted they would rather give that access to Siri, because Apple doesn’t depend on monetizing what it knows about you.

The underlying problem is structural, not technical.

Meta has something neither OpenAI nor Anthropic has: billions of real users who already live inside its platforms. Facebook, Instagram, WhatsApp. These aren’t niche users: they’re ordinary people who open those apps every day. If they manage to get them to adopt Muse, the agent wouldn’t need to compete on technical benchmarks: it would win through volume and constant presence in everyday life.

Meta’s track record works against it from the start.

Trust isn’t built with a good launch. Meta has spent years accumulating privacy scandals that have left their mark. Every time it asks for more access to personal data, that history comes back. Muse may be technically capable, but convincing users that this time is different goes far beyond the agent itself.

OpenAI and Anthropic go enterprise; Meta goes for your pocket.

That divergence isn’t a mistake by Meta: it’s a reading of the market. If the big players are betting on B2B, the consumer space becomes more open. Meta sees a real opportunity there and Muse is its first serious move.

The question isn’t whether Muse works.

The question is whether Meta’s business model allows users to grant Muse the access it needs. An agent that can’t touch your finances is a half-baked agent. And one you won’t give permissions to because you don’t trust whoever operates it is, in practice, an expensive chatbot.

Without trust, Muse is just another chatbot.

Meta has the distribution, the users, and the technology. What it doesn’t have is the benefit of the doubt that Muse needs to be something more.

How much access would you be willing to give an agent that sells you ads?

Security is not improvised, it is audited. At Nacata Security we detect vulnerabilities and protect your company, because a single flaw can cost you everything you have built.

Related articles

Nacata Security, reach out to us anytime