8 ms·

Did everybody already forget only a month ago it was revealed Chinese hackers had access to US Treasury computers including US Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen's

by alecco 2y ago

Did everybody already forget only a month ago it was revealed Chinese hackers had access to US Treasury computers including US Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen's own? https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2025-01-16/chinese-hacked-us-treasury-secretary-yellen-s-computer-in-breach https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2025-01-16/chinese-h... (https://archive.ph/xeEaO https://archive.ph/xeEaO) (January 16, 2025)

blondie9x 2y ago
That's a bit different than complete access to the complete payments database isn't it?
- SoftTalker 2y ago
  OPM has had major leaks. I think it’s safe to assume most federal IT leaks like a sieve.
  - daveguy 2y ago
    So why should we care if the administration busts up the dam with a sledgehammer!
    - torstenvl 2y ago
      If outsiders with the CCP's interests at heart are able to use this data, why can't outsiders with the U.S.'s interests at heart be able to use this data? I always feel like there's a Monty Hall aspect to these discussions where people forget that the past has occurred and it has a bearing on the present. The choice isn't between "observe data protections" and "don't observe data protections." Something was behind door #3.
      - acdha 2y ago
        Your personal data is already public due to commercial breaches. Does that mean that your current bank, etc. shouldn’t be expected to obey privacy laws?
        deleted 2y ago
        [deleted]
        genewitch 2y ago
        No, but I'd expect an auditor to be able to do their job, third party, first party, or whatever. Especially if my bank was lying about my money.
        acdha 2y ago
        First, the idea that the bank is lying is unfounded speculation, not a given. Second, if you were auditing a bank you would be scrupulous about how you get access and keeping it limited because you be would want it to hold up in court and avoid any questions about tampering or planting evidence. You’d use qualified auditors with clean records, not someone who couldn’t pass a background check. Now, of course, if your goal was to create propaganda or to install extra-legal modifications to block payments without having to follow normal processes, you might do this because you’re getting you’ll never have to defend your actions in court. That would be consistent with what we’ve seen of the “fraud” being talked up despite being quickly debunked because most of the people sharing stories don’t care whether it’s true as long as it feels right.
        genewitch 2y ago
        > Second, if you were auditing a bank you would be scrupulous about how you get access and keeping it limited because you be would want it to hold up in court and avoid any questions about tampering or planting evidence. er, not if my role was as a consultant of the parent bank and my assignment was to close branches that were "losing money". note: i even specified "first party" because in my mind i was envisioning a first party audit, of which i have done many as a consultant.
      - cataphract 2y ago
        You can't tell the difference between: 1) a random citizen murders someone and 2) a cop murders someone on duty? Yes, ideally the country would be safe enough that no one was killed, and you can even argue that it don't matter because the end result is the same (hell, some people would even argue whoever the police kills had it coming). But most people understand that when those entrusted with special powers for the public good abuse that trust and engage in criminal behavior, it’s a far more serious issue.
        torstenvl 2y ago
        If you disagree with me, explain why. Egregious personal attacks are against site guidelines. Knock it off.
blackeyeblitzar 2y ago
I find it strange that neither activists nor politicians nor journalists cared about that enough to make it a continuous news cycle. There was also no outrage about various security breaches that exposed personal information for 100 million Americans, like the Change Healthcare breach. The reaction to alleged violation of privacy here seems inconsistent and disproportionate, and I wonder why?
- A4ET8a8uTh0_v2 2y ago
  The story did get memoryholed very fast. At the time, I was not sure what to ascribe it to ( well, still don't ), but I did find it interesting that it was pointed out how limited in scope it was.
- throw0101d 2y ago
  >> Did everybody already forget only a month ago it was revealed Chinese hackers had access to US Treasury computers including US Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen's own? > I find it strange that neither activists nor politicians nor journalists cared about that enough to make it a continuous news cycle. Because (a) that was a month ago and that's a long time given recent events. And (b), it's implicit that someone 'inappropriate' having access is a bad thing, but with Trump/Musk/DOGE it's being done on purpose. It's the purposeful part that's at issue now. There are people who have reportedly just graduated high school that have root-level access to things: * https://futurism.com/elon-kids-gutting-opm-doge https://futurism.com/elon-kids-gutting-opm-doge Beside being party loyalists, do they have any kind of qualifications?
  - an_guy 2y ago
    Are you saying, a potus appointed commission for auditing government system is worse than a chinese backdoor in treasury department, who's level of access was unknown?
    - johnnyanmac 2y ago
      Yes. Someone without clearance nor congress approval running around with a sledgehammer is a lot more an immediate issue than a long term saboteur. We can deal with both, but let's make priorities.

by alecco 2y ago

blondie9x 2y ago

That's a bit different than complete access to the complete payments database isn't it?

SoftTalker 2y ago
OPM has had major leaks. I think it’s safe to assume most federal IT leaks like a sieve.
- daveguy 2y ago
  So why should we care if the administration busts up the dam with a sledgehammer!
  - torstenvl 2y ago
    If outsiders with the CCP's interests at heart are able to use this data, why can't outsiders with the U.S.'s interests at heart be able to use this data? I always feel like there's a Monty Hall aspect to these discussions where people forget that the past has occurred and it has a bearing on the present. The choice isn't between "observe data protections" and "don't observe data protections." Something was behind door #3.
    - acdha 2y ago
      Your personal data is already public due to commercial breaches. Does that mean that your current bank, etc. shouldn’t be expected to obey privacy laws?
      - deleted 2y ago
        [deleted]
      - genewitch 2y ago
        No, but I'd expect an auditor to be able to do their job, third party, first party, or whatever. Especially if my bank was lying about my money.
        acdha 2y ago
        First, the idea that the bank is lying is unfounded speculation, not a given. Second, if you were auditing a bank you would be scrupulous about how you get access and keeping it limited because you be would want it to hold up in court and avoid any questions about tampering or planting evidence. You’d use qualified auditors with clean records, not someone who couldn’t pass a background check. Now, of course, if your goal was to create propaganda or to install extra-legal modifications to block payments without having to follow normal processes, you might do this because you’re getting you’ll never have to defend your actions in court. That would be consistent with what we’ve seen of the “fraud” being talked up despite being quickly debunked because most of the people sharing stories don’t care whether it’s true as long as it feels right.
        genewitch 2y ago
        > Second, if you were auditing a bank you would be scrupulous about how you get access and keeping it limited because you be would want it to hold up in court and avoid any questions about tampering or planting evidence. er, not if my role was as a consultant of the parent bank and my assignment was to close branches that were "losing money". note: i even specified "first party" because in my mind i was envisioning a first party audit, of which i have done many as a consultant.
    - cataphract 2y ago
      You can't tell the difference between: 1) a random citizen murders someone and 2) a cop murders someone on duty? Yes, ideally the country would be safe enough that no one was killed, and you can even argue that it don't matter because the end result is the same (hell, some people would even argue whoever the police kills had it coming). But most people understand that when those entrusted with special powers for the public good abuse that trust and engage in criminal behavior, it’s a far more serious issue.
      - torstenvl 2y ago
        If you disagree with me, explain why. Egregious personal attacks are against site guidelines. Knock it off.

blackeyeblitzar 2y ago

I find it strange that neither activists nor politicians nor journalists cared about that enough to make it a continuous news cycle. There was also no outrage about various security breaches that exposed personal information for 100 million Americans, like the Change Healthcare breach. The reaction to alleged violation of privacy here seems inconsistent and disproportionate, and I wonder why?

A4ET8a8uTh0_v2 2y ago
The story did get memoryholed very fast. At the time, I was not sure what to ascribe it to ( well, still don't ), but I did find it interesting that it was pointed out how limited in scope it was.
throw0101d 2y ago
>> Did everybody already forget only a month ago it was revealed Chinese hackers had access to US Treasury computers including US Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen's own? > I find it strange that neither activists nor politicians nor journalists cared about that enough to make it a continuous news cycle. Because (a) that was a month ago and that's a long time given recent events. And (b), it's implicit that someone 'inappropriate' having access is a bad thing, but with Trump/Musk/DOGE it's being done on purpose. It's the purposeful part that's at issue now. There are people who have reportedly just graduated high school that have root-level access to things: * https://futurism.com/elon-kids-gutting-opm-doge https://futurism.com/elon-kids-gutting-opm-doge Beside being party loyalists, do they have any kind of qualifications?
- an_guy 2y ago
  Are you saying, a potus appointed commission for auditing government system is worse than a chinese backdoor in treasury department, who's level of access was unknown?
  - johnnyanmac 2y ago
    Yes. Someone without clearance nor congress approval running around with a sledgehammer is a lot more an immediate issue than a long term saboteur. We can deal with both, but let's make priorities.