19 ms·
Because there are bigger fish to fry, I think people don’t appreciate the sheer cost of the system rebuild that will be required for security reasons later. Th
by lucasyvas 2y ago
Because there are bigger fish to fry, I think people don’t appreciate the sheer cost of the system rebuild that will be required for security reasons later.
There’s absolutely no telling what additional software has been installed alongside existing, or which systems have been modified that would require audit. Purging this will be an absolute fucking nightmare to the American taxpayer.
This may turn into one of the most significant IT incidents in world history.
- laserbeam 2y agoAnd there's no telling how many backups they compromised (let's be generous and assume backups exist).
- thih9 2y ago> The team could then feed this classified information into AI tools, either for training purposes or to mine the data for insights. (Members of DOGE already reportedly have put sensitive data from the Education Department into AI software.) Perhaps it's cheaper to assume everything leaked or will leak soon.
- lucasyvas 2y agoEven if you were to argue AI systems would eventually have a place in government, which they almost certainly would have anyway long term, the sheer carelessness and lack of oversight of its implementation by a private citizen and group of individuals of proven, questionable ethics is enough reason in itself to have to burn the forest down. Thinking of it objectively, almost nobody here can say they would stand for this at any company they worked at or ran. This is not an acceptable IT practice no matter which side of the fence you are currently sitting on - allowing an unvetted entity to modify your internal systems without audit or oversight is completely absurd.
- CyrsBel 2y agoYou are correct. And the nonchalant way in which the leaders who are supposed to oversee this thing are treating it is appalling. It will have consequences during mid-terms and beyond. It is clear that some people believe elected office to mean that they are then given authority and rights with which to increase in...being voyeurs rather than visionaries???
- hamhock666 2y ago[flagged]
- lucasyvas 2y agoBig Balls, man? Really? This dude is vetted to make this change? Come on. The kid wouldn’t be an unpaid intern at most companies. He wouldn’t pass the HR screen. Regardless of politics, they don’t have the credentials.
- hamhock666 2y ago[flagged]
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- scottLobster 2y agoNo, they're hiring people with no relevant experience who in one case was fired from a previous job for leaking confidential information. Another is an unapologetic cartoonishly not-subtle racist. It's amazing to me how every time DOGE is challenged its supporters come back with "I'm sure they're doing the right thing" despite all evidence to the contrary. I'm starting to think this ends with DOGE cutting like a few hundred million dollars of random stuff, taking out even more debt to cut everyone $5000 checks, swamp every media channel with bogus "WE CUT FIFTY TRILLION DOLLARS TO GIVE BACK TO THE PEOPLE!!!" and you guys will just lap it up without question.
- ModernMech 2y agoIt’s worse than that. They’re going to give themselves $4T in tax cuts for the 1%, cut Medicaid for $800 billion, and claim DOGE will make up the balance, even though it won’t make a dent. The debt will go up $3T, the savings will never come (again), poor people will lose healthcare, and when people wisen up, Republicans will revert to talking about how Democrats just want to “tax and spend”.
- AlecSchueler 2y ago> nobody here can say they would stand for this at any company they worked at or ran This is what leaves me incredulous about so many people here defending this. I've been on this site daily for how many years I don't know but the one thing that has been consistent is the security idea that an outside entity gaining physical access to your server means that it is irreparably compromised, and that it should be treated as a liability and re-built from the ground up. But somehow it's fine if it's public data in a federal database?
- lucasyvas 2y agoThank you for citing that because it is really the basis of my point. It is meant to be apolitical and to demonstrate that we are not OK with this otherwise so shouldn’t be now.
- gunian 2y agoi love when we pretend the NSA is dumb makes my day :)
- CyrsBel 2y agoYes. Even if DOGE is operating without any ill intent, and I don't think they have ill intent, the possibility of errors alone is massive and they need to slow down. https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2025/02/17/trump-musk-nuclear-weapons-workers-nnsa/78968238007/ https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2025/02/17/trum...
- lucasyvas 2y agoI thank you for highlighting that the intent isn’t actually the problem. I do feel the opposite to you but I’m happy you can see the practice itself is not acceptable / is a bad practice.
- exabrial 2y ago[flagged]
- watwut 2y agoThere is nothing transparent about DOGE. They are also not doing an audit. Can you share why are you opening offtopic content?
- exabrial 2y ago[flagged]
- lucasyvas 2y agoI don’t believe they actually think that transparency and auditing are bad. I think that many people are either excited for possible benefit or horrified by what they are watching and have understandably been unable to detach themselves enough from what is happening to recall their own expertise to guide them. We all should know the way this is being done is wrong and it will either have to be removed or redone, which is equivalently costly and might as well be the same thing at the end of the day. I would expect the same practices from all of you in your own day to day work. We expect it from each other. The lack of transparency is enough for anyone here to worry. It bucks every best practice and is a red flag in itself. We do not accept this in our work - it is what we all value and that has to be the north star.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- snvzz 2y agoOr maybe it'll accelerate the much needed improvements.
- lucasyvas 2y agoIt still has to be torn down though, don’t you see that? Even if a following government wanted to keep things of benefit, it was implemented in an untrustworthy way without oversight. It has to be rebuilt either way now because they didn't follow best practices for the implementation. They objectively fucked up.
- nilamo 2y agoYeah, all of every American's banking information being permanently exposed is a totally OK cost for "improvements".
- snvzz 2y agoPermanently exposed where? Are we talking about something that happened, or just conjecture?
- root_axis 2y agoIndeed, and its not just a problem for future democratic administrations (assuming they come to pass), it's doubtful that Trump's inevitable republican successors will be comfortable with Elon having a back door to their government.
- lfmunoz4 2y agoThis kind of thinking is what leads to zero progress. Also I think most people will be surprised how unless a lot of the data is compared to private sector data. I.e, in 2017 Equifax leaked data on 150 million people and no one cared (you get a free 6month credit check). That data went to foreign governments and private databases and it is easy to access on darkweb so real actual scammers and criminals have it. Millions of people were targeted for scamming because of this. That is just ONE leak. Now imagine the amount of data Visa has on your for example, all your purchases. Apps that have collected your browsing history and actual GPS location. Don't think this data isn't sold and combined with other databases. There are companies that just collect data and buy data. And you are worried about 1 database with people given explicit access makes me think the real objection is something else.
- lucasyvas 2y agoWhat company do you work for so I can tell them to fire you for negligence? Nobody hire this person. How can you possibly disagree with this and call yourself good at your job or a technologist? What an embarrassing take. Seriously you might want to delete your post if you want to ever be employed again. Actually trying to help you here.
- tucnak 2y agoHe works for 127.0.0.1 you should look them up!
- renewiltord 2y ago[flagged]
- lucasyvas 2y agoHow about "You're fired"?
- tech_ken 2y ago> I.e, in 2017 Equifax leaked data on 150 million people and no one cared (you get a free 6month credit check) What are you even talking about? People (myself included) were fucking livid! The reason we got the 6mo credit check was because so many people tried to claim the monetary compensation (which the court had ruled they were owed!) that Equifax was unable (unwilling) to pay the resulting volume of money. The 6mo credit check was the weasel compromise that the Trump regulatory apparatus rubber stamped.
- tmaly 2y agoAssuming they have a read only copy to the data, how would having access to just data require rebuilding the systems?
- kevingadd 2y agoIt's common for stray passwords or authentication tokens to be found in data dumps of i.e. someone's email, dropbox, or whatnot. So getting read only access to all the data in a given agency means you probably have access to a trove of stray passwords and authentication tokens that can be used to pivot into write access there or somewhere else. As a concrete example, if you have read-only access to someone's email inbox that's enough to steal most of their accounts on other services since you can request a password reset link and then click on it.
- mkolodny 2y ago> security reasons later What about security reasons now? The federal government includes the military. Giving DOGE “God mode” on the federal government is a national security risk right now.
- lucasyvas 2y agoNow is definitely relevant, however the ones steering the ship don't care about now. Someone will care later, that's all I personally know for sure.
- dhosek 2y ago“later” as in as soon as we can get the infestation removed, which would be the bigger fish needing frying. Not to mention the open question of whether we will ever arrive at later.
- ethagknight 2y agoThis is a very dramatic take on something you (and many others) are making extremely broad presumptions upon. It’s clear that DOGE is reviewing payment data and has the same access to various components of the US Govt that Obama’s US Digital Services, created to rebuild the ACA website but also provisioned for a number of other digital services. DOGE has the same access to services that USDS had. USDS was praised for its “speed and cutting through red tape”
- lenerdenator 2y agoThe question isn't what's being accessed, it's who is accessing it. There's at least some belief that the people looking at the data haven't been vetted or instructed as they should be when handling data of this nature. It doesn't help that the guy who is running the show is basically doing it as a friend of the president and has some conflicts of interest.
- epa 2y agoGovernment employees already have access to every text, call, and email you have ever sent. Where was your outrage since the Snowden leaks?
- lucasyvas 2y agoNot a totally unfair point, but to be fair, some people are still outraged after the Snowden leaks.
- pmalynin 2y agoI think a lot of people on hacker news were equally if not more outraged about Snowden leaks. Not sure what you’re trying to say.
- anon7000 2y agoIt’s another side of the same problem. We REALLY need data privacy laws in this country.
- godelski 2y ago
- eric_cc 2y ago[flagged]
- ddalex 2y agoYou make the very weird assumption that this will go "back to normal" at some point.
- cryptonector 2y agoThe system was almost certainly already so-accessible.
- rchaud 2y agoAll systems are accessible when you claim the right to arbitrarily fire people tasked with protecting access to it.