10 ms·
Treasury agrees to block DOGE's access to personal taxpayer data at IRS
- voidfunc 2y agoI give this less than 72 hours before reversal
- throwup238 2y agoWhat are the assurances that they don’t already have the data? This would be the largest data breach in US history that would make the OPM breach look like a stolen garden gnome in comparison.
- know-how 2y ago[dead]
- mattmaroon 2y agoIt's not really a breach if it is from the same organization (i.e. the executive branch). It may lead to one.
- Frankion 2y ago[dead]
- johnnyanmac 2y agoTechnically yes. I'd still be just as worried as a breach given the context though.
- atkailash 2y ago[dead]
- lozenge 2y agoAlthough authorised by some members of the executive branch, it is missing some of the oversight the executive branch is supposed to have.
- rayiner 2y agoSuch as what oversight exactly?
- afavour 2y agoSecurity clearances are surely one? Government employees with access to that data are heavily vetted. DOGE, not so much.
- rayiner 2y agoSecurity clearances for classified information and most IRS employees don’t have security clearances.
- philistine 2y agoYeah, let's just assume there are no safeguards in place at the IRS to protect personal data.
- xyzzyz 2y agoThese IRS safeguards will not be of the “security clearance required” form. IRS data, while private, is not classified.
- master_crab 2y agoThis. IRS data isn’t protected because it’s classified. It’s protected because of confidentiality enforced by laws passed by Congress (the Tax reform act I believe) (and the fact that the executive branch can be sued out of their pants for civil damages).
- jrs235 2y ago*(and the fact that the executive branch can be sued out of their pants for civil damages) if the government agrees to allowing itself to be sued...
- Applejinx 2y agoIt is if it's actually to a foreign adversary.
- fjjjrjj 2y agohttps://www.businessinsider.com/musk-spotted-pro-putin-russian-tv-presenter-world-cup-2022-12 https://www.businessinsider.com/musk-spotted-pro-putin-russi...
- scarab92 2y ago[flagged]
- krapp 2y ago[flagged]
- dang 2y agoCould you please stop posting flamebait comments and please stop duplicating comments? You've been doing way too much of this and are over the line at which we'd ban an account. I don't want to ban you because everyone goes on tilt sometimes, but please stop now. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- dboreham 2y agoIt's like if your CEO sent you an email saying you should give the production DB credentials, and any encrypted at rest keys to their cousin. Probably you wouldn't do that.
- Spivak 2y agoLike technically he does have the authority to compel you to do that but at the same time it's a massive red flag if he asks you in the first place. I do understand why this administration is trying very hard to centralize authority because it's faster than vetting a bunch of people they can trust to act on their behalf. But on the other hand federal employees making it as hard as possible to do what they perceive as bad/immoral is a soft-check on the executive.
- aforwardslash 2y agoHe may not actually have the authority for it; Imagine you're a cto receiving this request - you don'respond to the ceo, but to the administration board instead, just like the ceo. In fact, if you were a cto and you carried out this request without any kind of due diligence or vetting, you'd probably be legally and criminally liable for it. The same applies to anyone under the cto management (so basically all IT); they don't respond to the ceo, their top boss is the cto. I know, in smaller companies, where the ceo is also the owner, there is a tendency to confuse the boundaries of the roles - in my experience, it is up to the cto to politely deny these requests and educate the ceo on the "why"; if he still wants to move forward, he can hire another cto
- mattmaroon 2y agoYou might resist, but if you didn’t it would hardly be a data breach.
- kevin_thibedeau 2y agoWe can be all but certain that the CCP has its tendrils into Big Balls' phone and computers. A bunch of idiots with no opsec skills makes for easy pickings.
- cced 2y agoWhy does the ccp always come up in these discussions? You have Rogue billionaire taking an axe at the pillars of government and there’s still someone bringing up the ccp. Why
- Kelvin506 2y agoA lot of people are so brainwashed by U.S. propaganda they cannot comprehend that American billionaires are independently evil. Add to that the fanboyism where his sycophants can't see how utterly rotten Musk is and always has been. Their sense of world order requires there be a shadowy threat actor such as Russia or China, instead of the obvious truth that this is American capitalism operating as designed.
- andriesm 2y agoWhat makes Musk so utterly rotten? Otherwise "it's just like your opinion, man..." "Requires a shadowy threat actor such ad Russia and..."? Trump is trying to normalize US-Russian relations. "This is American capitalism operating as designed" - Honestly what do you mean? Trump and Musk's reforms looks different enough from anything else tried in the last 25 years that I am super curious to see where it goes. I'm not into fear porn that this is the end of the world, H*tler, or whatever. I'm also curious about Billionaires being independently evil - what do you mean, are virtually all billionaires evil? Are they really morally worse people than the average or do they just have access to more resources and influence?
- fjjjrjj 2y ago> I'm not into fear porn that this is the end of the world, H*tler, or whatever. Are you are okay with Trump splitting Ukraine with Russia and blessing Russia's war on Ukraine? There are historical parallels with Hitler annexing other countries. You not being into that reality is a choice.
- wodenokoto 2y agoYou can have data breaches within an organization.
- mattmaroon 2y agoOk, you’re right, but this is not that. This is the leader of the organization specifically wanting them to have the data.
- wmf 2y agoAgain, it's not a data breach for the government to have access to government data. If it gets outside then it's a data breach. DOGE has enough real problems that we don't need to cry wolf about its hypothetical (although maybe "inevitable") future actions.
- Frankion 2y ago[dead]
- johnnyanmac 2y ago"the front door and all windows are open, but don't worry. No one robbed the house yet so it's not a robbery " I wouldn't discount such reckless vulnerabilities happening here. Any decent IT department would faint imagining the overtime needed to fix such issues.
- DiogenesKynikos 2y agoIt's a data breach because DOGE is a bunch of random people chosen by Elon Musk, who act arbitrarily and completely outside the law.
- deckard1 2y agoyou have a lot of faith that Big Balls hasn't been compromised. Because surely none of them are using their personal smartphones or laptops and are following strict access protocols. Seeing that they are so so careful with everything else they've been doing. I feel like this is a bad episode of the Twilight Zone.
- Amezarak 2y agoOne of the more bizarre things with this whole saga is seeing people act as though the existing government employees are any different. People throwing our “vetted” like it means something meaningful. No, “vetting” basically means they checked to see if you ever got caught embezzling money, or in the case of clearances, if you lied about committing any crimes (committing them is ok). They are regular people and getting them to abide by sensible IT policies is a giant nightmare and compliance is poor. Heck, have people already forgotten Trump’s tax returns were leaked by politically motivated “vetted” people working for the IRS? Not the first time that happened either. And they didn’t even find anything interesting!
- soraminazuki 2y agoI doubt there are any real assurances considering this: > the career official who was in charge of that program resigned rather than grant the request. He was later replaced by a DOGE staffer on assignment to Treasury.
- naravara 2y agoThe practice of resigning rather than follow illegal/immoral orders seems ill suited to operating in a context where the leadership is an active adversary and can instantly replace you with someone who will just do the thing. I feel like civil servants need to internalize that the old customary practices are based on a context where there are checks and balances in the system, as well as standards of decency and democratic accountability, that make these sorts of formal actions have teeth. When none of that exists a principled resignation is basically just saying “My principles make me a hurdle to your attempts at violating the Constitutional rights of the public, so let me just get out of the way so you can sprint towards that goal more easily.” Obviously though, it’s the dirty hands problem. 99% of the time we don’t want civil servants to do this because 99% of the time the President isn’t actively trying to unmake the Constitutional order. It’s very problematic to have civil servants thinking their judgement should overrule their leadership, but we’re in extraordinary times and there is no leadership of an opposition movement that can coordinate to set any sort of guardrails around that kind of willful insubordination.
- gopher_space 2y ago> 99% of the time we don’t want civil servants to do this because 99% of the time the President isn’t actively trying to unmake the Constitutional order. It’s very problematic to have civil servants thinking their judgement should overrule their leadership[.] Civil servants use their personal judgment 100% of the time because they're tasked with bringing local context to decisions made elsewhere. 99% of the time this isn't a problem because most of the people involved understand the process and their role in it.
- naravara 2y ago
- UncleOxidant 2y agohttps://archive.is/fEtbi https://archive.is/fEtbi
- UncleOxidant 2y agoTreasury didn't want DOGE having access so agreeing to block DOGE access seems like weird wording here.
- halJordan 2y agoThe elected official in the WH wanted doge to have access, therefore the political appointees in the DoT wanted doge to have access. The career civil servants in the IRS did not want doge to have access. Therefore, the political appointees in the DOT agreed with the elected official in the White House that the civil servants could win this one. It's not weird wording, we just have a complex government.
- refurb 2y agoIndeed. The new Trump head of Treasury is just making a statement confirming what already was.
- andsoitis 2y agoGood. If, however, DOGE gets access, then, like some Nordic countries, I think we should demand public disclosure of all of it. The public deserves seeing what the richest rich pay in taxes, the middle class, and the poor. There’s so much fud and fog in the political discourse around tax burden. Current POTUS famously, notoriously, refused to disclose his, as has been tradition.
- dkjaudyeqooe 2y agoActually the kernel of a good idea. Over a certain level of wealth taxpayers have a right to know why you're denying them millions of dollars of income, so your tax returns are a legitimate public interest. Basically if you're paying close to the "full amount" of your tax rate in say the $5 million dollar range, then no disclosure required. If you're substantially under that your deductions should be public.
- mattmaroon 2y agoBut you're just defining the "full amount" as what you think they should pay. If they're abiding by the tax code, they are paying what the law considers "the full amount". It would not be discriminatory to say "we're going to publicize the returns of anyone who commits tax fraud". It would be discriminator to publicize the returns of anyone the Marxist hive mind thinks should pay more taxes than they are legally required to. If the rich commit tax fraud, put them in jail. If they don't "pay their fair share of taxes" but don't commit any crime in so doing, be mad at the people who wrote the tax code.
- collingreen 2y agoGreat! Let's get transparency and enough people in the irs to ensure everyone is following that tax code! That sounds like a great way to make sure a democratic government based on equal treatment of everyone is doing the right thing according, like you said, to the will of the represented people.
- dataflow 2y ago> But you're just defining the "full amount" as what you think they should pay. No, I think they're defining it as something like "the tax you would have paid if all your personal revenue that year had been ordinary income". The baseline is not an opinionated criterion, it's what most people deal with.
- dkjaudyeqooe 2y agoThank goodness for small mercies. I wasn't looking forward to Musk posting my tax return on a twatter rant.
- snvzz 2y ago[flagged]
- nielsbot 2y agoBased on what? There's no guarantee that moron (yes, moron) wouldn't do it if he could.
- IntelMiner 2y agoGiven what happened with the ISS recently, how do you know?
- Arkhadia 2y agoDo you actually believe all your financial and personal data hasn’t already been leaked and sold online numerous times already?
- tills13 2y agoOk and? Doesn't make it being stolen again any better.
- Fauntleroy 2y agoA bit late for that
- rattlesnakedave 2y agoThe multiple daily submissions about DOGE are getting a bit tiresome and are offtopic for HackerNews IMO. Unless they're doing something technically interesting I'm not sure why it has to be posted here. Judging by the fact that they make the front page daily I seem to be in the minority though, so whatever.
- whateveracct 2y agohttps://www.vcinfodocs.com/venture-capital-and-trump https://www.vcinfodocs.com/venture-capital-and-trump The actions by DOGE and the Trump administration are extremely relevant in a VC-hosted forum.
- ergonaught 2y agoLike any other "algorithm" feed, if you dislike what is engaging the masses then switch to a chronological view and sip from the feed as you will. ie: https://news.ycombinator.com/newest https://news.ycombinator.com/newest
- costco 2y agoYes, but it'd be nice if there were insights in the comments not present in the original text on these sorts of political articles. I have not seen that lately, and frankly "anything that good hackers would find interesting" has become so tortured as to become meaningless. People are missing the "If they'd cover it on TV news, it's probably off-topic" line that follows. The real issue is that there are too many articles on the front page that everyone can participate in (news, 150 word anecdotes on AI, language/editor wars, ...). If there is too much pent up demand for those topics, it should just be moved to a certain day of the week. I think you could more or less violently suppress it while having very limited collateral damage on actual technical discussions. And by allowing politics to remain on the front page for many days, you basically slowly change the composition of the community to people who want to debate politics all the time, which is explicitly not the intent of HN. I'm probably violating the guidelines by complaining instead of silently flagging the article, but hoping this inspires other people to start flagging as well.
- 2y ago
- Frankion 2y ago[dead]
- kylehotchkiss 2y agoI was pretty nervous about voterfile / irs data merges. I sensed this was headed towards building retribution tools for those who didn't vote for the admin.
- myko 2y agoIt certainly seems to be the goal. Military purges will be starting soon.
- myko 2y agoI know it is hard to stomach reality here but turns out I was right: https://www.military.com/daily-news/2025/02/21/fired-joint-chiefs-chairman-top-navy-leader-air-force-vice-chief-service-judge-advocates-general.html https://www.military.com/daily-news/2025/02/21/fired-joint-c...
- JoshTko 2y agoThis, they don't care about normal citizens, they just need to purge democrat military personnel
- scarab92 2y ago[flagged]
- portaouflop 2y agoYea I think it’s soon time to flag all Us politics/DOGE threads — it’s a bit tiring, especially for the majority of the world that lives elsewhere
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- maeil 2y ago1936: Think it's time to start flagging all posts related to the takeover of that Nazi party, it's getting a bit tiring for everyone outside of Germany.
- waltercool 2y ago[dead]
- fiatlux5784 2y ago[dead]
- zombiwoof 2y agoWhy do they need to see any tax returns?
- snvzz 2y agoThey don't, thus why they're not.
- insane_dreamer 2y agoToo late. You think DOGE is going to go back in and uninstall whatever hooks they put into the system? Nobody would even be able to verify that.
- grepfru_it 2y agoReplace DOGE with any subcontractor or executive pen authorization in the last 20 years. What makes you think what you are afraid of happening right now has not already happened? Too late may have left the room a long time ago and we are just wasting our breath fearing the corpse of the boogie man
- fsckpg 2y agoWell, contractors are typically not hellbent on destroying everything they touch, for one. Oh, and they have actual clearance, and consequences if they deliberately ruin something.
- insane_dreamer 2y agocontractors are given limited access within a clearly defined scope and procedures in place to ensure that they don't do anything they shouldn't. This is _not_ what is happening here, where DOGE has unfettered access, with those who offer resistance being fired or resigning.
- AlecSchueler 2y agoThe regular employees had to wait outside while DOGE brought additional hardware in.
- Arkhadia 2y agoDo you really think all your data hasn’t already been for sale for years? Cmon now
- collingreen 2y agoIs the implication that we should just publish all of everyone's data everywhere then and there is no value in trying to maintain any protections for anything? If that is the implication then I disagree.
- retrocryptid 2y agoyou might want to have a few special agents swing by big balls' apartment and go through whatever hard drives can be found. ive got to think they've already made an offsite backup.
- 1vuio0pswjnm7 2y agoWorks where archive.is is blocked: https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/taxes/treasury-agrees-to-block-doge-s-access-to-personal-taxpayer-data-at-irs/ar-AA1ztoSy https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/taxes/treasury-agrees-to-blo... Text-only: https://assets.msn.com/content/view/v2/Detail/en-in/AA1ztoSy https://assets.msn.com/content/view/v2/Detail/en-in/AA1ztoSy
- exabrial 2y agoHilarious. IRS is all worried about $601 I'm paying to a friend but they themselves don't want any transparency. Honestly tired of the overreach by the federal government.