6 ms·
What 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 s
by throwup238 2y ago
What 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...
- genewitch 2y agoThey have 500MB email boxes! Actually I wonder, now, because they wanted to hire 84k people last year...
- 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