20 ms·
The article says > [ChatGPT] is blocked for other Department of Homeland Security staff. Gottumukkala “was granted permission to use ChatGPT with DHS controls
by dmix 9mo ago
The article says
> [ChatGPT] is blocked for other Department of Homeland Security staff. Gottumukkala “was granted permission to use ChatGPT with DHS controls in place,” adding that the use was “short-term and limited.”
He had a special exemption to use it as head of Cyber and still got flagged by cybersecurity checks. So obviously they don't think it's safe to use broadly.
They already have a deal with OpenAI to build a government focused one https://openai.com/global-affairs/introducing-chatgpt-gov/ https://openai.com/global-affairs/introducing-chatgpt-gov/
- grayhatter 9mo ago> So obviously they don't think it's safe to use broadly. More likely, everything gets added to the list because there shouldn't be false positives, it's worth investigating to make sure there isn't an adjacent gap in the security systems.
- kulahan 9mo agoYou are uploading information to the chat system every time you use it. Doubly true if you’re having it analyze or work with documents. I presume pulling this data out is simple if you’re, say, China. There really no security to investigate. Without a private instance, it’s an absolute non-starter for anything classified.
- patrickmcnamara 9mo ago> presume pulling this data out is simple if you’re, say, China Why would you presume that?
- nostrademons 9mo agoSomehow I think that the weak link in our government security is at the top - the President, his cabinet, and various heads of agencies. Because nobody questions what they're allowed to do, and so they're exempt from various common-sense security protocols. We already saw some pretty egregious security breaches from Pete Hegseth.
- NoGravitas 9mo agoThat's also the case in businesses. No one denies the CEO a security exemption.
- AnimalMuppet 9mo agoBeen there. The CEO of an internet security company was the one who clicked on the wrong email attachment and turned a virus loose. I mean, I don't know if he had a security exemption, or if anyone who clicked on it would have infected us. But he was the weak link, at least in that instance.
- lysace 9mo agoI have never worked in a company where an obviously incorrect CEO-demanded security exemption (like this one) would have been allowed to pass. Professionalism, boards (with a mandatory employee member/representative, after some size) and ethics exist. 30 years in about 8 software companies, Northern Europe. Often startups. Between 4 to 600 people. When they grow large the work often turns boring, so it's time to find something smaller again.
- NoGravitas 9mo agoAh, Northern Europe is probably the difference. This passes all the time in the US. It's probably more common in non-tech companies, as well.
- LastTrain 9mo agoI’m in the US, SE since 1998, startups to multinationals. What the GP said holds true for me too. There are serious professionals in the world - I don’t know why some people want to drag every one else down to the level of the current US administration- they are exceptionally inept.