Live data from Hacker News

DOGE has 'god mode' access to government data

theatlantic.com

771–780 of 1001 posts

Re: DOGE has 'god mode' access to government data

#771
post #673

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…

Assuming they have a read only copy to the data, how would having access to just data require rebuilding the systems?

It'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.

Re: DOGE has 'god mode' access to government data

#773

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Atlantic: https://www.influencewatch.org/for-profit/the-atlantic/ "The Atlantic is a left-of-center literary, political, and ideas magazine that publishes ten issues per year. It was founded as The Atlantic Monthly in 1857 by several prominent American literary figures such as Ralph Waldo Emerson and Henry Wadsworth Longfellow. 1 In 2017 the Emerson Collective, a left-of-center private grantmaking enterprise fund…

"Jeffrey Goldberg was named editor in chief of The Atlantic in October 2016 and held the position as of November 2020. Prior to being elevated to the top editorial spot, Goldberg had been a correspondent for the magazine since 2007 and had written numerous essays covering foreign policy in general and the Middle East in particular. 3 Just days prior to Goldberg’s promotion, the magazine endorsed Democrat Hillary Clin…

Now if you got this far and are still thinking "yeah but I trust the Atlantic, they are the pinnacle of news and they don't need to show their work!" I would urge you to read the full 'Controversies' section @ https://www.influencewatch.org/for-profit/the-atlantic/

Here are a few choice items though that just -might- impact their impartiality and should maybe cause you to second guess if 'anonymous, unquoted sources' are a great journalistic bar for 'the truth':

"A September 2020 report authored by Jeffrey Goldberg, editor-in-chief of The Atlantic, cited “multiple sources” claiming President Donald Trump had disparaged the historical sacrifices made by American military personnel. The headline read “Trump: Americans Who Died in War Are ‘Losers’ and ‘Suckers’” with a sub-headline sentence stating “The president has repeatedly disparaged the intelligence of service members, and asked that wounded veterans be kept out of military parades, multiple sources tell The Atlantic.” 15

Both the content and context of the allegation was disputed in whole or in part by the president, his staff, and even some of his critics, including left-wing journalists.

The two opening paragraphs set the context and provided the sourcing for the allegation:

When President Donald Trump canceled a visit to the Aisne-Marne American Cemetery near Paris in 2018, he blamed rain for the last-minute decision, saying that “the helicopter couldn’t fly” and that the Secret Service wouldn’t drive him there. Neither claim was true.

Trump rejected the idea of the visit because he feared his hair would become disheveled in the rain, and because he did not believe it important to honor American war dead, according to four people with firsthand knowledge of the discussion that day. In a conversation with senior staff members on the morning of the scheduled visit, Trump said, “Why should I go to that cemetery? It’s filled with losers.” In a separate conversation on the same trip, Trump referred to the more than 1,800 marines who lost their lives at Belleau Wood as “suckers” for getting killed. 15

John Bolton, the President’s former National Security Advisor turned Trump critic, was on the 2018 trip and involved in the discussion regarding the motive for the helicopter grounding and cancelling of the motorcade alternative. Despite having become a severe Trump critic who had by September 2020 stated that President Trump was not fit for office, Bolton gave the New York Times an eyewitness account of the incident that differed sharply from that presented by The Atlantic

Mr. Bolton said he was in the room at the ambassador’s residence when Mr. Trump arrived and Mr. [White House Chief of Staff John] Kelly told him that the helicopter trip had to be canceled. A two-hour motorcade would have put him too far away from Air Force One and the most capable communications array a president needs in case of an emergency, per usual protocol, Mr. Bolton said. “It was a straight weather call,” he said." .... "Former White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders stated: “I was actually there and one of the people part of the discussion — this never happened.” And Jordan Karem, the former personal assistant to the president during period in question, replied to the story with a Twitter statement: “This is not even close to being factually accurate. Plain and simple, it just never happened.”"

So they literally have just 'made up' stuff about Trumpt to make him look vein and stupid, and people who basically hate him even called them on this charade. And I know for sure I remember this making the rounds -- so their lies get around due tot their perceived authority.

This was the rationale:

Goldberg replied: “They don’t want to be inundated with angry tweets and all the rest … In this case I decided that I felt I knew this information well enough, from high enough sources, and multiple sources, that I thought we should put it out.”

I'll stop here - but if you go on to read the rest, Glenn Greenwald (an actually good investigative journalist with integrity) rips The Atlantic to shreds, they have multiple other controversies, they have dubious financial ties... and so on

If you believe this 'God Mode' article it is strictly an act of faith in the party you have pronounced your allegiance to.

Re: DOGE has 'god mode' access to government data

#774

Setting politics aside for a moment, I find it fascinating that an audit of this scale is taking place within the government. Has there ever been a historical precedent where an external agency thoroughly reviewed all departments, published its findings for the public, and then based decisions on that analysis? Is it really possible to root out governmental fraud using this approach? Fraud and theft exist at every le…

Before even debating the effectiveness of this audit, we have to address the fundamental problem: Elon Musk has no legal authority to be conducting this in the first place. The Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) is not a real government agency and Musk has not been confirmed by the Senate or given formal oversight. It's illegal and unconstitutional. Beyond that, yes, large-scale government audits have been do…

DOGE is actually the USDS: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Digital_Service

Re: DOGE has 'god mode' access to government data

#775

I find it wild that apparently there is no law onto which government workers can cling to refuse these requests. Is it all just based on conventions, goodwill and culture?

[dupe]

We don't when said President illegally fires the inspectors general responsible for independent oversight.

[1] https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/fired-inspecto...

Re: DOGE has 'god mode' access to government data

#776
post #451

Perhaps the whole situation will finally convince the "I don't mind, I have nothing to hide" crowd about the need to scrutinize & limit as much as reasonably possible the personal data collection and retention by government and other entities. What good are rules, statutes, checks & balances, passwords and ACLs, if at some point someone you don't like or trust can just come in "as a root" and circumvent everything?

1. I don't want the federal government to know much about me.

2. I think the federal government executive branch should be able to control itself and inspect itself.

Re: DOGE has 'god mode' access to government data

#777

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…

> 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.

“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.

Re: DOGE has 'god mode' access to government data

#778

This should be very illegal. It’s a huge security risk to let Federal government employees access Federal government systems.

You forgot to add "without proper security controls/clearances and data governance".

I didn’t. It’s just a giant security scam to let doge access systems. Didn’t you read the article? The USAID people said they don’t trust the doge people so we shouldn’t either.

Re: DOGE has 'god mode' access to government data

#779

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is no constitutional way the president to not have access to any data in the executive branch. And since doge is reporting to him - it just send the data to the president and he will forward it to whomever he pleases. Even the concept of independent executive agencies is probably more vulnerable constitutionally than more people think.

Yeah, that's my point. Not even the president should have unrestricted access to that data. He's not a king or the head of a corporation. And government workers aren't his subjects or employees. In most places, at least honest government workers can stand their ground because they're backed by a law governing this access.

Change the constitution then.
Post reply on HN