Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

CVE program faces swift end after DHS fails to renew contract [updated]

csoonline.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

861–870 of 1001 posts

Re: CVE program faces swift end after DHS fails to renew contract [updated]

#861

Post by lolinder »

sanktanglia wrote: post #348
lolinder wrote: post #292

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> In truth they voted for him because he was the Republican on offer and they're die-hard Republican. The Republican party has made no secret of its agenda for decades. This is actually simply not true. The Republican party before the Tea Party looked nothing at all like this. Trump won the presidency last year riding a wave of distinctly not-your-typical-Republican lower class voters. As he rose the old guard Republ…

You are ignoring that trump rode to power explicitly by enabling the shittest of Republicans that already exist. To try and let republicans off the hook for supporting him, especially a 2nd time? Is hilarious

Even the first wave of Republican support came from the Tea Party types more than the establishment types.

Re: CVE program faces swift end after DHS fails to renew contract [updated]

#862

Post by absker »

tlogan wrote: post #739
jeff_carr wrote: post #721

The contract with MITRE has been extended. https://www.forbes.com/sites/kateoflahertyuk/2025/04/16/cve-... My guess indefinitely. DOGE might be a bunch of idiots, but in the entire DOD, there are non-idiots.

My guess is that they’ll be phased out next year. The long-term goal seems to be transitioning the CVE program into something more like an industry-led consortium. (If you did not notice they operate zero budgeting approach: cut everything and if something is very important reverse it. But you cut first and then ask questions.) It’s worth noting that MITRE is a DoD contractor (with minor contracts from other agencies…

MITRE is a non-profit company that operates Federally Funded Research and Development Centers (FFRDCs), which are owned and funded by the federal government and contracted out to companies like MITRE to operate them.

While MITRE does have contracts with DoD (and many other agencies across the federal government as part of the FFRDCs they operate), they are not the same as a stereotypical DoD contractor as their non-profit status motivates them to work in the public interest.

Re: CVE program faces swift end after DHS fails to renew contract [updated]

#863

Post by RankingMember »

knowaveragejoe wrote: post #817
i80and wrote: post #800

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know if this is a Poe's Law situation or not, so apologies if this is a satirical bit, but I'm horrified by the idea that you may be serious.

No, see, they're doing things and doing things is Good. Therefore progress is being made, and the country is being made incrementally better.

Poe's Law overflow detected

Re: CVE program faces swift end after DHS fails to renew contract [updated]

#864

Post by jhelps »

tlogan wrote: post #739
jeff_carr wrote: post #721

The contract with MITRE has been extended. https://www.forbes.com/sites/kateoflahertyuk/2025/04/16/cve-... My guess indefinitely. DOGE might be a bunch of idiots, but in the entire DOD, there are non-idiots.

My guess is that they’ll be phased out next year. The long-term goal seems to be transitioning the CVE program into something more like an industry-led consortium. (If you did not notice they operate zero budgeting approach: cut everything and if something is very important reverse it. But you cut first and then ask questions.) It’s worth noting that MITRE is a DoD contractor (with minor contracts from other agencies…

I can see how govt funding was needed to help bootstrap the CVE program before people saw the value of it.

But now that CVEs form the basis of a very lucrative ~$16b/year industry[0], wouldn't it make sense to let those companies take over?

Privatizing the Internet enabled much more innovation than if it had stayed govt-funded.

0: https://www.grandviewresearch.com/industry-analysis/security...

Re: CVE program faces swift end after DHS fails to renew contract [updated]

#865

Post by jmull »

tlogan wrote: post #829
jmull wrote: post #820

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The long-term goal seems to be... Where do you get that from? I've seen no sign of long-term goals, much less any mechanisms being put in place for follow-through on those goals. It seems like people keep making the mistake of believing there's a detailed plan, while all evidence tells us there isn't. I guess it's the normal human tendency to see order in the chaos.

Project 2025 lays out a clear vision for the privatization and decentralization of federal functions. It’s not subtle—it explicitly calls for it. Separate from whether we support this or not: Trump is doing—or promising to do—exactly what he said he would. We can disagree with the policies, but it’s not accurate to say he or his team are directionless or incompetent. They have a coherent (if controversial) agenda. So…

Trump said he was not going to follow the project 2025 plan.

So you're making two immediately contradictory claims that Trump is doing what he said he would, and is following the project 2025 plan. That's not coherent.

You're suggesting a privatization plan exists, and want to debate its merits, but I see no sign such a plan is being adopted. E.g. who is enacting the plan? When is the comment period? Who do we send our feedback to? You may have a plan, but what does that have to do with the people in charge? If it's not their plan it doesn't matter one bit. Despite your assurances, I see no sign they aren't acting without a plan (or, as you put, as clueless idiots).

Re: CVE program faces swift end after DHS fails to renew contract [updated]

#866

Post by sigzero »

pstuart wrote: post #850
chowchowchow wrote: post #845

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually Trump repeatedly said he didn't know about project 2025. He's so scattered in his campaigning that it's possible to pretty much justify any action as "what he said he would do." But saying executing project 2025 is exactly what he SAID he would do defies all reality. It may be what intelligent observers expected him to do but it is not what he said. Edit: good lord people I’m not defending Trump I’m saying h…

> Actually Trump repeatedly said he didn't know about project 2025 * He said he'd end the war in a day. * He said he had a better health care plan. * He said he'd drop the price of eggs. * ... * He said lots of things that were not true.

Which doesn't mean Trump saying he has nothing to do with Project 2025 a lie.

Re: CVE program faces swift end after DHS fails to renew contract [updated]

#867

Post by sollewitt »

dimitrios1 wrote: post #840
bunderbunder wrote: post #822

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I keep thinking of that time Wisconsin's state government privatized a bunch of IT stuff in the interest of "government efficiency", and the cost taxpayers paid for those specific functions increased by several hundred percent while quality of service went down. At that same time, though, I worked for a contractor that I do believe saved states money compared to doing things in-house. The work we did really required…

For every example of privatization going wrong, there's least one example (if not two) of it going right. But serious question -- what is the difference these days anyways? Our entire government is effectively privatized anyways from the local level up to the federal. We rely on contractors for almost everything that matters. We just maintain this facade that they are not privatized.

Answer for your serious question: hiring contractors isn’t “privatized” - that’s outsourcing. The thing you’re saving on is the ongoing cost of having permanent staff.

The difference is the government and public entities like mayoral offices or parliaments get to decide how the entity (doing the contracting) is run and approve costs, and the entity is under no obligation to return a profit.

Re: CVE program faces swift end after DHS fails to renew contract [updated]

#868

Post by lolinder »

pseudalopex wrote: post #666
lolinder wrote: post #292

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> In truth they voted for him because he was the Republican on offer and they're die-hard Republican. The Republican party has made no secret of its agenda for decades. This is actually simply not true. The Republican party before the Tea Party looked nothing at all like this. Trump won the presidency last year riding a wave of distinctly not-your-typical-Republican lower class voters. As he rose the old guard Republ…

> The Republican party before the Tea Party looked nothing at all like this. Starve the beast is older than the Tea Party.[1] [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starve_the_beast

There are extremely superficial similarities here, but they're just that: extremely superficial. Along the same axis but in totally different orders of magnitude, and orders of magnitude make a difference.

Obamacare and communism are along the same axis too, but the Republicans who claimed they were the same thing were obviously wrong.

Re: CVE program faces swift end after DHS fails to renew contract [updated]

#870

Post by lolinder »

bruce511 wrote: post #467
lolinder wrote: post #292

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> In truth they voted for him because he was the Republican on offer and they're die-hard Republican. The Republican party has made no secret of its agenda for decades. This is actually simply not true. The Republican party before the Tea Party looked nothing at all like this. Trump won the presidency last year riding a wave of distinctly not-your-typical-Republican lower class voters. As he rose the old guard Republ…

I'm upvoting you because you make a coherent argument, and votes here should be for that, not whether I agree with you or not. I would agree he's not George Bush, much less Ronald Reagan. Nevertheless those who voted for Bush and Reagan also voted for Trump. This has been "decades" in the making in the sense that since Obama was elected (in 2008), Republicans have embraced racism at the heart of their populist messag…

> Today's president is nothing like him, but wins because a bunch of people "vote Republican".

There's a component of that, but it's not the primary cause. A lot of former Republicans stopped voting Republican with Trump, including a lot of old rich white guys, and a lot of the current Republican voters didn't vote for Bush. He wins because of the new wave of voters that counterbalanced the flight of the educated core of the Republican establishment.

Post reply on HN