Hacker News Reader

Comment by alecco | Hacker News Reader

Did everybody already forget only a month ago it was revealed Chinese hackers had access to US Treasury computers including US Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen's own?

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2025-01-16/chinese-h... (https://archive.ph/xeEaO) (January 16, 2025)

View on HN

That's a bit different than complete access to the complete payments database isn't it?

OPM has had major leaks. I think it’s safe to assume most federal IT leaks like a sieve.

So why should we care if the administration busts up the dam with a sledgehammer!

If outsiders with the CCP's interests at heart are able to use this data, why can't outsiders with the U.S.'s interests at heart be able to use this data?

I always feel like there's a Monty Hall aspect to these discussions where people forget that the past has occurred and it has a bearing on the present. The choice isn't between "observe data protections" and "don't observe data protections." Something was behind door #3.

You can't tell the difference between:

1) a random citizen murders someone and 2) a cop murders someone on duty?

Yes, ideally the country would be safe enough that no one was killed, and you can even argue that it don't matter because the end result is the same (hell, some people would even argue whoever the police kills had it coming). But most people understand that when those entrusted with special powers for the public good abuse that trust and engage in criminal behavior, it’s a far more serious issue.

If you disagree with me, explain why. Egregious personal attacks are against site guidelines. Knock it off.

Your personal data is already public due to commercial breaches. Does that mean that your current bank, etc. shouldn’t be expected to obey privacy laws?

No, but I'd expect an auditor to be able to do their job, third party, first party, or whatever. Especially if my bank was lying about my money.

First, the idea that the bank is lying is unfounded speculation, not a given. Second, if you were auditing a bank you would be scrupulous about how you get access and keeping it limited because you be would want it to hold up in court and avoid any questions about tampering or planting evidence. You’d use qualified auditors with clean records, not someone who couldn’t pass a background check.

Now, of course, if your goal was to create propaganda or to install extra-legal modifications to block payments without having to follow normal processes, you might do this because you’re getting you’ll never have to defend your actions in court. That would be consistent with what we’ve seen of the “fraud” being talked up despite being quickly debunked because most of the people sharing stories don’t care whether it’s true as long as it feels right.

> Second, if you were auditing a bank you would be scrupulous about how you get access and keeping it limited because you be would want it to hold up in court and avoid any questions about tampering or planting evidence.

er, not if my role was as a consultant of the parent bank and my assignment was to close branches that were "losing money".

note: i even specified "first party" because in my mind i was envisioning a first party audit, of which i have done many as a consultant.

I find it strange that neither activists nor politicians nor journalists cared about that enough to make it a continuous news cycle. There was also no outrage about various security breaches that exposed personal information for 100 million Americans, like the Change Healthcare breach. The reaction to alleged violation of privacy here seems inconsistent and disproportionate, and I wonder why?

The story did get memoryholed very fast. At the time, I was not sure what to ascribe it to ( well, still don't ), but I did find it interesting that it was pointed out how limited in scope it was.

>> Did everybody already forget only a month ago it was revealed Chinese hackers had access to US Treasury computers including US Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen's own?

> I find it strange that neither activists nor politicians nor journalists cared about that enough to make it a continuous news cycle.

Because (a) that was a month ago and that's a long time given recent events. And (b), it's implicit that someone 'inappropriate' having access is a bad thing, but with Trump/Musk/DOGE it's being done on purpose.

It's the purposeful part that's at issue now.

There are people who have reportedly just graduated high school that have root-level access to things:

* https://futurism.com/elon-kids-gutting-opm-doge

Beside being party loyalists, do they have any kind of qualifications?

Are you saying, a potus appointed commission for auditing government system is worse than a chinese backdoor in treasury department, who's level of access was unknown?

No one invited the Chinese through the front door.

If you can’t understand that difference, you’re missing something very critical.

One is serious because a foreign adversary is compromising us; the other is serious because we are apparently designing the compromise ourselves via the whims of a demagogue.

Yes. Someone without clearance nor congress approval running around with a sledgehammer is a lot more an immediate issue than a long term saboteur. We can deal with both, but let's make priorities.

"if the president does it, it's not illegal" ok Nixon.

Cosigned by the Supreme Court of The United States, in 2024.

> Are you saying, a potus appointed commission for auditing government system […]

You don't need read-write access for auditing. You don't need root/admin-level privileges.

Do they really have write access though?

So far the only evidence of that is a wired article [1] with anonymous sources, even those source were not 100% sure about it.

Since then wired has posted another article [2] claiming the access have been revoked after announcements from senior officials, which again is from anonymous sources.

I'm really skeptical of these anonymous sources tbh.

[1] https://www.wired.com/story/elon-musk-associate-bfs-federal-...

[2] https://www.wired.com/story/treasury-department-doge-marko-e...

Ageist and just parroting what the media says.

I'm surprised you didn't throw in jabs like "racist misogynistic eugenicist" like some reports...

I mean, Luke Farritor used some variety of AI to translate ancient scrolls and won an award for it:

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/this-21-year-old-u...

> I mean, Luke Farritor used some variety of AI to translate ancient scrolls and won an award for it:

Did the ancient scrolls involved accounting ledgers? Because some kind of auditing experience would be useful to figure out how where Treasury or USAid payments went.

What was the impact of the "exposed personal information" from Change Healthcare? One thing that makes me suspicious when I see those leaked personal details headlines: I am sure that my own personal info has been leaked many, many times. And, yet, never once have I been hacked (PC/laptop/phone) or had financial crimes against me (steal credit card, unauth'd charges, etc.). And, I write this as a total normie, who basically depends upon Google Accounts/Passwords to "do it all for me" (and my commercial banks where I have bank + credit cards). I don't do anything particularly special.

To be clear: I am not here to defend companies with weak cybersecurity, but the impact of these leaks is virtually nil. "One hundred million" sounds like a huge number, but it provides little insight on the realised impacts.

>The reaction to alleged violation of privacy here seems inconsistent and disproportionate, and I wonder why?

because they made a public show of it. That's the big difference. Meanwhile, Healhcare is already under more scutiny than ever and want to bury a lede of hacking.

Only unclassified data was accessed. Which is still bad but I suspect those types of hacks happen nearly daily.

Because those were done by state or criminal actors and this one is allegedly being done with the consent of our elected government? It’s really not that difficult to figure out.

Why don’t you just state your opinion instead of being vague?

>I find it strange that neither activists nor politicians nor journalists cared about that enough to make it a continuous news cycle

No not strange, because Elon etc. will cause more damage to their corrupt careers than other security breaches.

It's pretty obvious that people opposing the goals of DOGE are pushing this story, same way they were pushing the earlier "doxxing" of the young engineers working for DOGE or the Elon nazi zieg idiocy.

Say what you will, but Musk has a track record of executing well at preposterous speed, so for legacy players/media this sorta of PR campaign is about the most they can muster.

At the end of the day thought, we'll all have to compare real word results versus those PR narratives and I am positive i know which way that will swing. You just can't PR bullshit you way out something like a 250ton piece of stainless sticking a landing.

>Say what you will, but Musk has a track record of executing well at preposterous speed

I highly disagree, and these stories makes his incompetence more obvious. As well as proving various anecdoctes years ago from SpaceX/Tesla that Musk was someone you needed to work around, not with.

> Musk has a track record of executing well at preposterous speed

He has been promising Tesla full auto-pilot every year for about 9 years. Just around the corner he said. I even shelled out $10K for it on top of the price of my car, 6 years ago. He said the car would pick up the owner from the airport. That was about 5 years ago.

Musk says a lot and promises a lot. A lot of it never materializes. And he seems be going insane at a rapid pace as of late. I have been wondering if the ketamine that he says he has been taking is really turning his brain into mush.

Did you get the $10k back? Surely they haven't delivered?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com