DOGE improperly shared sensitive social security data, DOJ court filing reveals | Hacker News Reader

DOGE improperly shared sensitive social security data, DOJ court filing reveals

theguardian.com

I'd like to see the same kind of scrutiny of private information handling by conventional government departments.

https://www.moneyness.ca/2024/07/your-finances-are-being-sno...

>472 different U.S. law enforcement agencies at the Federal, state, and local levels have the ability to directly query FinCEN's database of CTRs, suspicious activity reports, and more. This amounts to around 14,000 law enforcement officers who can search through the personal financial data of American citizens. In 2023, these 14,000 users conducted 2.3 million searches using FinCEN's query tool.

>FinCEN's data can also be downloaded in bulk form to the in-house servers of eleven different federal agencies, including the FBI, ICE, and the IRS. Bulk access (also known as Agency Integrated Access) means that the FBI, ICE, IRS, and eight other agencies don't need to use FinCEN's query tool. This bulk data can be access by another 35,000 agents. Alas, FinCEN doesn't track how many in-house searches were conducted by these agents in 2023, but I'd guess it's in the tens if not hundreds of millions.

You won't; at least not in the Grauniad.

Yes but in this case we have caught someone red-handed, why would you bring this other stuff up other than to distract from this known abuse? Sticking with topic at hand, do think we should prosecute those involved in this theft of data?

When private information is as widely shared as it currently is by government bodies, I think it's important to point out selective coverage of privacy violations, while the systemic encroachment of privacy rights continues unabated by 20 plus agencies.

In fact, a contrarian political entity created by an outside party — as the DOGE is/was — may be the kind of shock to major institutions that could lead to real positive change, in terms of greater transparency into and accountability over how these major institutions operate.

> A member of the so-called “department of government efficiency” signed a secret data-sharing agreement with an unidentified political advocacy group whose stated aim was to find evidence of voter fraud and overturn election results in certain states.

How did they characterize that as government efficiency?

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.mdd.577...

Earlier: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46696654

We still desperately need someone to represent the taxpayer and actually make sure we are getting what we pay for.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com