Elon Musk’s government-slashing crew, the “department of government efficiency”, has been given access to the federal payment system, exposing the sensitive personal data of millions of Americans as well as details of public contractors who compete directly with Musk’s own businesses, an influential US senator has confirmed.
This “endangers US cybersecurity and creates conflicts of interest that make [Musk’s] access to these systems a national security risk,”
The US is in the find out phase - having fucked around late last year.
See, this is why this is more a off topic/politcal post than a privacy one.
I agree partially to be off-topic. Can you expand why do you think is off-topic?
We see posts of regimes about many countries around the world getting exposed here but it seems that when it is about the USA it kinda of raises some friction.
Isn’t this a space to share privacy threats and discuss technical options to defend citizens rights?
Edit: Also, a lot of the privacy threats in the USA affects directly and indirectly many influenced nations in the globe. It can drive other countries regimes and affect their population privacy rights.
An unelected social media mogul & billionaire gaining full access to the PII of Americans is absolutely on-topic for a privacy forum.
Yes, governments mishandling data has been on-topic in the past, so I am not sure why the USA would get an exemption from being discussed.
Under the arrangement, the Times reported, one of the Doge members who can now scour the data of millions of Americans is Tom Krause, chief executive of the tech company Cloud Software Group.
It is surprising to me that these massive conflicts of interest are not garnering more legal action.
Maybe I had just assumed there were more legal avenues to help protect against this stuff.
Eh, my judgement is not always ideal or leads to the best deductions. I thought differently. You all think differently. That’s okay. It is highly subjective.
I read this. I significantly face palmed at the acronym needing to be DOGE, the same as the cryptocurrency Elon was pushing himself, and I just feel that isn’t a coincidence.
I think the US is in a shock and awe time. I think the current POTUS is going for a “move fast, break shit, and hope bureaucracy isn’t fast enough to catch it in time”. Seems like the entire system is currently in the POTUS’s court, so I’d expect more blitzkrieg tactics like this. Other recent events from what I see seem to be testing that legal system, and I doubt the system can handle a lot of volatility in a shorter time.
I get it. That is why I asked if you could share your thoughts because we can learn with different perspectives.
Wow, commission made to examine a system gets access to system’s data. Big news surely…
Where does the privacy implication comes from? How else are committees made to provide recommendations supposed to function? Did previous financial committees only use scrying and divination instead of accessing actual data?
Isn’t it all government data being accessed by a committee made by the government to provide recommendations to the government?
Majority of the government is unelected. What makes this one so special? Unelected contractors, third parties, consultants, etc. always had data that they were authorised to process.
This is bureaucracy itself 
How is this mishandling? Maybe I am not getting it.
I think a better way to phrase it is “lack of” or “dwindling” legal protections/avenues with this current president; we’ve seen him elude legal consequences for his felonies, and now we’re seeing him “purge” government positions and replace them with staunch loyalist who are loyal to him, not the constitution or rule of law (which is why Musk is enthusiastic to knit a close relationship with him)
To make matters worst, he essentially has immunity due to SCOTUS
I don’t really like to talk about politics here, since we’re here to focus (mainly) on privacy; but i’m definitely alarmed and disturbed by the current administration, if they push through with their plans and agendas, our humans rights are going to take a substantial hit, which includes our privacy rights
If there’s no issue with a tech billionaire with a bad privacy track record and his subordinates accessing our unredacted personal data then why are we here on PrivacyGuides? Why not just use TikTok, Facebook, or Google?
Previous financial committees were bound by decades of law-making and precedent on who gets to access what secure data and the Congressional power of the purse, as enumerated in the constitution. Additionally, Trump and Musk have been ordered to stop some of their illegal money-rerouting work by the courts and reportedly haven’t done so.
The executive, the judicial, and the legislative are (supposedly) equal branches of government. The President is not a king, and he doesn’t have the legal authority to deputize someone to override Congressional laws and judicial verdicts.
Respectfully, I advise that you refresh your understanding of our branches of government and how they work together.
Despite the name and messaging, this is not a “government commission” (nor government at all really). Nor is it beholden to the checks and balances or confidentiality rules, nor oversight that an actual government agency, department, or agency must follow. “DOGE” is a made up thing that exists outside of government.
Majority of the government is unelected. What makes this one so special?
The fact that it is not part of government, not bound by the same rules, nor oversight. And is the pet project of a pair of deeply unpopular billionaires that have not been elected, appointed, or confirmed/approved by the senate (the normal process for government appointments). Both of whom have substantial conflicts of interest (Vivek’s background is Big-Pharma, Musk’s conflicts of interest are widely known already).
No, both you and @xe3 are factually wrong. DOGE is a legally created government agency (Establishing And Implementing The President's "Department Of Government Efficiency" – The White House).
It has the necessary powers to examine things under its purview. I really suggest actually looking into how the US president’s powers work instead of depending on hotshot headlines.
It needs no senate confirmation since it is similar to other agencies that come under President’s direct control on appointment and jurisdiction. The laws very clearly allow it.
US has really lax setup for actual accountability from the president. It is time to make strict norms to control the office. It cannot be left on custom and precedent alone (since Trump or any other person isn’t required to respect them).
I know it must feel defeating right now, but please shed this voluntary blindness of mislabelling everything as “hurr durr Trump is violating law” because he is not (he is just using all the powers the office has), and actually force your representatives to make concrete procedures and checks on executive powers.
That’s all well and good, but you didn’t respond to either half of my post.
If there’s no issue with a privacy-hostile tech billionaire and his subordinates accessing our unredacted personal data then why are we on PrivacyGuides? Why not use Facebook, Google, and Twitter?
Also, the president is not a king and cannot deputize people to override congressional funding decisions, break data access laws, shutter congressionally constructed agencies, ignore court orders. or otherwise ignore established law.
In fact the executive order you linked demonstrates this:
Sec. 5. General Provisions. (a) Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:
(i) the authority granted by law to an executive department or agency, or the head thereof; or
(ii) the functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.
(b) This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.
Respectfully, I ask that you loosen your reflexive ideological stances and refresh your understanding of our branches of government and how they’re supposed to work together.
??
Is this the level of US Polity understanding?
Government already used third parties, which often included industry veterans and “billionaires” in advisory capacities. It is nothing new. Look up who was in the AI advisory committee or who often heads agencies like FDA and FTC, you might see a pattern.
People are free to use it if they feel comfortable with their privacy policies. The issue is not the same as this is the case of government using its own data through an agency it authorised to work with that data.
Tell me which specific law passed by Congress or provision of constitution they broke. Please link as soon as possible.
It demonstrates nothing except that you are not comprehending what you read. Stop misinterpreting what you can’t understand (just to help you, the clauses you cite are correct because an advisory body cannot interfere with legal authorities, functions, or appropriated funds because it is, by definition, tendering advice and not creating any action legislative or otherwise. The president is allowed to take advice from his barber if they so wish to, and it will have the same clause applicable). Stop making sentimental emotional arguments. Also if you don’t stop implying that I am ignorant about US government, I will respond in kind.
Show sources for your claims outside of sensationalist coverage.
This makes the most sense. It seems to be an issue that appointed by one person, rather than elected, individuals are able to be given such overreaching power to review government processes. It’s still concerning, but in this specific case legal. There have been other actions taken by Trump that have been deemed illegal and blocked by judges - perhaps I’m unsure if this is a common occurrence among all presidents, and its selection bias due to the nature of the current president.
Regardless of legality, I don’t particularly like the idea of Musk leading handling anything related to privacy, given track record. But I suppose he won’t be the first, or last, shitty person that controls privacy for citizens. I suspect this data will “happenstance” help Musk in his personal ventures, but that is my speculation.
Judges block a lot of executive action with almost every president. To help with the recency bias against present president, I can cite a few cases where Biden was blocked which are student loan forgiveness, asylum changes, Title IX changes, etc. It is a common and healthy occurrence.
I also don’t like how Musk is allowed to get away with all this. Hope citizens wake up and demand actual accountability instead of the two party circus they usually fall for.
Ignoring the public data, I’ll just say that the legality of it still beyond my capacity to understand the separation of the access to “details of public contractors who compete directly with Musk’s own businesses” since it seems to create a conflict of interest.
Contractors/Companies that compete in contracts to the government seems to had their contract privacy violated which could make a lot of people to perhaps lose jobs.
Should all americans apply to jobs in Musk’s companies if they want to have a job?
It is just the sensationalist framing. Since DOGE has the mandate to recommend budget cuts, it will need access to the budget finances, which will by design include any contracts entered by the government.
This is not Musk getting access to competitors data. This is a government financial advisory agency getting access to government financial data.
Push the Congress to make it illegal to hire people via executive action where they hold positions with conflict of interest.
I think Trump’s opponents are making a major error by trying to encircle him in legal traps. The office has too much power to be stopped without senate (which GOP controls). Also for anyone interested, this is an evaluation of posts Trump can fill without even the senate (so he can appoint literally anyone): Characteristics of Presidential Appointments that do not Require Senate Confirmation | U.S. GAO