In a letter to the Social Security Administration’s Inspector General’s office requesting an investigation into DOGE, Ranking Member Rep. Gerald Connolly (D-VA) alleged that the government entity created by Elon Musk supposedly to reduce the size of the federal government is now constructing a “cross-agency master database” of sensitive personal information.
Wired appeared to back up Connolly’s allegations on Friday, detailing an effort at DOGE to fold this database into the Department of Homeland Security, the counterterrorism agency founded after 9/11. Specifically, “mass amounts” of personal data harvested from the IRS, SSA, and voting records in Pennsylvania and Florida were recently uploaded into servers at the United States Customs and Immigration Services (USCIS), which processes immigration cases.
Connolly cited testimony from SSA whistleblowers who witnessed DOGE engineers accessing the agency’s IT system with “backpacks full of laptops, each with access to different agency systems”, with the aim of combining them into one database. Connolly warned that not only would such a database pose a threat to government cybersecurity, which siloes its information across several agencies to prevent cyberattacks from accessing all information at once, it was also very likely violating several privacy laws.
The Committee has also received reports about troubling, fumbling efforts by DOGE to combine sensitive information held by SSA, the IRS, HHS, and other agencies into a single cross-agency master database. Improving how federal agencies share data to improve outcomes and customer service is a longstanding and bipartisan goal in Congress. Information obtained by the Committee, however, indicates that DOGE is carrying out its work in a manner that disregards important cybersecurity and privacy considerations, potentially in violation of the law.
In an apparent attempt to sidestep network security controls, the Committee has learned that DOGE engineers have tried to create specialized computers for themselves that simultaneously give full access to networks and databases across different agencies. Such a system would pose unprecedented operational security risks and undermine the zero-trust cybersecurity architecture that prevents a breach at one agency from spreading across the government. Information obtained by the Committee also indicates that individuals associated with DOGE have assembled backpacks full of laptops, each with access to different agency systems, that DOGE staff is using to combine databases that are currently maintained separately by multiple federal agencies.
Though several other House investigations into DOGE’s activities have revealed their data harvesting efforts at other agencies, Rep. Connolly’s letter is the first to allege that DOGE, the government-shrinking agency founded by Elon Musk and now wreaking havoc across the federal government, is pooling everyone’s data into one giant database.
“I have long championed efforts to improve data sharing across the government to combat improper payments and to increase government efficiency,” Connolly wrote. “But any efforts to reform our current systems must be undertaken with the utmost sensitivity and concern for privacy, security, and the Social Security payments that millions of people rely on.”
The privacy implications of this cross-agency database would not only violate numerous privacy laws and cause cybersecurity risks, but could also become a potent weapon for whomever can access said database: it could be used by the government to conduct mass surveillance of whomever they wished to target, such as immigrants, or become a target for outside actors seeking a trove of private and personal data. Either way, “it’s terrifying,” John Davisson, senior counsel and director of litigation at the Electronic Privacy Information Center, told Nextgov, adding that this was exactly what the Privacy Act was supposed to prevent. “Aggregation of data is building a weapon, essentially, and it’s one that can be used in a lot of different ways.”
The government should be scrutinizing Metaâs power. Unfortunately, its legal attack isn’t cutting to the heart of what keeps Meta big.
This week, I spent three days in a Washington, DC courtroom watching Mark Zuckerberg testify. He was there defending his company from being broken up by the Federal Trade Commission, which is seeking to unwind his acquisitions of Instagram and WhatsApp on the grounds that they were anticompetitive. At times, he was made uncomfortable and challenged with evidence that he wanted to âneutralizeâ rivals. Primarily, what I observed was the FTC’s misunderstanding of how social media works.
To establish the market it argues Meta has a monopoly in, the FTC has defined a subset of social media that it calls âpersonal social networking services.â This category includes apps that primarily facilitate sharing between friends and family, but for some reason, doesnât include private messaging apps. The government argues that Metaâs only competitors in this market are Snapchat and MeWe, an obscure, blockchain-based social network that claims to have 20 million users. Conveniently for the FTC, including only these two companies gives Meta a de fac …
Prototyping is an important stage in the development of a new app. And to make life even easier for developers, prototyping platform Play recently introduced Play to Xcode, which essentially turns mockups into real app projects.
more…
