this post was submitted on 27 Aug 2025
669 points (97.0% liked)

Technology

74545 readers
3780 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
L3s@lemmy.world
enu@lemmy.world
technopagan@lemmy.world
L4s@lemmy.world
L3s@hackingne.ws
L4s@hackingne.ws
669
The entire US Social Security database was uploaded on a random cloud server, Whistle-Blower Says (www.nytimes.com)
submitted 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) by Davriellelouna@lemmy.world to c/technology@lemmy.world
81 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] jacksilver@lemmy.world 11 points 1 day ago (2 children)

I agree that "random server" is a bad choice of words, but do want to add additional information context as the concern isn't necessarily unwarranted. Another qoute from the article:

“I have determined the business need is higher than the security risk associated with this implementation and I accept all risks,” wrote Aram Moghaddassi, who worked at two of Mr. Musk’s companies, X and Neuralink, before becoming Social Security’s chief information officer, in a July 15 memo.

Its also sounds like they did spin up a new database with limited security/oversight to "move" faster. Why that's worrisome is they aren't denying there is a risk or lack of security, they are just saying it's justified.

[–] nieceandtows@programming.dev 2 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

Could you please explain like I'm 10?

[–] jacksilver@lemmy.world 3 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

The SSA stores a lot of sensitive data. Normally with sensitive data you want to be very careful with who can access it and how.

What is potentially worrisome in this situation is it seems like the SSA is taking on the "move fast and break things" attitude of Silicon Valley.

More technically, most government agencies use AWS and Azure (cloud providers) to host data. So spinning up a new server isn't inherently bad. However, creating a new server that is secure and has the correct access controls (user permissions regarding who can see/change content) can be challenging. The whistle blower believes they are not doing this right, and it sounds like the head of the SSA isn't disagreeing, just saying he thinks the risk is worth it.

[–] nieceandtows@programming.dev 1 points 38 minutes ago

That makes sense, thanks for the explanation

[–] fmstrat@lemmy.nowsci.com 2 points 1 day ago

Oh yea, agree it's a dumb move. This should be on-prem data IMO.