"In what ways do DOGE's disruptions of U.S. federal computer systems both resemble and differ from cyber attacks from foreign adversaries?"
Answer from xAI's (Elon Musk's) Grok:
"**Similarities between DOGE's Disruptions and Foreign Adversary Cyber Attacks:**
1. **Access to Sensitive Data**: Both DOGE's actions and foreign cyber attacks aim to access sensitive or classified information. Reports indicate that DOGE has gained access to classified materials across several agencies, similar to what foreign actors might target, such as intelligence reports, financial systems, and personnel data ([Forbes](www.forbes.com), [Washington Post](www.washingtonpost.com)).
2. **Security Breaches**: Both scenarios involve bypassing or ignoring standard security protocols, potentially leading to data breaches. DOGE's reported use of personal devices and granting of administrative access to individuals without proper clearances mirrors the tactics of foreign adversaries who seek unauthorized entry into systems ([CyberScoop](cyberscoop.com), [CSO Online](www.csoonline.com)).
3. **Potential for Malware Introduction**: There's a risk with DOGE's approach, like foreign attacks, of introducing malware or other malicious software into government systems. This could occur through insecure practices or untrusted devices ([CSO Online](www.csoonline.com)).
4. **Disruption of Services**: Both can lead to disruption of government operations. DOGE's activities have been described as creating chaos, which could inadvertently or deliberately disrupt services much like cyber attacks do ([TechCrunch](techcrunch.com)).
**Differences between DOGE's Disruptions and Foreign Adversary Cyber Attacks:**
1. **Authorization and Legality**: DOGE's actions, while controversial, are backed by an executive order, giving them a veneer of legality or at least authorization from the highest level of government. In contrast, foreign adversary cyber attacks are unauthorized and illegal under both domestic and international law ([Foreign Affairs](www.foreignaffairs.com)).
2. **Intent**: The intent behind DOGE's access to systems is ostensibly to reform government efficiency, though this is highly debated. Foreign cyber attacks, however, are typically motivated by espionage, sabotage, or cyber warfare, aiming to undermine national security or steal intellectual property ([Foreign Affairs](www.foreignaffairs.com)).
3. **Transparency and Accountability**: While there's significant opacity around DOGE's operations, there's still some level of public and congressional scrutiny or potential for investigation. Foreign cyber attacks, on the other hand, are surreptitious by nature, with attackers often operating under the radar until detected ([Senate Press Release](www.warner.senate.gov)).
4. **Response and Reaction**: The response to DOGE's actions involves political and legal challenges within the U.S., including congressional letters demanding transparency and legal scrutiny. Foreign cyber attacks trigger international diplomacy, cybersecurity measures, and sometimes military responses or sanctions ([Senate Press Release](www.king.senate.gov)).
5. **Impact on Public Trust**: DOGE's activities might erode public trust in government data security due to perceived mismanagement or breaches of privacy. Foreign cyber attacks, while also damaging trust, primarily concern national security and international relations rather than internal governance ([The Conversation](theconversation.com)).
In summary, while both DOGE's disruptions and foreign cyber attacks can compromise security, privacy, and system integrity, their motivations, legal status, and the nature of response differ significantly."
Related video: Retirement Savers Get a Boost: IRS Increases 2025 Contribution Caps (Money Talks
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
