> We have built in roles that auditors can use
… and we make sure doesn’t reveal our wrongdoing.
— that’s what DOGE is tasked with uncovering. The “deep state”, the lies, hidden costs, etc…
Now you may think this is counterproductive. You may think this is political posturing. You may think it’s borderline conspiracy theory nonsense.
We agree!
Trump, Musk and DOGE don’t agree with us and don’t trust the staff that they believe are providing carefully constrained access and curated data dumps with strategic omissions.
THIS is why they’re side-stepping the official processes and using the skeleton key.
Again, please, focus on disambiguating the politics from the technical steps being taken.
If the task is: “Get all the data, especially the data they’re trying to hide from us” then asking for Tenant Admin is the right technical choice.
I can pick apart every other statement but I don’t have the time. But as a quick note: it’s common for the RBAC permissions to be the inverse of the organisational permission. As a random subcontractor I often get granted Domain Admin or the equivalent and the CIO, CTO, and CISO staff are treated the same on the network as some secretary might. They’re meeting jockeys, not super admins! The fact that the staff member raised this “issue” automatically implies that they know nothing and that their opinions and statements are suspect.
PS: Most systems don’t have a built-in Tenant Reader role, they only have Tenant Admin. DOGE staffers would have been instructed not to trust any custom role, so… Tenant Admin it is.
I personally feel that they’re being reckless and sloppy, uncovering “waste” that is often simply an artefact of their hubris. In doing so, they’re risking exposing the internal systems of the government to outside attack.
This is the rough equivalent of the guards in a prison turning over everything in a cell looking for contraband.
It’s not nice. It’s rarely productive. It is also a tool of intimidation. That’s part of the point. The prisoner is not supposed to like it. They’re not invited politely to present what they want others to see. They’re humiliated and powerless. That’s what the MAGA and DOGE want.
2. DOGE is committing treason.
3. DOGE is humiliating those who were formerly in control.
A little of column A, B, and C in my opinion. At this point it doesn't matter what's true. I think all parties are involved to commit terrible acts, whether they're directly assets of a foreign power or just have something to gain. Inept, traitorous, opportunistic, inhumane, careless.. the whole party is here.
I hope when all is said and done, a true accounting is performed and those who committed the damage are held responsible. It won't matter what their associations or intent was. Manslaughter is manslaughter.
Ok, arguing with DOGE on their own terms… I confess I’m not knowledgeable with these systems, but how do you even trust it when it tells you you’re the “Tenant Admin”? Why would the deep state be unable to fabricate such a role that looks like the real one but is still lying to you? I did enough research to assume this is a Microsoft thing, so you might be viewing a Microsoft domain signed by a Microsoft SSL cert, and trust that Microsoft is telling you you’re really the highest admin. But… we’re talking a vast conspiracy with billions on the line… why would a true-believer DOGE crusader not believe there are also deep state agents in Microsoft, the certificate authorities, and ISPs?
Asking for Tenant Admin or whatever magic term seems like a start to get “the truth”, but completely inadequate to actually take down “the deep state.”
Of course, that’s the beauty of it. A super-powerful, secret enemy can never be vanquished, so they’re always a great excuse to take the next step to demolish the real government and trample the rights of the people.
The NSA might be able to do this, but even they’d be finding it a challenge if forced to do so on short notice with someone looking over their shoulder.
"7. March 3rd - I received a call during which an ACIO stated instructions were given that we were not to adhere to SOP with the doge account creation in regards to creating records. He specifically was told that there were to be no logs or records made of the accounts created for DOGE employees."
Which part of doing an audit, or some other DOGE employee's job, requires logs or records not to be made of their accounts?
Another quote:
"They were to be given what are referred to as “tenant owner” level accounts, with essentially unrestricted permission to read, copy, and alter data. Note, these permissions are above even my CIO’s access level to our systems. Well above what level of access is required to pull metrics, efficiency reports, and any other details that would be needed to assess utilization or usage of systems in our agency. We have built in roles that auditors can use and have used extensively in the past but would not give the ability to make changes or access subsystems without approval. The suggestion that they use these accounts instead was not open to discussion."
Audits don't require being able to alter data.
Also, some of the data is mentioned as being sensitive. Although granting access to the data of another agency may make sense, I have trouble believing that direct access to data such as sensitive personal information of third parties would routinely be given to people from outside of the organization. Even within the organization the group of people given access to sensitive data should be as limited as possible.