News

In early 2025, the Department of Government Efficiency gained access to a range of federal information systems at agencies including the Social Security Administration, the Department of Education, the Treasury Department, and others. The access was granted rapidly, without the standard security vetting processes that typically govern who can touch sensitive government data.

The controversy that followed was primarily about data governance. Federal systems hold Social Security records, tax filings, benefit payment data, immigration records, and health information for hundreds of millions of Americans. The question of who can access that data, under what authority, with what logging, and subject to what oversight is a foundational data security question.

Career officials at several agencies raised concerns through internal channels. Inspectors general opened reviews. Privacy advocates filed legal challenges. The courts weighed in on access to specific systems. The situation remained fluid through the first months of 2025.

Whatever one’s view of DOGE’s stated mission, the episode illustrated a principle that security professionals have articulated for decades: access controls are only meaningful if they are enforced consistently, regardless of who is requesting access. The moment you create an exception — for an executive priority, for an emergency, for someone with political backing — you have created a vulnerability.

The question of who should have access to sensitive data, and under what conditions, requires a deliberate, rigorous answer. But it has to be asked before access is granted, not after.