Path: ...!local-4.nntp.ord.giganews.com!Xl.tags.giganews.com!local-3.nntp.ord.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 09 Apr 2025 00:04:26 +0000
Subject: Re: Rewriting SSA. Is This A Chance For GNU/Linux?
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.linux.misc
References: <pan$54963$b3f3d4e6$ae35ff46$71fe05c9@linux.rocks>
 <m4tf1dFmvh3U1@mid.individual.net> <vsd0ui$365s0$1@dont-email.me>
 <vsds7u$2u8h$1@dont-email.me> <wwviknpb1iw.fsf@LkoBDZeT.terraraq.uk>
 <vsksb5$3df6l$1@dont-email.me>
 <ZI2dnQjwJajG9XP6nZ2dnZfqn_WdnZ2d@giganews.com>
 <m581c7Fd22eU2@mid.individual.net>
 <DJOdnXslWrdAbHP6nZ2dnZfqnPudnZ2d@giganews.com>
 <m58mnpFguqjU2@mid.individual.net> <vso5qc$31clb$1@dont-email.me>
 <E2WdnXiNaZ9CTXL6nZ2dnZfqn_idnZ2d@giganews.com>
 <pan$f2307$df5236a$923c4908$a6fb4a1f@linux.rocks>
 <6BidndvG26Vec236nZ2dnZfqnPadnZ2d@giganews.com>
 <vsr383$2421k$1@dont-email.me>
 <Tz2dnbEsYvaaHmz6nZ2dnZfqnPWdnZ2d@giganews.com>
 <vss108$2vde2$6@dont-email.me>
 <MI-dnf3_6bzzM2z6nZ2dnZfqnPidnZ2d@giganews.com> <vt1d6c$e0sl$2@dont-email.me>
 <TsudnYL_HJhO12n6nZ2dnZfqnPidnZ2d@giganews.com>
 <1834560e02e32793$90856$735129$802601b3@news.usenetexpress.com>
 <vt3456$26qph$1@dont-email.me>
 <9PCcnTNvhsJdr2j6nZ2dnZfqnPGdnZ2d@giganews.com>
 <vt40q3$2rc8f$4@dont-email.me>
From: c186282 <c186282@nnada.net>
Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2025 20:04:24 -0400
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/78.13.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <vt40q3$2rc8f$4@dont-email.me>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Message-ID: <scadneYTn50XJGj6nZ2dnZfqn_adnZ2d@giganews.com>
Lines: 73
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-fdM6UdxIDzHcSdSg+ZXI7X3p1m1ImeEg5CmfkdK6CN8pyCrCzJmMG6+eZITn9HBTStcEW4bEEkiCiIU!7Gj/zivXnxKKB9FFAIIMt8vsWtKFPgTWPZfxRsLLklv7/QYwMHqL6xJrlONCtfzP5GeUr5mL8psA
X-Complaints-To: abuse@giganews.com
X-DMCA-Notifications: http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
Bytes: 4805

On 4/8/25 4:26 PM, -hh wrote:
> On 4/8/25 10:28, c186282 wrote:
>> Oh, on-theme, apparently Team Musk's nerd squad
>> managed to CRASH a fair segment of the SSA customer
>> web sites while trying to add some "anti-fraud"
>> feature  :-)
>>
>> PROBABLY no COBOL involved ... well, maybe ....
> 
> 
> Oh, its worse than that.
> 
> "The network crashes appear to be caused by an expansion initiated by 
> the Trump team of an existing contract with a credit-reporting agency 
> that tracks names, addresses and other personal information to verify 
> customers’ identities. The enhanced fraud checks are now done earlier in 
> the claims process and have resulted in a boost to the volume of 
> customers who must pass the checks."
> 
> <https://gizmodo.com/social-security-website-crashes-blamed-on-doge-software-update-2000586092> 
> 
> 
> 
> Translation:
> 
> They *moved* where an existing credit agency check is done, but didn't 
> load test it before going live ... and golly, they broke it!
> 
> But the more important question here is:
> 
> **WHY** did they move where this check is done?
> 
> Because this check already existed, so moving where its done isn't going 
> to catch more fraud.


   "Well ... just jam the new code in ... *somewhere* ..."

   Oh, DOUBT many/any even knew the checks WERE done,
   just somewhere ELSE.


> Plus front-loading it before you've run your in-house checks means that 
> your operating expenses to this contractor service go UP not down.  Yes, 
> that's a deliberate waste of taxpayer dollars.
> 
> The only motivation I can see is propaganda:  this change will find more 
> 'fraud' at the contractor's check ... but not more fraud in total.


   There's a fundamental political rule, esp in 'democracies',
   that goes "ALWAYS be seen as *DOING SOMETHING*"

   Spin it however needed.

   ONLY possible maybe perhaps reason to move the checks
   is to not let fraudsters/Putin deeper into the system/
   process where there may be more little flaws to exploit.

   We know ALL code has those little flaws, logic/field/
   buffer issues. Even M$ can't clean all that junk out
   its products despite decades and 'AI' debugging and
   such. Check their security notes - there's still the
   dreaded "buffer-overflow vulnerability of the week".
   SO ... block perps earlier = less for them to attack.

   Maybe ....

> Expect them to use the before/after contractor numbers only to falsely 
> claim that they've found 'more' fraud.  No, they're committing fraud.


   Nah ! They're *doing something* !!!   :-)