Loading story…
Reporting and commentary on DOGE describe a loosely organized, chaotic government cost-cutting effort that relied on informal authority structures, ad hoc recruiting, and pressure campaigns inside federal agencies. Testimony cited by Nextgov/FCW says staff operated across agencies with unclear reporting lines, used Signal during recruiting and coordination, and often did not understand formal leadership roles, including how named administrators related to the people actually directing work.
A separate Techdirt article is about the same broader DOGE initiative and argues it failed to deliver its central promise of reducing federal spending, citing prior reporting and congressional findings that spending increased rather than fell. While it is more opinionated than the other source, it still addresses the same underlying event: DOGE's operation inside the federal government and the evidence that the effort produced disorder, questionable staffing practices, and poor results instead of meaningful savings.
See the actors and campaigns active against you right now.
6 events from the most recent confirmed update back to the earliest known activity.
Former participants cited in depositions said DOGE did not actually reduce the federal deficit despite its stated mission of cutting waste. Their accounts also described rule-breaking, procedural circumvention, and chaotic management during the initiative's early days.
A report by House Oversight Committee Ranking Member Robert Garcia said DOGE's public claims of major savings were largely inaccurate, with some of the biggest cited contract savings described as false, unsupported, or based on accounting manipulation. The report also raised concerns about conflicts of interest and data-security risks tied to DOGE activities at SSA, Treasury, NLRB, and OPM.
Changes associated with DOGE allegedly worsened public-facing operations at agencies including the Social Security Administration and the FDA, increasing delays and reducing staffing. The reported effects were presented as evidence that the initiative disrupted services rather than improving efficiency.
DOGE-linked pressure campaigns contributed to grant cancellations, employee reviews, layoffs, and major staffing reductions at the National Endowment for the Humanities and the General Services Administration. Depositions cited in reporting said participants often lacked relevant subject-matter expertise while carrying out these actions.
During DOGE's early operations, staff obtained administrator-level access to government systems, monitored employee email activity, and used tools including ChatGPT to screen grants for DEI-related content. Officials also reportedly relied on Signal with auto-delete and external Microsoft email accounts, raising records-retention, governance, and cybersecurity concerns.
DOGE personnel started working through the General Services Administration and other federal agencies with unusually broad authority, using ad hoc hiring and rapid decision-making to influence internal operations. These early activities set the stage for later grant cancellations, employee reviews, layoffs, and expanded system access.
See the adversaries and campaigns active against your sector right now, ranked by what they're exploiting.
2 references tracked. Mallory keeps watching after this page renders.
Map indicators from this story to your assets and identify affected systems in minutes.
Every observed campaign, victim, and pivot linked to actors named in this story.
Malware, exploits, and IOCs connected to the activity described here.
YARA, Sigma, and Snort rules deployed to your SIEM as soon as they’re published.
Get matching new stories delivered to your team as they break — not the next morning.
Ask questions about this story and take action on the answers.
Other stories Mallory is tracking that overlap on entities, sources, or topic labels.
The Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), a federal agency reportedly created by Elon Musk, has come under intense scrutiny for its handling of sensitive personal data belonging to millions of Americans. According to a report by the Senate Homeland Security and Government Affairs Committee Democrats, DOGE has been bypassing established cybersecurity protections at three major federal agencies: the Social Security Administration (SSA), the General Services Administration (GSA), and the Office of Personnel Management (OPM). The committee's findings are based on staff visits, whistleblower disclosures, legal filings, and media reports, all of which point to significant lapses in data security and privacy compliance by DOGE personnel. One particularly alarming incident involved DOGE uploading the Numident database—a file containing highly sensitive personal information—into an environment lacking additional safeguards, which an internal SSA risk review estimated carried a 35% to 65% chance of a data breach with catastrophic consequences. Whistleblowers further alleged that DOGE staff, including Edward Coristine, had the ability to move sensitive SSA data into unmonitored cloud environments, raising the risk of unauthorized access or exfiltration. The Senate report also highlighted that DOGE teams were sometimes denied access to agency offices due to security concerns, and that DOGE personnel had not completed the same cybersecurity training required of other federal employees. In response to these findings, the committee urged federal agencies to revoke DOGE's access to sensitive information until the department demonstrates compliance with privacy laws and cybersecurity best practices. The report has sparked widespread concern about the potential for large-scale data breaches and the misuse of Americans' personal information. The situation is further complicated by the broader context of increasing government surveillance and the aggregation of disparate data streams, as noted by security experts. The risks posed by DOGE's practices are seen as distinct from those of corporate surveillance, with the potential for government misuse of personal data being particularly acute in a techno-authoritarian environment. The revelations have prompted calls for greater oversight, transparency, and accountability in how federal agencies and their contractors handle sensitive data. Lawmakers and privacy advocates are demanding immediate action to mitigate the risks and prevent future incidents. The controversy underscores the critical importance of robust cybersecurity protocols and strict adherence to privacy regulations in all government operations involving personal data. The ongoing investigation and public debate are likely to shape future policy and enforcement actions regarding federal data security. The case also serves as a cautionary tale for other agencies and private sector partners about the dangers of circumventing established cybersecurity safeguards. As the story develops, the focus remains on ensuring that Americans' personal information is protected from both internal and external threats. The incident has also reignited discussions about the balance between efficiency, innovation, and security in government technology initiatives. Ultimately, the DOGE controversy highlights the urgent need for comprehensive reforms to safeguard the privacy and security of citizens' data in the digital age.
Jun 29, 2026
Court filings in ongoing litigation over the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) access to Social Security Administration (SSA) data describe a March 2025 outreach from a political advocacy group seeking help analyzing state voter rolls it had obtained, with the stated goal of finding voter fraud and overturning election results in certain states. According to a Justice Department correction signed by civil division official Elizabeth Shapiro, two DOGE associates at SSA were contacted, and one signed and sent a “Voter Data Agreement” that was not processed through SSA’s normal data-exchange approval procedures; SSA later discovered the agreement during an unrelated internal review. The filings say SSA has not seen evidence that SSA data were actually shared with the advocacy group, but communications suggest DOGE team members could have been asked to access SSA data to match against voter rolls, potentially involving Social Security numbers and use of unapproved third-party infrastructure. SSA made referrals to the Office of Special Counsel for potential **Hatch Act** violations tied to the alleged political activity, while the broader dispute over DOGE’s access to SSA data continues and has prompted corrections to prior SSA testimony in court.
Jun 29, 2026
Federal actions tied to election integrity and voter-fraud narratives triggered sharp backlash and oversight concerns. In Georgia, federal officials raided Fulton County’s Elections Office and seized roughly **700 boxes** of 2020-election records, including physical ballots, prompting state and local election officials to warn about ballot chain-of-custody risks and the precedent such a raid could set ahead of the **2026 midterms**. Lawmakers also criticized the administration for pursuing what they described as baseless online conspiracy theories, while the administration described plans to repurpose the federal **SAVE** database—historically used for tracking immigrant benefits—into a voter citizenship verification tool. Separately, bipartisan leaders of the Senate Finance Committee demanded details from the **Social Security Administration (SSA)** after a court filing indicated the agency does not know the full extent of SSA data accessed and shared by the Department of Government Efficiency (**DOGE**). The filing alleged DOGE associates **circumvented SSA data-sharing procedures**, used **unauthorized third-party servers** to share data, and that SSA still cannot determine what data was shared or whether it remains on those servers; it also described an agreement to share SSA data with an unnamed political advocacy group seeking evidence of voter fraud and to overturn results in certain states. SSA reportedly made **Hatch Act referrals** related to the incident and acknowledged learning key details only during a later, unrelated review.
Jun 29, 2026