IRS Leaves Taxpayer Data Largely Unprotected 152
LogError writes "Two weeks ago, Department of Treasury received a D-minus grade in the Federal Computer Security Report Card for 2005, down from a D-plus grade in 2004. The majority of Treasury systems are those belonging to IRS. The government-wide computer-security grade for 2005 was D-plus, while Homeland Security and Defense both received an F. Grades are based on reports submitted to Congress by the agencies; the reports are required under the Federal Information Security Management Act of 2002.8 The scores are meant to reflect whether departments meet federally mandated security standards."
See! (Score:5, Funny)
Careful... (Score:5, Funny)
Careful, they got a D- in protecting data, but they have an A doubleplus in 'tracking your ass down and throwing you in jail'. ask Al Capone.
Re:Careful... (Score:5, Insightful)
It's for this reason that I've never understood why governments don't set the tax services (I don't live in the USA; We call the equivilent of the IRS the Inland revenue, there's no service about it on this side of the Atlantic.) onto "Teh Terrorists!!!" They are the only branch of the state that can track anyone down quickely and eaisly; surley they should be put in chrge of what you call "homeland security".
Re:Careful... (Score:3, Interesting)
I know you're joking and all, but I still feel like pointing out for those who modded you Insightful why this isn't so simple.
American taxpayers sign up each year and tell the government whether they're obeying the law or not by filing (or not filing) their tax returns. Terrorists don't register with the government to say that they're terrorists.
Re:Careful... (Score:5, Funny)
The rod up your butt must have a rod up it's butt.
Re:Careful... (Score:2)
I've never understood why governments don't set the tax services (I don't live in the USA; We call the equivilent of the IRS the Inland revenue, there's no service about it on this side of the Atlantic.) onto "Teh Terrorists!!!"
Well, assuming that terrorists actually file taxes and don't lie about their income, it would be illegal to use that info in criminal prosecution, as that would violate the 5th ammendment. Despite whatever the Chimp in Chief thinks, the constitution applies to everyone in the coun
Re:Careful... (Score:2)
The 5th amendment protects you from being compelled to testify against yourself in a court. If you volunteer the information, you're out of luck.
Re:Careful... (Score:5, Interesting)
The 5th amendment protects you from being compelled to testify against yourself in a court. If you volunteer the information, you're out of luck.
You are compelled to list your income and occupation on the tax forms. Therefore, the IRS cannot share that info with the FBI or local cops. If you're a hooker and you declare that you made $150,000 last year and give uncle sam his cut, they won't do a damn thing to you. They won't (can't) tip off vice, because it's illegal.
Re:Careful... (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Careful... (Score:2)
ROFL, do you think these things matter? the _IRS_ took down _AL freakin CAPONE_ the original gangster of all the original gangsters. Do you think he filed taxes and didn't lie about his income?
Obviously not, since he went down for tax evasion.
The IRS is generally involved to a great degree whenever any sort of organized crime is taken down.
Um, because they're otherwise shielded?
I really don't see how that applies here. Posting what you make on your tax forms generally does not incriminate yourself
Re:Careful... (Score:2)
Re:Careful... (Score:2)
Actually, they have. There was a recent article on how Kim Il-Jong is in a world of hurt because the Treasury Department, with a lot of international cooperation, has been investigating and shutting down North Korea's illegal sources of income and goods.
Re:Careful... (Score:1)
Re:Careful... (Score:2)
Homeland security is much more concerned with conducting surveillance on American citizens and watching what WE do than what any supposed terrorists are doing.
I disagree. I think Homeland Security is more concerned with looking busy and giving the appearance of security than actually improving security. You are correct, however, that the problem with our government is not Bush and Friends, it is systemic all the way to the post-WW2 politicians who got the Arabs pissed at us in the first place. This is tr
Re:Careful... (Score:2)
Nah, I find it odd that DHS attacks its citizens.
The US has no defense. Our borders are open. Sept 11, 2001 proved that our defense was a joke. The Commander in Chief thought that not scaring some children and reading a book about a goat was more important than even acknowledging the fact that an aid told him "The nation is under attack".
Re:Careful... (Score:2)
because they want to make sure we're this supposed cohesive nation... we have to make sure we're all patriotic so when the next terrorist attack occurs
Yes, yes, I see it now. The NSA obviously exists to enforce goodthink and patriotism by hiding its existence and trying to do as little as possible. In no way is it simply trying to gather SIGINT for military and law enforcement.
Just wait for the next attack. I'm betting its a nuclear bomb and it will be blamed on Iran. We've had a vendetta against I
Re:See! (Score:1, Flamebait)
Sorry, Paris Hilton, but it's still not an excuse.
Surprised? Not really. (Score:5, Insightful)
This story acts as we should be surprised. The government serves the people. The IRS, on the other hand, serves the government. I let you figure out where the disconnect is.
Re:Surprised? Not really. (Score:2)
>
>This story acts as we should be surprised. The government serves the people. The IRS, on the other hand, serves the government. I let you figure out where the disconnect is.
Remember, remember, the Fifteenth of April,
Congress, Corruption, and Rot,
I see no reason, why taxpaying season,
Should ever be forgot.
"The IRS should not be afraid of the people. The people should be afraid of the IRS."
-A for AMT.
The disconnect is right after "surprised" (Score:2)
IRS Hacking (Score:2, Funny)
Re:IRS Hacking (Score:2)
That's why potential hackers wouldn't. They'd want to leave things nice and tidy, just the way they found them.
Who in their right mind would hack into the IRS
Someone looking for information on Bill Gates' bank accounts, or perhaps information useful in blackmailing someone. Financial information is very sensitive stuff. The IRS gets more than their share during normal filings. Just imagine how much info they collect during an audit!
Re:IRS Hacking (Score:3, Funny)
Re:IRS Hacking (Score:2)
Ob South Park Quote... (Score:2)
Man: Yeah, they're gonna have to come up with a new swear word now.
Mr. Garrison: Well, they can't use "fag." Because you can't say "fag" unless you're a homosexual.
Randy: Really? So we can't say (bleep)?
Mr. Garrison: No. See, you got beeped.
Man: You mean you have to be a (bleep) to say (bleep)?
Mr. Garrison: That's right.
Jimbo: Hell, that's not fair! I should be able to say "fag."
Randy: Hey, you didn't get beeped.
Jimbo: Uh, oh.
Mr. Garrison
Re:IRS Hacking (Score:2)
I'm glad you're the one making the rules here
Fuckety, fuck, fuck, fuck!
A literalist hacker helps you today! (Score:3, Funny)
I decided to help you out there. Here you go.
Instead of getting a return of $237.13, you will now receive $237.130.
Have a nice day!
Re:A literalist hacker helps you today! (Score:2)
Security, the Gold Standard (Score:4, Insightful)
Cost of providing security against al-Qaeda attacking US from Iraq, even though they weren't there
Cost of providing security against really obvious IRS forms that let people steal your money and assets easily
Realizing you've been taken to the cleaners due to your own gullibility
Re:Security, the Gold Standard (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Security, the Gold Standard (Score:1)
I truly feel that you guys are on to something, and i might just have to start watching ads to see if yours makes it.
Re:Security, the Gold Standard (Score:1)
Just a quick FYI to the FBI bot scanning this convo- if the two posts above me got together and ran for office, not only would I vote, I'd also pay my taxes.
It's like I keep telling you wacky feds: *I'm* not the one being irrational here.
Re:Security, the Gold Standard (Score:1)
500 million is 0.5 billion...
Re:Security, the Gold Standard (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Security, the Gold Standard (Score:2)
Security, the Open Standard (Score:2)
For the record, the next thing I did was to shut it down, reboot from the setup DVD, and perform
What a surprise (Score:5, Insightful)
Oh yeah. Squat. Why *should* they care? It's no skin off their back.
If our government wanted to make sure this didn't happen, they'd fine the IRS every time there was a security breach. In fact, they'd fine the IRS just for having bad security. And then things would improve.
'Course, in reality, why would they do that? There's no reason our government would want to hurt the IRS in any way.
Really, what should be happening is the people of America suing the IRS for not guarding our information properly. I wonder how *that* lawsuit would go.
Here's the fundamental issue: If you want someone to behave in a certain way, you have to make it worth their while. Right now the IRS has no incentive for keeping our info safe. Want to change that? Change it at the source.
Re:What a surprise (Score:4, Interesting)
That's basically taking a million out of one pocket and putting it in another. What's the point?
Re:What a surprise (Score:2)
Well I suppose the IRS has a budget to follow, so it could still hurt the IRS.
Re:What a surprise (Score:3, Insightful)
Instead, I'd put the heat on your local Congressman, as well as write to this gang [house.gov], who provides Congressional oversight to the IRS.
Dig up egregious examples of conduct (in the article, it mentions an IRS contractor digging up political info on taxpayers), and write to your local newspaper.
Re:What a surprise (Score:2)
So the IRS's budget would get reduced, leaving them fewer resources to do their job (of which the scope won't change), so the situation gets worse... I don't see that fining the IRS would do any good.
I would expect both the Dems and our new Neo-con overlords to do exactly the opposite: problem with IRS security? Throw them more money.
Re:What a surprise (Score:4, Interesting)
If you want to see the IRS punished, make heads roll when bad things happen. Which means things like:
1. Management can be fired if a huge screwup happens
2. Massive screwups can result in fines against management
3. Charges can be brought against the parties responsible for the screwup
Once their necks are on the line, you can be certain that the top level of IRS management will put pressure on the entire organization to prevent security issues.
That being said, the IRS is likely suffering from the same problem as the rest of the goverment agencies: Too much work, not enough manpower/funding. Putting more pressure on the IRS may only result in making it harder to find IRS employees.
Re:What a surprise (Score:2)
Too much work, not enough manpower/funding. Putting more pressure on the IRS may only result in making it harder to find IRS employees.
If the tax laws were simple enough to be understood by mere mortals, they wouldn't need so much manpower to operate. For government offices in general, if they weren't so obsessed with paperwork, they wouldn't be stretched for resources.
Re:What a surprise (Score:2)
Why do you think fining the IRS would make a difference? They are not a company, they do not care about profit and loss. Furthermore, the IRS is the government. Fining them would be like punishing your wallet by taking money out and keeping it in your pocket instead.
If you really want to do something
Re:What a surprise (Score:1)
You can't sue the government.
Re:What a surprise (Score:2)
You can't sue the government.
Yes, we can. However, there are only specific charges you may make. As an example, Eldred v Ashcroft [wikipedia.org]. Eldred sued the government all the way to the Supreme Court before unfortunately losing.
Re:What a surprise (Score:2)
No problem, they will just raise the tax to 150% on income from fines given to the IRS. It will be a special tax schedule.
Re:What a surprise (Score:2)
Is A Pleasure To Have In Class (Score:5, Funny)
I mean, wouldn't you much rather have a national government that was more like you, instead of some kind of intellectual-elite government scoring all "A"s? Better to have a government that understands people like you than a government that is out of touch with mainstream American values, I say!
(Break out the hookers and blow! Party at Treasury!)
Re:Is A Pleasure To Have In Class (Score:2)
Re:Is A Pleasure To Have In Class (Score:2, Funny)
I thought they worked around by using 1/2" tape (Score:2)
Bigger Government! (Score:2)
The IRS is insecure?!?!? (Score:2, Informative)
IRS is in the middle of a change over anyway (Score:5, Informative)
Case in point the whole system is fucked up because its doing things it was never designed to do. So now we introduce Modernized E-File. MEF is basically the IRS rebuilding its entire system from the ground up. File formats are getting moved to XML, the network connections are moving to SOAP, and all sorts of other cool stuff.
Given the amound of stuff thats going on right now I would expect them to be scored poorly because basically the existing system is held together with duct tape while the new system is being built, and the new system probably wasn't considered in the score since its not completly up and running yet.
Re:IRS is in the middle of a change over anyway (Score:2)
Mainly, its an implemetation problem. z-modem over telnet inside SSL isn't widely supported as other protocols. Sure it is possible to get all sorts of librarys and components and tie them together, but you have to do all sorts of glue work, and it doesn't always work. You can litterly spend weeks trying to hammer a component onto another only to find out that the internal implementation of z-
Re:IRS is in the middle of a change over anyway (Score:2)
Old News (Score:2, Funny)
Let's be fair (Score:3)
Homeland Security (Score:1)
zerg (Score:3, Funny)
In 2005, the Department of Commerce got a D+.
Clearly, they must have improved slightly. Why didn't anyone highlight these improvements to show the DOJ, NRC and Treasury that, even if you're completely retarded, you can still make some improvement?
Did any one pass? (Score:2, Funny)
In other news, the department of agriculture passed with flying colors. Though they haven't figured it how to plug in their 486 yet, so it's not entirely a fair fight.
Defense gets an F? (Score:2, Insightful)
Meanwhile NASA only gets a drop in the bucket.
Re:Defense gets an F? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Defense gets an F? (Score:2)
I tried that in college, but it never increased my pay. Shit, they wouldn't even let me graduate.
How's that a surprise? (Score:2)
exactly why (Score:1)
Effect of scores on budgets (Score:1)
Blame Game (Score:2)
Or maybe the problem is the media, for reporting these stories which tell IDnappers where to look to steal
Attention Homeland Security (Score:2)
Just one more reason to enact the FairTax (Score:5, Interesting)
The FairTax would replace the complex and difficult to understand federal income tax with a fair and simple national sales tax.
Under the FairTax, Americans will take home 100% of their paychecks, allowing them to save more money for education and retirement, as well as make investments that will stimulate our economy. Not only will American workers take home their whole paychecks, each registered household will receive a monthly "prebate" check to refund taxes paid on necessities. This combination of sales tax and monthly prebate makes the FairTax the only tax proposal that completely "untaxes" the poor.
The FairTax is revenue neutral. While the American worker has everything to gain under this new system of taxation, the government will lose nothing in federal funding.
The current system of taxation is beyond repair. Compliance is difficult and expensive, often prohibitively so for aspiring small businesses.
Re:Just one more reason to enact the FairTax (Score:2, Interesting)
Also, Walmart would rule the world with this one. Their lower prices would now be significantally lower than the mom and pop shops, since the tax overhead is much higher. Also, that would give them much more say in government affiars since
Re:Just one more reason to enact the FairTax (Score:3, Informative)
I haven't worked it out yet, but it sounds false to me at first glance. Let's see if this is true.
Let's say I make $100 under the current system. Immediately 30% is lopped off by the Federal government (give or take a little here and there) so I have $70 to buy stuff with.
Let's say state sales tax is 6%
If Wal-Mart has an item for $5 we'll
Re:Just one more reason to enact the FairTax (Score:2)
Presuming that this is the case then let's run it again:
$5/70 = 7.14% of my income.
$5/100 = 5% of my income.
$6/70 = 8.57% of my income.
$6/100 = 6% of my income.
5.00/7.14 = 70% of original felt price.
6.00/8.57 = 70% of original felt price.
Not working out in your favor on that one either...
Re:Just one more reason to enact the FairTax (Score:2)
At the mom-and-pop: (6.00 * 1.06 + 6.00 * 1.23) = $13.74. Then (13.74/100.00) = 13.74% of my take-home income.
What are you, an idiot? The fairtax thing is 23%, not 129%.
Re:Just one more reason to enact the FairTax (Score:2)
Re:Just one more reason to enact the FairTax (Score:2)
Now under FairTax the Feds would have a 23% sales tax.
The final price at Wal-Mart (5.00 + 5.00 * 0.06 + 5.00 * 0.23) = $6.45. Then (6.45/100.00) = 6.45% of my take-home income.
At the mom-and-pop: (6.00 + 6.00 * 0.06 + 6.00 * 0.23) = $7.74. Then (7.74/100.00) = 7.74% of my take-home income.
Percentage increase at Wal-Mart is (6.45/7.57) = 85% of original felt price.
Percentage incrase
Re:Just one more reason to enact the FairTax (Score:2)
Two guys walk up to you in a bar.
Guy one says, "I make $50,000 and got a 10% raise. I hear you were pretty bad at applied math and are now living in a cardboard box, so I'm going to donate my 10% raise to you."
Suddenly he is pushed aside by a guy in a McDonalds uniform, who says, "I only make $15,000 a year, but I flip burgers real good, and I too felt the rays of God and would like to donate my 10% raise to you. Also, I'll throw
Re:Just one more reason to enact the FairTax (Score:3, Insightful)
at 6% now, 23% fair tax, 5$ at Walmart, 6$ at Mom&Pop
now
Mom&Pop = $6.36
Walmart = $5.30
difference = $1.06
fair tax
Mom&Pop = $7.38
Walmart = $6.15
difference = $1.23
As the sales tax percentage goes up, the price difference goes up. People look at the prices of the products, not arcane crap like the percentage of take home pay and the increase over what the price used to be. The higher the tax goes, the bigger advant
Re:Just one more reason to enact the FairTax (Score:2)
Calculating the cost of something based on what percentage isn't "arcane crap" -- that's the only thing that really matters when you're trying to consider whether or not you can afford something.
Re:Just one more reason to enact the FairTax (Score:2)
I believe you may be correct and have showed me the err or my thinking. Let's try this again from a different persepctive: How much crap can i buy with $70 vs $100 under both systems.
5 * 1.06 = $5.30 with the "current" model that gives me $70. That means I can buy 13.20 units.
6 * 1.06 = $6.36 with the "current" model that gives me $70. That means
Re:Just one more reason to enact the FairTax (Score:2)
They already do that with duty checks and whatnot at the borders (paved ones anyway:) and its supposedly illegal to buy prescription drugs from foreign countries.
I can see the fanfare now. "Buy American!" Its more expensive, and hey the stuff is probably not made in the US anyway, or if it is its foreign owned.
Re:Just one more reason to enact the FairTax (Score:4, Insightful)
Hackers can't steal what isn't there.
Re:Just one more reason to enact the FairTax (Score:2)
I love the fair tax, except I would want to make some changes. If you read through, they do a good job of telling why they picked levels of numbers, but they don't pick the numbers the way I would, and they are all arbitrary. The other thing I haven't seen addressed is fraud prevention. The government will be sending out somewhere around $13,000,000,000 per month in checks. I'm thinking that someone would think that would be a g
Do it like Japanese, publish it. (Score:2, Interesting)
The privacy of tax return had allowed too many tax loopholes and evasions to go un-notices. If tax returns are public, the transparancy and public outrage would ensure loopholes are plug and tax system remains fair.
In the U.S. the finanacial accounting and tax accounting had been allowed to drifted away from each other. If public investors are allowed to see the tax r
Re:Do it like Japanese, publish it. (Score:2)
I really don't know the concern about the privacy either. Is the people that only pretend to be rich or are in tons of debt and about to go publicly bankrupt in fear here? Or is it the ones that cheat on their taxes that are worried like this poor guy, http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2005-11-2
Why can't people spell html?
Legitimacy of the tests (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Legitimacy of the tests (Score:2)
You sound like those parents who say "my child is failing because you don't know how to grade their work."
At which point everyone looks at the parents and goes "Huh?"
In an attempt to justify their statement, the parents explain how their child has a learning disability and while the kid can't spell, their grammar is excellent.
If
And they want me to pay for this data? (Score:2)
http://usgovinfo.about.com/b/a/217091.htm [about.com]
when I get get it for free, then?
Either it's mandatory or it's optional. (Score:2)
That's if it's mandatory. If it's optional, then they don't need to meet the standards and all is well with the world. But if it IS optional, then the Government should state so and
Entire report card (Score:2, Informative)
IRS E-File insecurity (Score:2, Interesting)
Everything was going fine until I filled out the address of my employer from my W2. On the W2, it was listed as "Comptroller's Office, SoAndSo Corp.". So I typed that in, verbatim, to the website. Surprise of surprises, I got back an ASP debugging page saying that an SQL syntax error had occu
Re:IRS E-File insecurity (Score:3, Interesting)
Lemme get this straight. (Score:2)
And they STILL fail?
Scary to think that they're even too dumb to cheat.
Slashdot: U.S. government, 4 corruption, 1 health. (Score:2)
This one: IRS Leaves Taxpayer Data Largely Unprotected [slashdot.org]. If the IRS is denied the computer equipment it needs, there is more money for the government corrupters to steal.
Former BSA VP Confirmed as Tech Undersecretary [slashdot.org]. Another unqualified person is appointed to influence U.S. technology.
FCC Opens Flood Gates for Junk Faxes [slashdot.org]. "Under the new rules, a junk faxer could visit
Taking a jab... (Score:2, Funny)
The report card (Score:3, Informative)
The Social Security Administration scored an "A". As I recall they were also one of the first federal agencies to complete their work on the Y2K project. Score another one for monolithic bureacracies over fragmented bureaucracies :)
Re:I Got a D- In English Yet I am Sucessful (Score:1)
Re:I Got a D- In English Yet I am Sucessful (Score:2)
Re:I Got a D- In English Yet I am Sucessful (Score:2)
I wouldn't want someone who was stupid enough to get a D- in security to be guarding any of MY data, just like I wouldn't want you writing anything that represented me. Your psychiatrist told you how to be happy, but I've seen many idiots smiling all the way up to the end.