I like these kind of speculative articles. The click bait title states something with certanity than the first sentence clarifies that it is a speculation. I am not sure why we are falling for this click baity garbage, over and over.
> Login credentials belonging to an employee at both the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency and the Department of Government Efficiency have appeared in multiple public leaks from info-stealer malware
Does not sound like clickbait for me.
(Also, if you are willing to be pointlessly formal, it goes in both directions, since it can be argued that a computer, which belongs to a person, who in the future will become DOGE's software engineer, but hasn't become yet, also formally isn't a "DOGE software engineer’s computer".)
As long as it's a work computer, what does it matter if it's his current computer or not? Remember that we're talking about an infostealer, it got his credentials and "that's it" (that's gravely serious).
This might just be selection bias because there is a large crowd of angry people looking for things to fling at DOGE.
If his accounts were compromised after the computer was (as article indicates), people would still care. It included Greenfield too, so potentially has password reuse risk.
>But some of the datasets that Schutt is included in are much more concerning than normal data breaches because they're from stealer logs.
Logs from information-stealing malware were leaked multiple times, and if your credentials appear in multiple of those, that's reasonably good evidence that you are doing something wrong.
So I don't think the headline is clickbait, but I do think that the Ars article could be clearer in making its point.
No need for multiple leaks, just one is enough.
And I wouldn't say "do something wrong", just getting infected with an infostealer. Happens all the time.
My credentials are in the various leaks, like the Adobe one.
“Login credentials belonging to a Department of Defense contractor, who previously had worked at a government-sponsored media outlet, have appeared in multiple public credential leaks.”
Because it's easier to create and broadcast bait than to filter it.
In the long term HN should do something about it, e.g. editoralized titles.
HN does have a policy of using the original title from the submitted article, unless it is misleading or linkbait, and we try to be rigorous in enforcing it.
Users can help us by emailing us (hn@ycombinator.com) when they see a case where a title seems to be misleading or linkbait.