Again. Who's got the nuclear codes?

[ancianita]

The Atlantic: DOGE Could Compromise America’s Nuclear Weapons
by Ross Anderson

https://archive.ph/OViLI

... The National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) was created by Congress in 1999 in order to consolidate several Department of Energy functions under one bureaucratic roof: acquiring fissile material, manufacturing nuclear weapons, and preventing America’s nuclear technology from leaking. It has all manner of sensitive information on hand, including nuclear-weapon designs and the blueprints for reactors that power Navy ships and submarines. Even the Australian Navy, which has purchased some of these submarines, is not privy to their precise inner workings, James Acton, a co-director of the Nuclear Policy Program at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, told me.

So far, the people who work for DOGE have not wished to be slowed down by cumbersome information-security protocols. Late last week, they reportedly demanded access to a sensitive Treasury Department system that controls government payments. When the most senior civil servant at the Treasury raised security concerns, DOGE engineers were undeterred, according to The New York Times. They were happy to blast ahead while he resigned in protest.

The employees at DOGE are reportedly working seven days a week, on very little sleep. This slumber-party atmosphere isn’t a great fit for the sober and secretive world of nuclear weapons, where security lapses are hugely consequential. I spoke with three former officials and nuclear experts about what might happen if DOGE were to take a too-cavalier approach to the NNSA. None believed that Musk’s auditors would try to steal important information—although it is notable that not everyone at DOGE is a federal employee, many lack the security clearance to access the information they are seeking, and Musk had to be stopped from hiring a noncitizen. Nuclear-security lapses don’t need to be intentional to cause lasting damage. “When access to the NNSA’s sensitive systems is not granted through proper channels, they can be compromised by accident,” the former senior official at the Department of Energy, who requested anonymity to discuss internal matters, told me. “You could stumble across some incredibly sensitive things if you are coming at it sideways.”

DOGE employees might try to avoid file systems that are known to contain nuclear-weapons designs. But they could still create some risk simply by inquiring into the ways that the NNSA spends money abroad, Acton said. (Overseas expenditures have been a focus for DOGE.) The NNSA helps other governments keep highly enriched uranium secure within their own borders, and also arranges for them to ship it to the United States for safekeeping. The details of these agreements may include information about the degree to which a country’s uranium is enriched, its precise whereabouts, and the nature of the security systems that protect it—all of which are very sensitive. If one of Musk’s recruits were to access this information on their personal laptop, they could expose those secrets to hackers or spies...

None of this is to say that the NNSA should be exempted from questions about its budget. The agency likely overspends on some things, as any bureaucracy will. But nonexperts will struggle to determine what is essential and what is excessive in its highly specialized and technical realm. Building nuclear weapons is not like making widgets. DOGE can try to root out waste, but it should take its time, and avoid the break-it-to-rebuild-it approach that Musk tends to prefer. A tech-start-up mindset might be dangerous, the former official told me. “That doesn’t work with nuclear weapons.”

[Think. Again.]

1. By now the codes are probably all over the place.

[MrWowWow]

2. Here's Who Has the "Nuclear Football"

Last edited Thu Feb 6, 2025, 10:17 PM - Edit history (2)

A military aide from one of the U.S. armed services is responsible for carrying and safeguarding the nuclear football, which contains the launch codes and procedures for nuclear strikes. This aide accompanies the president at all times. The White House Military Office oversees the system, and the National Security Council ensures its readiness.

-ChatGPT
.

.

.

[ancianita]

4. Cute. Thanks, good parrot, ChatGPT!

From the best open source site:

...the commander-in-chief of the armed forces, decides to order the use of nuclear weapons, the briefcase would be opened. A command signal, or "watch" alert, would be issued to the United States Strategic Command and perhaps the Joint Chiefs of Staff. The president would review the attack options with others such as the defense secretary and the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and decide on a plan, which could range from the launch of a single ICBM or nuclear-armed bomber to options for multiple, even hundreds of ICBMs or bombers. These are among the preset war plans developed under OPLAN 8010 (formerly the Single Integrated Operational Plan).[18] A two-person verification procedure would precede the entering of the codes into a Permissive Action Link.[citation needed]

Before the order can be followed by the military, the president must be positively identified using a special code issued on a plastic card, nicknamed the "biscuit".[19] The authentication is conducted between the president and the National Military Command Center deputy director of operations, using a challenge code of two phonetic letters. The president will read, from the biscuit, the daily phonetic letters, and the deputy director will confirm or deny that it is correct, confirmation indicating the person is the president and the attack orders can be given.[20] Down the chain of command, the United States has a two-man rule in place at nuclear launch facilities.

This verification process ensures the order came from the actual president. Many sources indicate that the president has sole launch authority, and the defense secretary has no veto power.[21][22][23] A Congressional Research Service provides a detail reason: There is a short time before nuclear weapons from adversaries will strike US soil and a similar short time when advisers relay options to the US President.

Secondly, the US may conduct a pre-emptive strike if the assessment was its territory or allies were facing an imminent nuclear attack.[24] The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff will also be an advisor to the President, but is by law only allowed to advise, and has no operational control over US forces.[25] The Secretary of Defense also advises but the Goldwater–Nichols Act Section 162(b) states the chain of command to a unified or specified combatant command runs "from the president to the secretary of defense," and "from the secretary of defense to the commander of the combatant command".[26]

However, it has been argued that the president may not have sole authority to initiate a nuclear attack because the defense secretary is required to verify the order but cannot veto it.[27][28][29] U.S. law dictates that the attack must be lawful; military officers are required to refuse to execute unlawful orders, such as those that violate international humanitarian law.[30]

Some military officials, including General John Hyten, have testified to the U.S. Congress that they would refuse to carry out an unlawful order for a nuclear strike.[31] In addition, off-the-shelf strike packages are pre-vetted by lawyers to confirm that they are legal and, thus, such a strike would be presumed to be a lawful order.[32]

Military service members have been reprimanded for questioning U.S. protocols for nuclear strike authority. In 1975, Major Harold Hering was discharged from the Air Force for asking, "How can I know that an order I receive to launch my missiles came from a sane president?"[33]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_football

Problem is, the felon would F up a two car oligarch funeral.

[LearnedHand]

3. JFC why the "advisory" tone of this piece

As if what dogbreath is doing is actually a worthwhile activity for the good of the union.

[ancianita]

5. So what tone would you prefer -- critical tone? explanatory tone? panic tone? informational tone?

After all that's happened in the last 17 days, it's a bit late, maybe even irrelevant, to bother about tone.
If you don't like the writing style, ignore it.

Headlines aside, OP's usually prioritize content over emotion. Just sayin'.

[LearnedHand]

6. I'm referring to how The Atlantic seemed to be moving toward being the opposition

Being the opposition doesn't mean advising musk how to do his distriction better and more efficiently. Being the opposition means putting the very premise under which musk is doing the work under the microscope. They are just shaping a narrative around whether or not he's doing it right.

[ancianita]

7. I see. The Atlantic isn't writing specifically for Musk. It's our 2nd oldest magazine with a much broader audience.

It's got long term memory and good old American common sense, and a liberal bias (70% of the time, anyway).
It doesn't identify itself as 'advocacy journalism' like, arguably, The Rolling Stone or The New Republic.