The Social Security Administration’s inspector general is investigating allegations that a former member of the Department of Government Efficiency copied sensitive Social Security databases and attempted to take the information to a private-sector job.
The investigation began after a whistleblower complaint alleged that the former software engineer said he possessed two restricted Social Security Administration databases and stored at least one of them on a thumb drive. The inspector general’s office opened the inquiry and informed members of Congress as well as the Government Accountability Office, which is conducting its own audit of DOGE’s access to federal data systems.
The complaint was filed on January 9 and later amended on January 26. It was submitted anonymously because the whistleblower feared retaliation. Journalists reviewed the complaint and interviewed the whistleblower, who described conversations with the engineer after he left government service.
The allegations focus on two central Social Security databases: the Numerical Identification System, known as Numident, and the Master Death File. These systems contain records for more than 500 million living and deceased individuals. The records include Social Security numbers, dates and places of birth, citizenship, race and ethnicity, and parents’ names. These data sets are used across government programs and by private organizations to verify identity, determine benefit eligibility, detect fraud, and prevent improper payments.
Numident serves as the Social Security Administration’s master enumeration database. The Death Master File is derived from reported death records and is widely used across government and industry to prevent identity theft and stop payments after a person dies. Access to these systems is tightly restricted, with permissions segmented and system activity audited.
According to the whistleblower complaint, the former engineer told colleagues that he possessed copies of the two databases and asked for help transferring the data from a thumb drive to his personal computer. The purpose of the transfer, according to the complaint, was to sanitize the data before using it at a private company where he had begun working in October. The company is described as a government contractor and has not been publicly named because the allegations have not been independently confirmed.
The complaint states that the engineer intended to remove personal identifiers and then integrate the remaining information into the company’s tools. One colleague declined to assist and raised legal concerns about the request.
During that conversation, the engineer reportedly described his plan for the data. According to the complaint, he said he wanted help transferring the databases to his personal computer so he could “sanitize” the information before using it at the company.
The complaint does not claim that the engineer successfully transferred the data to the company’s systems.
The engineer denied wrongdoing through his attorney. The contractor where he now works conducted a two-day internal investigation and said it did not find evidence supporting the allegations.
An official familiar with the engineer’s departure from the Social Security Administration said he returned his agency laptop and lost his system credentials when he left government service. That account contradicts the complaint’s claim that he still had “God-level” access that could bypass many internal restrictions.
Despite those denials, the inspector general opened a formal inquiry and briefed both Congress and the Government Accountability Office. The complaint also claims the engineer said he had been granted broad access to Americans’ Social Security data while working at the agency and that his credentials conferred privileges exceeding those of other employees at his new company.
The allegations surfaced as questions persist about the Department of Government Efficiency, an initiative launched by President Donald Trump upon taking office. The effort aimed to identify waste, fraud, and spending problems across federal agencies. Billionaire Elon Musk led the initiative until leaving the administration in May.
According to the Social Security database, these are the numbers of people in each age bucket with the death field set to FALSE!
Maybe Twilight is real and there are a lot of vampires collecting Social Security 🤣🤣 pic.twitter.com/ltb06VX98Z
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) February 17, 2025
DOGE required extensive technical access to government databases. A team of about a dozen DOGE technologists began working at the Social Security Administration headquarters in February 2025.
Their work involved building cross-database views that could reveal irregularities. One example involved identifying cases where benefits were still being paid to individuals listed as deceased in the Death Master File or where inconsistencies appeared within Numident records. The project focused on detecting fraud, including payments issued after a recipient’s death.
Agency technologists often challenged DOGE’s conclusions about widespread fraud. Some staff members said the group operated with what they described as “pre-ordained” conclusions when analyzing data.
The current investigation follows another whistleblower complaint filed in August by Charles Borges, the Social Security Administration’s former chief data officer. Borges alleged that DOGE personnel copied Social Security data into an unsanctioned cloud environment. According to his complaint, that action bypassed internal safeguards and could have violated federal privacy laws.
His filing referenced internal email threads, including a June 2025 exchange discussing a request for a DOGE member to copy Numident data. The request was approved by a senior IT official associated with DOGE.
The Social Security Administration initially rejected Borges’s allegations, saying the data referenced in his complaint was stored in an internet-isolated secure environment. Later court filings from the Justice Department acknowledged that DOGE staff accessed and shared sensitive Social Security records without the knowledge of agency leaders. The filings also described data sharing through an unapproved third-party service and through an agreement with a political group seeking to overturn election results in several states.
Oversight efforts connected to these issues have taken several paths. The Government Accountability Office launched a government-wide review of DOGE access to sensitive federal data systems, including records held by the Social Security Administration. GAO investigators have received briefings about both the new whistleblower complaint and the earlier allegations from Borges.
However, the GAO audit does not include whistleblower protections. Attorneys representing Borges said that the limitation could discourage individuals from providing information. Borges was informed that the Office of Special Counsel would pause its review of his complaint while the GAO investigation continues.
The potential loss of control over Social Security data remains a concern for those responsible for protecting it inside the agency. Borges described the possible consequences of copied records leaving controlled systems.
“This is absolutely the worst-case scenario,” Borges said.
“There could be one or a million copies of it, and we will never know now.”
The allegations triggered reactions from lawmakers and advocacy groups. Representative John Larson, a Democrat from Connecticut who has long supported Social Security programs, responded on Elon Musk’s social media platform X.
“We need a full congressional investigation and answers!” Larson wrote.
Elon Musk called Social Security a Ponzi scheme and Donald Trump called it a scam. Make no mistake – they want to slash & privatize Americans’ benefits.
My resolution compels them to provide answers, but Republicans are trying to stop it from even coming to a vote in the House. pic.twitter.com/SdB833tedB
— Rep. John Larson (@RepJohnLarson) March 12, 2025
Representative Robert Garcia of California, ranking member of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, said the committee is expanding its investigation of DOGE-related data leaks involving the Social Security Administration. In a public statement, Garcia described the claims as troubling and called for transparency about how Americans’ personal data may have been handled.
Advocacy groups also raised concerns about the reported handling of Social Security records. Richard Fiesta, executive director of the Alliance for Retired Americans, warned that the allegations involve highly sensitive information, including Social Security numbers, birth records, health records, and lifetime earnings histories.
Public Citizen co-president Lisa Gilbert also called for further action, saying federal and state officials should stop any misuse of the data and require destruction of private copies if they exist. She also called for prosecutors to open a criminal investigation if the evidence supports it.
The inspector general’s investigation continues as Congress, federal auditors, and advocacy organizations examine the whistleblower’s claims and the history of DOGE’s access to Social Security Administration systems.
![ensuring-transparency-when-deploying-ai-[q&a]](https://thetechbriefs.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/5060-ensuring-transparency-when-deploying-ai-qa.jpg)
