Comment by 0x_rs
18 hours ago
The repository has been deleted. In addition, 26 other repos have been removed from the account. This is in line with DOGE members' quick response scrubbing data whenever put into spotlight, as previously seen with another "teen hacker". [0]
Archived repo page: https://archive.ph/LI7tt; archived previous repo count: https://archive.ph/tgkg5
0. https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2025/04/i-no-longer-hack...
Archived repository: https://archive.softwareheritage.org/browse/origin/directory...
You can download it as a Git repository from https://archive.softwareheritage.org/api/1/vault/git-bare/sw...
Legally, they're allowed to modify and use GPL code internally without redistributing the source. The only mistake was publishing the source code to a public git repo without the LICENSE file, which may be a GPL violation.
I say "may", because I'm not sure if you have internal code on a public git or FTP server, is that consider "distributing"?
[flagged]
> speculative articles like this... speculative articles like this
But we know it isn't speculative based on these public data. You're arguing they should have covered up better. I agree. But that doesn't make (a) it okay or (b) this article speculative.
> You're arguing they should have covered up better.
No I’m arguing that they are under heavy scrutiny from the media - it’s very difficult to get any work done publicly in that environment.
> this article speculative.
Other comments have addressed the possible usage of this tool. The connection is dubious.
These are government employees, you don't get to do that.
You have to keep git repos public as a government employee?
4 replies →
Government software can't be copywrited, but the government is under no compulsion to share it. That's what FOIA requests are for.
8 replies →
[dead]