I suspect this was done to raise light to the situation (or they wanted time off). Similarly, I suspect running this website is mostly automated and likely being shut down to raise awareness
Just because it can run, for any sort of dynamic site, it'd be stupid and dangerous to keep it exposed to the internet without active monitoring.
Can != Should
It doesn't work that way.
The thing about government is that there isn't much wiggle room to improvise on those kinds of issues. You are either following the law or you are not.
Fortunately, the product I lead has not yet been affected, but the possibility of having to bring down sites looms.
If the government can't keep staffing those teams, the responsible thing is to pull the servers down on their way out -- rather than leaving a government asset unmonitored.
Has anyone bought an airline ticket since the shutdown? Perhaps they're not charging the fee, since they are unable to provide security or its theatre during this time.
Also note that Data.gov was participating in a Bug Bounty program through HackerOne which means it was actively encouraging people to find vulnerabilities but is no longer able to respond to them - https://hackerone.com/tts
Here's the official statement:
“As data.gov is not a static site, it requires staff monitoring and maintenance to be online,” a GSA spokesperson told FedScoop in a statement. “Because personnel that monitor and maintain the site are currently furloughed, data.gov redirects to usa.gov. The decision to take data.gov offline is consistent with previous funding lapse practices.”
Automation, some of the comments are linking to TLS renewals. It is 2019, how is there still an individual manually doing this kind of work?
One example: Deployment of updated software to 15+ VM's by the method of:
1) Development team creates lengthy MSWord document describing steps, including Bash command lines to perform each step interspersed among narrative paragraphs;
2) Operations team performs deployment by copy-pasting the Bash command lines from MSWord doc. into terminals (repeat copy-paste for the 15+ VM's that are being updated).
I.e., the deployment equivalent to:
 This, of course requires the individual steps be created such that they can be monitored and output captured by the Bash (or other script language) to determine 'next steps' at each stage. Sadly, several of the steps in the word doc amount to "run this command" - note the output number from the command, give that value to the command in step 35 (where step 35 is some number of additional steps ahead in the word doc).
I have an idea why I didn't think of this first, but I don't want to insult the entire US defence industry for giggles.
> skipping step 18 because step 17 was bonkers and humans forget stuff
I understand this more than I'd like to. From both sides.
Not to stir the political pot, but this is one of the reasons my father says he voted Trump - an "outsider from corporate lands" would cut the fat of government and start running it like a company. The government is slow because OF the paper pushers, and the often used cliche "you have to really do a bad job to get fired as a government worker".
But I guess it all depends on who you pick for the position..
As a JSON wrapped in a tar file, it's not exactly accessible to all, but at least it's out there.
Would be amusing if the API was still live though. I'll poke a bit.
FYI the "pissed" comment was mostly at the situation as a whole and not at anyone behind the energy star site, who are rightfully furloughed and should not be leaving unmonitored services up.
Also I was able to find most of the info on the Canadian energuide site.
Hatch Act makes it illegal to work during shutdown, you're only supposed to come in, check your voice messages and perform your shutdown procedures (if you have any)
> The Hatch Act of 1939, officially An Act to Prevent Pernicious Political Activities, is a United States federal law whose main provision prohibits employees in the executive branch of the federal government, except the president, vice-president, and certain designated high-level officials, from engaging in some forms of political activity. It went into law on August 2, 1939. The law was named for Senator Carl Hatch of New Mexico. It was most recently amended in 2012.
Where do you see anything about shutdowns? Are you sure you have the right act? Do I have the wrong act?
The shutdown is politically motivated. The fact that certain government operations do not work is the result of the shutdown.
You seem to be suggesting that it is the objective of Democrats to continue to allow people to enter the country illegally. Do you truly believe that?
The wall being ineffective is a good argument against it, but it isn't the only one. Even an ineffective wall will surely damage the relationship between the two countries it separates, for example.
I do believe Democrats want people to enter illegally, instead of not at all. Based on things they say I see no reason why to think that’s not the case.
Second, it still doesn't matter. Giving in to Trump on this matter would only show him that he can expand his racist policies again and again by threatening to shut down the government again. "Once you have paid him the Dane-geld you never get rid of the Dane."
For Trump in particular, that means his speeches as candidate, "They're sending people that have lots of problems, and they're bringing those problems with us. They're bringing drugs. They're bringing crime. They're rapists. And some, I assume, are good people." He is a fearmongerer, and this is just another step of playing along fears of immigrants.
And even if you don’t give Trump what he wants now do you really think that’s going to stop him from trying again? He has no reason to stop trying.