2026-10-11 16:38 UTC

Two sources familiar with classified intelligence estimates tell Washington Sun reporter Jeff Stein that the NSA's AI Security Center is spending billions of taxpayer dollars this year evaluating frontier AI models — far above prior public estimates and CBO scores — which, if corroborated, would make government-run model testing a major institutional pillar of frontier oversight and force the question of whether taxpayers, a levy on frontier labs, or industry self-policing pays for it.

state: watchingheat: lowuncertainty: mediumconvergesscott: highai-governance ai-evaluation government-ai-procurement nsaJeff SteinNSA Artificial Intelligence Security CenterNathan CalvinNat Purser

What is this?

Washington Sun reporter Jeff Stein reports, per two sources familiar with classified intelligence estimates, that the NSA's AI Security Center is spending billions of dollars in taxpayer funds this year evaluating and testing frontier AI models — far above prior public estimates and CBO scores; the dollar figure and the 'told lawmakers' claim rest entirely on Stein's sourcing and are not independently confirmed by the supplied snippets. What the snippets do corroborate is the surrounding apparatus: a June 2, 2026 executive order tasked NSA, CISA, Treasury, and NIST with building a classified benchmarking process to designate 'covered frontier models,' with NIST's CAISI as civilian lead running voluntary evaluations (40+ completed, including unreleased models) under agreements with all five major US frontier labs, and an August 1 framework deadline that passed without public announcement. Notably, that publicly described pipeline is civilian and voluntary — a multibillion-dollar NSA budget, if real, would imply the classified side of government testing dwarfs it. The report also lands mid-debate over who funds oversight: DeepMind's CEO has called for an industry-scale independent standards body, warning that otherwise frontier companies will define the agenda while everyone else is 'permanently trying to catch up.'

Why it matters to Scott

A consequential other party (DeepMind's CEO, and the policy apparatus generally) is now publicly converging on independent external frontier-model evaluation and the question of who pays for verification — exactly where Scott's challenger-never-arbiter and verification-cost canon already placed release authority in shared, funded evaluation rather than vendor confidence or self-policing. The NSA's classified-billions detail makes this a dated-receipts publishing opportunity because it instantiates the failure mode his canon names — a single classified evaluator with no mechanically-different verifier, no replayable evidence, and a weights-only benchmark that his model-plus-harness position predicts will misdesignate 'covered frontier models' whose real capability lives in undisclosed harnesses.
ip:framework.challenger-never-arbiterip:concept.verification-costip:concept.correlated-checkers-pitfallip:concept.mechanically-different-verifiersip:concept.model-plus-harness-benchmark-unit
queries asked of Scott's wikis
  • government as sole frontier model evaluator single-evaluator capture risk
  • classified benchmark opacity vs reproducible public eval harnesses
  • open-weight models excluded from federal AI evaluation pipeline
  • who pays frontier model safety testing taxpayer levy vs industry self-policing
  • eval harness standards compatibility with government benchmarking (NIST/CAISI)
  • CBO cost scoring gap for AI regulation and model testing

Measured heat

now 0 pts/hpeak 0 pts/hcomments 0/hpeers p14momentum: steady2 platformsage 434h
points/hour across evidence · reading as of 2026-10-12 02:59:37.977291+11:00 · deterministic, not a model opinion

How the heat travelled

09-23 14:00⭐ origin echo-reconstructed'The National Security Agency told lawmakers that it is spending billions of dollars in taxpayer funds this year evaluating and testing adva
Jeff Stein, The Washington Sun on blog (echo) · attributed from hn.story.49845952
—
09-25 15:27first on hacker news · published · +49.5hClassified Estimates Show the NSA Is Paying Billions to Test AI Models
rdmuser
—
09-25 15:27amplified on hacker news 👑hn.story.49845952
rdmuser
peak 178 · 105 comments · 100% of case engagement
09-25 16:20our radar first saw it · +50.4hdiscovery anchor: hn.story.49845952—
pace: p79 vs 1032 stories at the 336h mark (now 434h old) — ahead of bitcos-ternary-weight-layout (1.0x), behind irregular-agentic-weight-self-modification (1.0x)

Evidence (2) — ⭐ canonical anchor

sourceobjectauthorscorecomments
🟧 hnClassified Estimates Show the NSA Is Paying Billions to Test AI Models
Retrieved article excerpt

Open article · Retrieved 2026-09-25T16:30:20.228658+00:00

[Technology](https://www.washingtonsun.com/technology)

# Classified Estimates Show the NSA Is Paying Billions to Test AI Models

The price tag is significantly higher than previously known.

NSA

The NSA’s Artificial Intelligence Security Center has been testing frontier models to identify potential national security vulnerabilities.
T. Schneider/AP

By [Jeff Stein](https://www.washingtonsun.com/jeff-stein)

September 24, 2026
12:22 p.m.

- Email
- [LinkedIn](https://www.linkedin.com/shareArticle?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.washingtonsun.com%2Ftechnology%2Fclassified-estimates-nsa-paying-billions-to-test-ai-models&mini=true&title=Classified%20Estimates%20Show%20the%20NSA%20Is%20Paying%20Billions%20to%20Test%20AI%20Models&summary=The%20price%20tag%20is%20significantly%20higher%20than%20previously%20known.&source=The%20Washington%20Sun)
- [Twitter](https://twitter.com/intent/tweet?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.washingtonsun.com%2Ftechnology%2Fclassified-estimates-nsa-paying-billions-to-test-ai-models&text=Classified%20Estimates%20Show%20the%20NSA%20Is%20Paying%20Billions%20to%20Test%20AI%20Models)
- Copy

  Link copied

The National Security Agency told lawmakers that it is spending billions of dollars in taxpayer funds this year evaluating and testing advanced artificial intelligence models, according to two sources familiar with classified intelligence estimates.

The price tag — which is significantly greater than previously known — has led lawmakers to believe that a more comprehensive AI regulatory system could cost the government tens of billions of dollars per year, the sources said.

President Donald Trump has mostly resisted calls for greater federal oversight of AI, rejecting regulatory proposals from members of Congress and the frontier labs aimed at imposing new safeguards on the models. But after a string of [high-profile hacking and security incidents](https://www.notus.org/technology/rogue-ai-agents-hacks-alarming-researchers), the NSA’s Artificial Intelligence Security Center began testing frontier models to identify potential national security vulnerabilities.

The high cost of those efforts is bringing new urgency to the debate about the government’s role in reviewing AI models designed by some of the most powerful and resourceful companies in the world. It also may intensify calls to have the frontier labs to shoulder the financial burden of reviewing the models, especially with spending set to only balloon as the technology grows more advanced.

## Trending

- Trump Xi State Dinner

  ### [Dana Milbank: It Was Already a Pretty Bad Week. Then Trump Surrendered to China.](https://www.washingtonsun.com/perspectives/it-was-already-a-pretty-bad-week-then-trump-surrendered-to-china)
- AP24337716841075

  ### [The Best Place to Catch a Lawmaker? Where They Pee.](https://www.washingtonsun.com/congress/house-bathrooms)
- Supreme Court building

  ### [Supreme Court Allows States to Purge Voters Using an Updated Immigration Database](https://www.washingtonsun.com/courts/supreme-court-voters-database)
- Healthcare.gov

  ### [Inside the Freakout Over AI Testing in Government Websites](https://www.washingtonsun.com/agencies/ai-testing-freakout-government-websites-doge)

Estimates of prior proposals to establish new federal AI regulatory oversight suggested a far lower price tag.

For instance, the Congressional Budget Office [estimated](https://www.cbo.gov/publication/62730) the AI Security and Innovation Act, a bipartisan House proposal to establish a center on AI risks and “facilitate the mitigation of those risks,” would cost roughly $20 million per year.

A [separate bill](https://www.cbo.gov/publication/62731) in the House to establish a new reporting and tracking system for AI calls for $36 million in total over the next five years, the CBO reported.

Some tech leaders, like billionaire Elon Musk, have suggested that the frontier labs should review each other’s models prior to their release without government oversight. On Thursday, The Information [reported](https://www.theinformation.com/articles/google-openai-anthropic-ai-safety-group-takes-shape) that Google, OpenAI and Anthropic are jointly working on a plan to create their own AI safety-focused “standards body.”

But some AI safety experts have rejected this model as effectively allowing the firms to police themselves. One alternative is for the government to levy a tax on AI companies to run these safety operations — both to ensure independence and to ensure the financial burden of regulating AI does not fall primarily on the taxpayers. Anthropic and OpenAI have suggested that they want greater federal oversight and may be open to paying for it as well.

Currently, NSA’s AI testing efforts are being funded by classified portions of the federal national security budget, the two sources familiar said. The exact dollar amount the government has spent so far is not clear.

The Pentagon declined to comment on what the NSA is spending on AI.

“For security reasons, the Department does not discuss the technical architecture or resource allocation for its AI tools,” a spokesperson for the Defense Department said.

The Defense Department’s annual budget is close to $1 trillion. Some budgetary funds already allocated to the military could be shifted into AI-related spending, reducing the potential price tag.

One source said the biggest AI-related cost to the NSA thus far has been the extra computing power: the processing on chips necessary to run and test the AI models. Purchasing computing power has become incredibly expensive worldwide amid a surge in demand accompanied by insufficient production of chips. For instance, Anthropic has [lined up computing deals](https://x.com/theinformation/status/2098849145188418001) that could cost as much as $517 billion, according to The Information.

Another big expense is in hiring personnel. Some top AI engineers have been [offered](https://finance.yahoo.com/news/meta-just-paid-250m-lure-203943831.html) salaries in the hundreds of millions of dollars, far outpacing what the government could match. NSA is widely regarded as having the deepest roster of technical experts within the government and still may not be able to compete with the giant pay packages thrown around by the frontier labs.

“Having in-house AI evaluation capability I think is extremely important and necessary. But it is genuinely expensive,” said Nathan Calvin, general counsel at Encode, an AI advocacy organization. “You’re competing in bidding with some of the most price-insensitive customers.”

Some experts have pushed for lawmakers to swiftly move to strengthen third-party audits of the models.Nat Purser, director of U.S. Policy at the AI Verification and Evaluation Research Institute, said that while “people often underestimate how much computing power it can take to rigorously test advanced AI systems,” the government should make the investments necessary. Purser also said the AI companies could foot the bill if taxpayers are paying large sums to evaluate the models.

“If we want the government to be equipped to assess these systems, we need to fund the computing resources and expertise that requires,” Purser said. “I think of these tests as public goods, but there are reasonable questions about if taxpayers should foot the bill. An assessment on frontier developers could be required to help fund these independent audits, including the necessary computing resources.”

#### Author

STAFF\_Jeff Stein\_MUG-500px.png

[Jeff Stein](https://www.washingtonsun.com/jeff-stein)

is a reporter at The Washington Sun.
rdmuser178105
🟧 echo.blog ⭐'The National Security Agency told lawmakers that it is spending billions of dollars in taxpayer funds this year evaluating and testing advaJeff Stein, The Washington Sun——

Interpretation history

Decision trace