| ▲ | embedding-shape 3 days ago |
| > his personal email should be pretty uninteresting except for stuff like HIPAA, amazon purchases, communications with friends / family. (good for HUMINT) But other than that, there shouldn't be anything in there which should make the news. It'll be interesting to see whether or not that bears out. Aren't these the same people who apparently used Signal with a journalist in the chat, and had military conversations in that very chat? Color me surprised if these people haven't heard of opsec before, and mix their work/personal life all over the place. |
|
| ▲ | everdrive 3 days ago | parent | next [-] |
| Yes, and I wouldn't be shocked if there was classified information in there. I struggled with wording, but what I meant was "you're not supposed to be able to find classified or sensitive information in personal email, but I who knows what will be the case here." |
|
| ▲ | drnick1 3 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| > Aren't these the same people who apparently used Signal with a journalist in the chat, and had military conversations in that very chat? Signal is one of the most secure communication platforms out there, but it is obviously not immune to human error or social engineering. |
| |
| ▲ | mikeyouse 3 days ago | parent | next [-] | | Also wildly illegal to use to conduct government business, especially confidential government business. (and yes the messages were auto-deleting and largely lost before anyone chimes in with technically they could be archived!) | | | |
| ▲ | krisoft 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | > Signal is one of the most secure communication platforms out there That might be true amongst the communication platforms available for the average Joe. It is definietly not the most secure communication platform available for someone high ranking in the USA government. > it is obviously not immune to human error or social engineering Nothing is immune. But there are systems more and systems less prone to these issues. | |
| ▲ | embedding-shape 3 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Ok? Signal is not the topic of my comment really, nor has anyone claimed it's less secure than other chat apps. | |
| ▲ | esseph 2 days ago | parent | prev [-] | | https://www.404media.co/the-signal-clone-the-trump-admin-use... |
|
|
| ▲ | throwa356262 3 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| [flagged] |
| |
| ▲ | embedding-shape 3 days ago | parent | next [-] | | > The investigation has led to turmoil within the Defense Department, raising tensions and the firings and resignations of several top DoD officials, including former Chief of Staff Joe Kasper. [...] On May 1, 2025, it was revealed that both national security adviser Mike Waltz and his deputy Alex Wong would be leaving their posts in the National Security Council Let me guess, the "leak" was intentional just to break a bunch of laws and to cause a bunch of people to get fired and leave their posts? | | |
| ▲ | apercu 3 days ago | parent [-] | | They do a lot of mental heavy lifting to support a corrupt and incompetent administration- sunk cost fallacy I imagine. |
| |
| ▲ | Forgeties79 3 days ago | parent | prev [-] | | The facts simply do not bear this interpretation out. Investigations and heads rolling for a stage whisper? Nah |
|
|
| ▲ | dmix 3 days ago | parent | prev [-] |
| Signal started being used during the Biden administration, the issue was how they were managing contacts which could be added to groups. They weren't carefully vetting access and a journalist with the same name as another military guy was added to the group by accident. |
| |
| ▲ | apical_dendrite 3 days ago | parent [-] | | Source? | | |
| ▲ | dmix 3 days ago | parent [-] | | The public record of a contract to the Israeli company which handled archiving Signal chats for the DoD was done during Biden admin. And it's been well reported if you just Google it: > Alexa Henning, spokesperson for the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, tweeted last week that “widespread use” of Signal began under the Biden administration, adding that “at ODNI, when I got my phone, it was pre-installed.” https://www.politico.com/news/2025/04/02/inside-the-hazy-fra... | | |
| ▲ | apical_dendrite 3 days ago | parent [-] | | You're missing some key distinctions. The issues are: 1) putting classified information into a non-classified system; 2) putting information that needs to be preserved under laws like the presidential records act into systems where it's set to be auto-deleted. Both are illegal. Simply saying that the Biden administration pre-installed Signal is irrelevant. There are legitimate uses. Your own article makes this exact point:
> Matthew Shoemaker, a former Defense Intelligence Agency analyst who left the agency in 2021, said that while Signal was used during his time in government, “it was almost exclusively restricted to scheduling purposes,” such as letting their boss know that they’ll be late to work because of personal circumstances.
“That’s why Signalgate is all the more staggering — because these senior leaders were doing the exact opposite of what even my most junior intelligence officers knew not to do,” he said. You're doing bullshit partisan whataboutism. "well the democrats did it first". This has nothing to do with adding the wrong contacts. It has to do with putting highly-sensitive material into Signal to circumvent the law around records preservation and as a result creating a situation where it's possible to accidentally add the wrong contact and therefore exposing that information to a journalist. | | |
| ▲ | dmix 2 days ago | parent [-] | | > This has nothing to do with adding the wrong contacts. It has to do with putting highly-sensitive material into Signal to circumvent the law around records preservation My comment above already mentions public records of the DoD contracting out archiving of the Signal chat, so it doesn't in fact circumvent laws around preservation. > You're doing bullshit partisan whataboutism. "well the democrats did it first". I don't think it's a huge sin for government workers to be using Signal, remote work and messaging is the new norm and they will use something whether we like it or not, and Signal is the least bad option. I don't blame the Biden DoD for experimenting down that road at all, as I'm skeptical they'd build something better internally - and to your hyperpolitical points I don't see large distinctions between these type of tech choices between administrations (the DoD staff largely remains the same even when presidents change). The issue with encryption and security will always be human security practices come first-and-foremost, technology second. They failed an OPSEC checklist when using group chats and need to implement better identification management. That's the sort of lesson that large organizations frequently need to re-learn the hard way when adopting new (and often better) things. This was just a good lesson in security hygiene | | |
| ▲ | fc417fc802 2 days ago | parent [-] | | I'm not clear on the verdict here. 1. Classified information. Was it legal to put that into the DoD approved Signal build? The media coverage at the time gave me the impression that it was not. 2. Records keeping. Were the Trump admin chats in question properly archived then? I had been led to believe that they weren't. Do you believe that to be incorrect? > I don't blame the Biden DoD for experimenting down that road at all The person you're replying to never criticized them for such. |
|
|
|
|
|
