Is it? This circumented the Pentagon's security protocols, presumably disrupting its air gap. This is a national security breach on the highest level, I'd say it's pretty serious and I don't understand why anyone is in the comment section trying to downplay or defend it.
(* or against protocols, etc)
It doesn't matter if he happened to use something that has a solid security model. The problem isn't Signal, it's that he ignored all the rules.
And it does have an impact, as we see in other news, because one failure mode of Signal is that it's super easy to add the wrong people to a group. Which has actually happened. Twice (at least.)
Why didn’t some automated system say “installation of unsecured lines in this building is not possible” or similar
To be course : I didn’t think something so obviously wrong would have been allowed and enabled by several people who made this possible - removing absolutely no accountability from the person who asked for this to happen
I suspect this is a case of being more afraid of saying "no" to the boss than of facing consequences for violating policy. Policies are unfortunately not self-enforcing.
Trump's been firing Inspectors General and dismantling mechanisms of internal accountability across the government, so perhaps that's a correct calculus in this case.
I'm curious what technology has been evaluated for secure communications. Are there better option?
Is MS Teams approved?
https://www.cisa.gov/sites/default/files/2024-12/guidance-mo...
Approval for classified or military use is a completely different ballgame.
Why beclown yourself like this? Just say you don’t care.
Even Trump can’t manage denial mode for this one. https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/rcna197944
> "Michael Waltz has learned a lesson, and he’s a good man," Trump said Tuesday in a phone interview with NBC News.
> Asked what he was told about how Goldberg came to be added to the Signal chat, Trump said: “It was one of Michael’s people on the phone. A staffer had his number on there.”
Article regarding the CIA director you mentioned.
https://www.texastribune.org/2025/03/25/texas-cia-director-g...
—- “The Secretary of Defense is the original classification authority," Ratcliffe said, "and my understanding is that um his comments are that any information that he shared was not classified.”
—-
So, I am back to what I have been saying from the beginning.
This is an AP hit piece via corrupt MSM and until someone can point to further evidence from these unknown “sources” then this story can’t be trusted.
Like so many others, this particular 'failure mode' doesn't exist if you're a Republican. What if Hillary Clinton did it? Now that would be a democracy-threatening 'failure mode.'
What’s the difference between a breach, a leak, and a spill? It seems like you’re the one reaching here.
https://csrc.nist.rip/glossary/term/classified_information_s...
“ An air gap involves physically isolating a computer or network from other networks to prevent unauthorized access and data breaches. This method creates a literal "air gap" between the secured network and any other unsecured networks. Air gaps are an isolation method crucial for data integrity and security and can be deployed across various industries.”
https://www.fortinet.com/resources/cyberglossary/what-is-air...
What part of what he communicated is classified and what is everyone basing that on? What says it is ?
A breach is when security measures are bypassed and a leak is when information is given to someone who should not have it (a spill is a leak). If he was using an insecure connection for sensitive communications, then the “breach” would be his decision to do that while accidentally including the wrong people in the chat and the “leak” would be Jeffrey Goldberg receiving the messages.
(Just answering the question. They were correct in a very literal way but it seems a bit pedantic. The overall point is moot given what we know.)
Not a fan of using Signal, but we have to accurate about what happened
Hegseth was confirmed Jan 24. https://apnews.com/article/pete-hegseth-defense-secretary-tr...
The attack on Yemen and the group chat was in March. https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2025/03/signal-...
Its contents were undoubtedly classified.
Everyone here is confusing classified and op sec which can overlap but also cannot. No one here can point me to say what he reportedly did was release classified info. We also don’t know if the President who has the ultimate classification authority will allow it either.
> Unless you can point me at a security classification guide… I can’t evaluate something objectively without a security classification guide.
Yeah, I see someone else clued you in to their existence upthread. Here's an example of one:
https://www.nsa.gov/portals/75/documents/news-features/decla...
It's not a "laundry list of what's classified". It's how you determine what needs to be classified. The DOD's classification guides will absolutely deem information of this nature - attack timing, specific aircraft, intelligence details indicating tracking and confirmation of specific targets, etc. - to be classified.
(They are also, themselves, classified information. For you to get access to the specific one here, it'd have to be voluntarily declassified... by the folks currently trying to cover their asses. Example here: https://www.dni.gov/files/documents/FOIA/DF-2015-00044%20(Do... - note the SECRET//NOFORN original classification of it, and "The public release of the Guide or any portion of the Guide is prohibited." on page 7.)
> These are all hit pieces.
How did you evaluate that objectively without a guide?
In what world would "1345: 'Trigger Based' F-18 1st Strike Window Starts (Target Terrorist is @ his Known Location so SHOULD BE ON TIME — also, Strike Drones Launch (MQ-9s)" not be a piece of classified information? If revealed, every likely target in Yemen would be potentially forewarned.
https://apnews.com/article/hegseth-leaks-signal-trump-classi...
"NBC News first reported that the launch times and bomb drop times of U.S. warplanes about to strike Houthi targets in Yemen — details multiple officials have said are highly classified — came from the secure channel."
https://www.militarytimes.com/news/pentagon-congress/2025/03...
"'This information was clearly taken from the real time order of battle sequence of an ongoing operation. It is highly classified and protected,' said Mick Mulroy, a former Marine who was the Pentagon’s top official for Middle East policy during the first Trump administration."
Again, it’s all opinions until someone can show me it’s classified and not just someone’s uninformed opinion.
Page 36 indicates "General information or assessments regarding the military plans, intentions, capabilities, or activities of the US, its allies, coalition partners or foreign adversaries" would be classified CONFIDENTIAL, "Specific information" as SECRET, and "Information providing indication or advance warning that the US or its allies are preparing an attack" as TOP SECRET.
These texts included the location (Yemen), the equipment (F-18s, Tomahawks, MQ-9s), and down-to-the-minute timing, in advance. That would very clearly fall under TS for the DNI, and that's pretty solid evidence it'd be TS for the DOD.
'secret' means disclosure will 'damage the national security.
'top secret means disclosure will 'cause exceptionally grave damage to the national security'.
political discussions about dealing with world events is probably 'top secret', especially during the deliberation stage. operational information like 'TOT is 1pm local, 4 F18's with LGB's are inbound' is probably considered Secret until the crews return; in which case it is probably considered lower in criticality.