jross

I wanted to work for the CIA or FBI in software engineering. Helping my country and get a pension? Yes please. But no thank you to the pay and relocation. Many smart tech folks say no to government work.

The F9T53 OPSEC Special Bulletin doesn’t say 'Signal is insecure' in a technical sense. The encryption is not broken. Rather, it flags Signal as insecure in practice for DoD use due to phishing vulnerabilities exploited by Russian hackers. The phishing warning did not matter if Goldberg’s access was an invite error rather than a hack. The 'insecurity' was procedural. How could this have been prevented? Using a government or closed access app that a civilian could not use. This could still allow a wrong invite to a government worker on said app. There needs to be a closed access app that also has classification consideration that limits the qualifications of who is accidently invited due to human error. Ask yourself why signal is being used to begin with. (the alternatives must lack usability)

Publishing before hand would be self-suicide. The practicality of publishing quickly enough for the target to understand/act is slim. The damage to the gov optics would be much worse. Has the US government ever shared information with reporters before strikes? (yes)

I missed that. Did he directly state that he invited Goldberg by mistake because he shared the initials of another person? Does that change that it could be an intentional leak? Do we have reason to believe these people who were obviously lying are telling the truth with how Goldberg was added? Please explain how the VP is disagreeing with the president.

What was the honest risk of including the reporter based on the material discussed?

covert CIA operative? Ratcliffe testified before the Senate Intelligence Committee on March 25, 2025, that the "operative" was one of his aides and not undercover.

If spotting a staged leak is convoluted, try explaining Goldberg’s invite as a whoopsie. ---- The least likely event is an accidental invite of a despised reporter. The obvious scenarios are a staffer, Russia via social engineering, or Waltz himself. Why would this chat, framing the U.S. as strong compared to Europe and Iran/Houthis as trade-route villains, include this reporter? A staffer might want to to embarrass Waltz/Hegseth, hoping to spark turnover. Who is this staffer and do they have access to Waltz device? Russia would go about this a different way. They wouldn't want to expose their insights, know it will give reason to cramp down. They also wouldn't benefit from leadership turnover or projection of America's strength. Remember... "Hegseth is unqualified"... so why would Russia want him out? It is unlikely that Waltz would knowingly end his career to embarrass Hegseth. Waltz, likely with a partner, staged this; the narratives are too sharp for chance.

The CEO of tech companies get phished in internal security tests. Everyone is susceptible to a well orchestrated operation.

This is correct. Signal has not been hacked. The risk is social engineering / phishing and that risk applies to all apps.

There have been many strikes where I didn’t “get it.” The leak’s too convenient, curates a specific narrative, and makes this a conversation. They did not want the blow back but they wanted the exposure. People are paying attention and the intent is clear as to why we would interfere. Besides the leak, everyone looks competent.

Yes, laws apply. Private Citizen: Don’t share (18 U.S.C. § 798), don’t keep (18 U.S.C. § 793). Report to FBI, return it. https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/793 Military/Government Employee: More strict than private citizen. Secure it, report to security officer, don’t share. Follow DOD rules (5200.01), return or destroy as directed. https://www.esd.whs.mil/Portals/54/Documents/DD/issuances/dodm/520001m_vol3.pdf

My thoughts continue to evolve on this. Originally I thought this must be a staffer that accidently or purposely included the reporter to cause leadership turnover. Hearing the director say he doesn't know how this occurred indicated he's a buffoon. But he's not a buffoon. So then I thought it must be that social engineering exploited a device vulnerability. Now that I've read the actual texts, I'm leaning to this being an intentional disclosure. The message goes to one of the last people you would expect (Goldberg). The messaging accomplishes this: US is decisive US provides global security in a way that Europe cannot US interests are important - let's make Europe pay for the benefit we provide

Will you share the full article?

Oh look; a baby troll.

This may be the problem! https://www.npr.org/2025/03/25/nx-s1-5339801/pentagon-email-signal-vulnerability

Old ass children can't admit they make a mistake.

I’m hearing Democrats and the CIA Director insist Signal’s fine for government use, with Ratcliffe and Hegseth claiming the info wasn’t classified. At best, the chatters are playing word games to dodge the obvious: you don’t invite a reporter to share coordination about forthcoming strikes. At worst, it’s a reckless lack of accountability. "Legal" or not, admit the screw-up. Ratcliffe won't admit it was a major mistake. He was going to downplay it as an inadvertent release of unclassified information. Gabbard either would not admit or at least wasn't given enough time to admit she was on the chat. They've been coached to dodge and appear spineless as result. This is the ick that makes me sick. So now I want them all thrown out... but that gets us no where. Minimally need to fire the Waltz staffer. If this was intentional, does he get jail time? Trump already said Waltz is too valued to fire... so be it. Take these dips in the back room and slap them around. Then move on.

And this -

Prob not true

It is the place for me, who has no D1 wrestling in their state.

Signal’s comms encryption have never been busted. Attacks hit the devices or trick the users, not the code. Sooner or later, some tech leap or random bug may crack it open.

Clout chasing is clout chasing. It'd be hard not to as a media company.

You are talking about what's right. I'm talking about human nature.

Why waste money? Fire the meeting organizer staffer at minimum... issue the newly enforced policy... reprimand those involved... move on.

This "Signal" incident will not impact my independent vote in 2026 or 2028. Neither will bombing to protect the trading routes.