(03-25-2025 08:27 AM)GeminiCoog Wrote:  

(03-25-2025 08:25 AM)mlb Wrote:  

(03-25-2025 08:19 AM)GeminiCoog Wrote:  

(03-25-2025 08:18 AM)andybible1995 Wrote:  

(03-25-2025 08:16 AM)Bear Catlett Wrote:  Sounds to me that a traitor staffer included this a-hole's number in the group.

I find it hard to believe that this was just an unfortunate mistake.

Exactly. There are probably more leftist moles that are working for the other side in this administration.

Yep. It's the only thing that makes sense.

FFS there are screen shots and the White House admitted it was legit. Signal IS NOT approved for government use, let alone top secret information. They are f'n idiots, simple as that. Again, this is a HUGE **** up. Own it, apologize, and be better.

Make me.

FFS, he's not talking to you, he's talking to the ****-ups in this clown of an administration!

(03-25-2025 08:52 AM)Mr_XcentricK Wrote:  

(03-25-2025 08:48 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(03-25-2025 08:31 AM)mlb Wrote:  My employer, whom is not in national defense, would reprimand and potentially fire someone for putting protected information into an unapproved system, even if the data was not exposed. I don't get why people are defending this stupidity. They should all be reprimanded at minimum. I don't care who you are, you broke the law. Be better.

I think a lot of these Trump supporters are converted Democrats. No consequences for our side.

It’s been awhile since I held a TS clearance but I can’t imagine the regs changed to allow this. Had myself or other service members done something like this I/they would be in chains.

I agree if this is all true what's being reported. Something smells a little fishy about it as others have said. Why is Jeffrey Goldberg a known Trump hater on the text?

That said, do you still feel the same way about when Hillary was using a private server?

(03-25-2025 09:15 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(03-25-2025 08:16 AM)Bear Catlett Wrote:  

(03-25-2025 08:09 AM)mlb Wrote:  

(03-25-2025 08:06 AM)Bear Catlett Wrote:  Forgot one.

The left LIES.

Based on this thread clearly the right does too. This is a HUGE **** up. Own it, apologize, and be better.

Sounds to me that a traitor staffer included this a-hole's number in the group.

I find it hard to believe that this was just an unfortunate mistake.

Wait, I thought it was all a lie?

So what now, it's sabotage by the coffee boy...who just happened to have access to sensitive information being shared on an unsecure app you can get at the google play store?

Yeah “industry standard” should never be national security standard.

(03-25-2025 09:19 AM)b2b Wrote:  

(03-25-2025 08:52 AM)Mr_XcentricK Wrote:  

(03-25-2025 08:48 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(03-25-2025 08:31 AM)mlb Wrote:  My employer, whom is not in national defense, would reprimand and potentially fire someone for putting protected information into an unapproved system, even if the data was not exposed. I don't get why people are defending this stupidity. They should all be reprimanded at minimum. I don't care who you are, you broke the law. Be better.

I think a lot of these Trump supporters are converted Democrats. No consequences for our side.

It’s been awhile since I held a TS clearance but I can’t imagine the regs changed to allow this. Had myself or other service members done something like this I/they would be in chains.

I agree if this is all true what's being reported. Something smells a little fishy about it as others have said. Why is Jeffrey Goldberg a known Trump hater on the text?

That said, do you still feel the same way about when Hillary was using a private server?

And therein lies the rub. Why him of all reporters? Unless the leak was intentional, which wouldn't surprise me in the least.

Tom: Frankly, I don't give a flying blankety blank. Also, don't go there about "clown administrations" at all.

(03-25-2025 08:34 AM)THE NC Herd Fan Wrote:  I also have to wonder WHY anyone in the trump administration would have a reporter from The Atlantic in their contact list.

You honestly don't think this administration would leak information to a reporter...any reporter...regardless if the information was true or false?

I'm sure they have contact information for all the major reporters...if not for leaking use...for monitoring use.

This is not a serious administration. Everything they do should be questioned. After all, the right pretty much questioned everything from the Biden administration, right? So why would they now have ANY trust in the federal government just because it's run by Republicans?

(03-25-2025 09:19 AM)b2b Wrote:  

(03-25-2025 08:52 AM)Mr_XcentricK Wrote:  

(03-25-2025 08:48 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(03-25-2025 08:31 AM)mlb Wrote:  My employer, whom is not in national defense, would reprimand and potentially fire someone for putting protected information into an unapproved system, even if the data was not exposed. I don't get why people are defending this stupidity. They should all be reprimanded at minimum. I don't care who you are, you broke the law. Be better.

I think a lot of these Trump supporters are converted Democrats. No consequences for our side.

It’s been awhile since I held a TS clearance but I can’t imagine the regs changed to allow this. Had myself or other service members done something like this I/they would be in chains.

I agree if this is all true what's being reported. Something smells a little fishy about it as others have said. Why is Jeffrey Goldberg a known Trump hater on the text?

That said, do you still feel the same way about when Hillary was using a private server?

They have all done it and they are all wrong for doing it. Like previously mentioned no consequences so some are going to take the easier path.

(03-25-2025 09:15 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(03-25-2025 08:16 AM)Bear Catlett Wrote:  

(03-25-2025 08:09 AM)mlb Wrote:  

(03-25-2025 08:06 AM)Bear Catlett Wrote:  Forgot one.

The left LIES.

Based on this thread clearly the right does too. This is a HUGE **** up. Own it, apologize, and be better.

Sounds to me that a traitor staffer included this a-hole's number in the group.

I find it hard to believe that this was just an unfortunate mistake.

Wait, I thought it was all a lie?

So what now, it's sabotage by the coffee boy...who just happened to have access to sensitive information being shared on an unsecure app you can get at the google play store?

I said the left lies. That is not a lie.

Reading comprehension not your strong suit. Matter of fact, any comprehension not your strong suit.

(03-25-2025 08:41 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(03-25-2025 08:34 AM)THE NC Herd Fan Wrote:  What bothers me, the reporting I've heard said this was a special app that encrypts messages not just a simple text message from a phone. IF that was true accidently being added to a group text should not allow recipients to read the text they should have an encryption key to unlock a message that's encrypted. So it would take two steps by the sender to give the Atlantic reporter the ability to read the text. First adding him to the text, second sharing an encryption key to unlock the text. IF it's accurate these were encrypted messages I don't see how this could be an accident.

I also have to wonder WHY anyone in the Trump administration would have a reporter from The Atlantic in their contact list.

Its why I have been ignoring the pearl clutching from the left and waiting to see what actually happened.

Yeah...you're the most pragmatic poster this board has ever seen.

(03-25-2025 09:24 AM)Bear Catlett Wrote:  

(03-25-2025 09:15 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(03-25-2025 08:16 AM)Bear Catlett Wrote:  

(03-25-2025 08:09 AM)mlb Wrote:  

(03-25-2025 08:06 AM)Bear Catlett Wrote:  Forgot one.

The left LIES.

Based on this thread clearly the right does too. This is a HUGE **** up. Own it, apologize, and be better.

Sounds to me that a traitor staffer included this a-hole's number in the group.

I find it hard to believe that this was just an unfortunate mistake.

Wait, I thought it was all a lie?

So what now, it's sabotage by the coffee boy...who just happened to have access to sensitive information being shared on an unsecure app you can get at the google play store?

I said the left lies. That is not a lie.

Reading comprehension not your strong suit. Matter of fact, any comprehension not your strong suit.

he's trollin' with an ewe la la 'n you...

(03-25-2025 09:24 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(03-25-2025 08:41 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(03-25-2025 08:34 AM)THE NC Herd Fan Wrote:  What bothers me, the reporting I've heard said this was a special app that encrypts messages not just a simple text message from a phone. IF that was true accidently being added to a group text should not allow recipients to read the text they should have an encryption key to unlock a message that's encrypted. So it would take two steps by the sender to give the Atlantic reporter the ability to read the text. First adding him to the text, second sharing an encryption key to unlock the text. IF it's accurate these were encrypted messages I don't see how this could be an accident.

I also have to wonder WHY anyone in the Trump administration would have a reporter from The Atlantic in their contact list.

Its why I have been ignoring the pearl clutching from the left and waiting to see what actually happened.

Yeah...you're the most pragmatic poster this board has ever seen.

and ewe're still tryin' ... good luck, chico...

(03-25-2025 09:24 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(03-25-2025 08:41 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(03-25-2025 08:34 AM)THE NC Herd Fan Wrote:  What bothers me, the reporting I've heard said this was a special app that encrypts messages not just a simple text message from a phone. IF that was true accidently being added to a group text should not allow recipients to read the text they should have an encryption key to unlock a message that's encrypted. So it would take two steps by the sender to give the Atlantic reporter the ability to read the text. First adding him to the text, second sharing an encryption key to unlock the text. IF it's accurate these were encrypted messages I don't see how this could be an accident.

I also have to wonder WHY anyone in the Trump administration would have a reporter from The Atlantic in their contact list.

Its why I have been ignoring the pearl clutching from the left and waiting to see what actually happened.

Yeah...you're the most pragmatic poster this board has ever seen.

No, that would be me. And you know I'm right.

(03-25-2025 08:31 AM)mlb Wrote:  My employer, whom is not in national defense, would reprimand and potentially fire someone for putting protected information into an unapproved system, even if the data was not exposed. I don't get why people are defending this stupidity. They should all be reprimanded at minimum. I don't care who you are, you broke the law. Be better.

My man, the docs and staff in all of your facilities SMS HIPAA data all day long

You might think they don't but they 100% do it. They should be using the HIPAA mobile app but they SMS.... guaranteed

Sent from my SM-S928U using Tapatalk

(03-25-2025 08:59 AM)U_of_Elvis Wrote:  Using signal for this is discussion is off the reservation and likely illegal in several ways.

THIS!!!

And most of you are burying the lead...the issue here is not whether someone allowed the information to get to the reporter, either intentionally, or not.

THEE issue is that nearly every high ranking official in the trump administration was allegedly knowingly transferring sensitive information on a unsecure third-party application. The Defense Secretary, The Vice President, The Director of National Intelligence, The Treasury Secretary, The CIA Director, and The Secretary of State. They were all a part of this. And if you believe him, the actual president...no not elmo...WASN'T!

And the majority of the right in this thread.....

(03-25-2025 09:36 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(03-25-2025 08:59 AM)U_of_Elvis Wrote:  Using signal for this is discussion is off the reservation and likely illegal in several ways.

THIS!!!

And most of you are burying the lead...the issue here is not whether someone allowed the information to get to the reporter, either intentionally, or not.

THEE issue is that nearly every high ranking official in the trump administration was allegedly knowingly transferring sensitive information on a unsecure third-party application. The Defense Secretary, The Vice President, The Director of National Intelligence, The Treasury Secretary, The CIA Director, and The Secretary of State. They were all a part of this. And if you believe him, the actual president...no not elmo...WASN'T!

And the majority of the right in this thread.....

lulz, ok, what are you dipsh*ts gonna say now that it has been shown that Signal was approved by the Biden* administration?

We warned you guys about getting your panties in a wad.

(03-25-2025 09:24 AM)Bear Catlett Wrote:  

(03-25-2025 09:15 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(03-25-2025 08:16 AM)Bear Catlett Wrote:  

(03-25-2025 08:09 AM)mlb Wrote:  

(03-25-2025 08:06 AM)Bear Catlett Wrote:  Forgot one.

The left LIES.

Based on this thread clearly the right does too. This is a HUGE **** up. Own it, apologize, and be better.

Sounds to me that a traitor staffer included this a-hole's number in the group.

I find it hard to believe that this was just an unfortunate mistake.

Wait, I thought it was all a lie?

So what now, it's sabotage by the coffee boy...who just happened to have access to sensitive information being shared on an unsecure app you can get at the google play store?

I said the left lies. That is not a lie.

Reading comprehension not your strong suit. Matter of fact, any comprehension not your strong suit.

This you bro? That's what I was referring to.

(03-25-2025 07:41 AM)Bear Catlett Wrote:  Gee... wouldn't it be nice to believe reporting when you here [sic] it. But since the media lies so much I don't believe a word they say.

And please tell me how/why some "staffer" would be on or have access to a chat with only top-level trump brass?

If that's what happened, pretty much tells you how incompetent this whole thing was.

(03-25-2025 09:40 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(03-25-2025 09:36 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(03-25-2025 08:59 AM)U_of_Elvis Wrote:  Using signal for this is discussion is off the reservation and likely illegal in several ways.

THIS!!!

And most of you are burying the lead...the issue here is not whether someone allowed the information to get to the reporter, either intentionally, or not.

THEE issue is that nearly every high ranking official in the trump administration was allegedly knowingly transferring sensitive information on a unsecure third-party application. The Defense Secretary, The Vice President, The Director of National Intelligence, The Treasury Secretary, The CIA Director, and The Secretary of State. They were all a part of this. And if you believe him, the actual president...no not elmo...WASN'T!

And the majority of the right in this thread.....

lulz, ok, what are you dipsh*ts gonna say now that it has been shown that Signal was approved by the Biden* administration?

We warned you guys about getting your panties in a wad.

“The Biden Administration authorized Signal as a means of communication that was consistent with presidential recordkeeping requirements for its administration — and that continued into the Trump Administration.”

Which part of that says Signal can be used in place of a SCIF?

Clown.

(03-25-2025 08:59 AM)U_of_Elvis Wrote:  

(03-25-2025 08:34 AM)THE NC Herd Fan Wrote:  What bothers me, the reporting I've heard said this was a special app that encrypts messages not just a simple text message from a phone. IF that was true accidently being added to a group text should not allow recipients to read the text they should have an encryption key to unlock a message that's encrypted. So it would take two steps by the sender to give the Atlantic reporter the ability to read the text. First adding him to the text, second sharing an encryption key to unlock the text. IF it's accurate these were encrypted messages I don't see how this could be an accident.

I also have to wonder WHY anyone in the Trump administration would have a reporter from The Atlantic in their contact list.

Signal is encrypted from telecom operators sniffing with a MITM attack, they will see encrypted traffic. Otherwise the encryption is set up when adding someone to the chat, you don’t share a key through a separate path.

Basically has the same measure of security as iMessage. More than SMS, but not in any way qualified for transmitting TS/SCI information.

Using signal for this is discussion is off the reservation and likely illegal in several ways.

Not familiar with the app, but it really isn't encrypted if receiving the text lets you read it. This would allow anyone on the distribution list to forward to anyone they choose and they could read. That's not encryption that's simply a secured channel.

(03-25-2025 09:36 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  THEE issue is that nearly every high ranking official in the trump administration was allegedly knowingly transferring sensitive information on a unsecure third-party application. The Defense Secretary, The Vice President, The Director of National Intelligence, The Treasury Secretary, The CIA Director, and The Secretary of State. They were all a part of this. And if you believe him, the actual president...no not elmo...WASN'T!

having a heavy flow day, eh?! ... they make plugs stuffers for that shite...

(03-25-2025 09:40 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(03-25-2025 09:36 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(03-25-2025 08:59 AM)U_of_Elvis Wrote:  Using signal for this is discussion is off the reservation and likely illegal in several ways.

THIS!!!

And most of you are burying the lead...the issue here is not whether someone allowed the information to get to the reporter, either intentionally, or not.

THEE issue is that nearly every high ranking official in the trump administration was allegedly knowingly transferring sensitive information on a unsecure third-party application. The Defense Secretary, The Vice President, The Director of National Intelligence, The Treasury Secretary, The CIA Director, and The Secretary of State. They were all a part of this. And if you believe him, the actual president...no not elmo...WASN'T!

And the majority of the right in this thread.....

lulz, ok, what are you dipsh*ts gonna say now that it has been shown that Signal was approved by the Biden* administration?

We warned you guys about getting your panties in a wad.

BS.

2023 DOD memorandum on messaging apps.

Mobile applications (apps) are software products designed to function on mobile devices.
The misuse and mismanagement of mobile apps poses a cybersecurity and operations security
(OPSEC) risk and may result in the unauthorized disclosure of controlled unclassified
information (CUI) and unclassified Department of Defense (DoD) information that has not been
approved for public release (hereinafter jointly referred to as "non-public DoD information") and
jeopardize operations, strategies, or missions, as described in references (b) and ( c ). This
memorandum provides guidance on the use of mobile apps on unclassified DoD government
owned, leased or issued, mobile devices (hereinafter referred to as "government owned mobile
devices") and on the managed partition of non-government owned mobile devices approved in
accordance with reference (d) (hereinafter referred to as "Approved Mobile Device" (AMD)).
Numerous mobile apps access or use non-public DoD information (e.g., authorized email
apps, collaboration apps, command/control apps). Other applications may be used in support of
mission requirements but do not directly access non-public DoD information (e.g., travel and
educational apps). Although mobile apps can provide ease of use and increased functionality for
users across the Department, there are risks that must be considered. Mobile apps may contain
malware or have vulnerabilities that can disclose CUI, personally identifiable information (PII),
non-public DoD information not approved for public release, or other sensitive information.
This is all possible without the user's consent or knowledge.
In accordance with DoD Instruction 5200.48, DoD personnel will not use non-DoD
accounts or personal e-mail accounts, messaging systems or other non-public DoD information
systems, except approved or authorized government contractor systems, to conduct official
business involving CUI. In accordance with DoD Instruction 5200.01, DoD personnel will not
use unclassified systems, government-issued or otherwise, for classified national security
information. DoD CIO will continuously consult with all DoD Components to evaluate risks
mobile applications may present to the DoD and update References (m), (n), and (o), as
appropriate

https://dodcio.defense.gov/Portals/0/Doc...leApps.pdf