Signal Chat Leak Shows Human Element Remains The Weakest Link

Forbes

25-03-2025

Despite the claims that the social messaging app Signal provided an encrypted means of communication, there were reportedly repeated warnings from within the United States Department of Defense that the platform wasn't as secure as some may have believed. Advisories were issued that mobile apps shouldn't be used for sending "controlled unclassified information."
According to a report on Tuesday from NPR, a memo was even sent out earlier this month that warned, "A vulnerability has been identified in the Signal messagener application," and it further stated that "Russian professional hacking groups are employing the 'linked devices' features to spy on encrypted conversations."
Yet, it wasn't hackers that breached the communication between top Trump administration officials this month that included Vice President JD Vance, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard and CIA Director John Ratcliffe. Rather, Michael Waltz, President Donald Trump's national security advisor, inadvertently added Jeffrey Goldberg, editor-in-chief of The Atlantic, to the joint communication.
This highlights that often times with classified communications; it isn't the technology that is at fault, but the human element where there is a failure.
History is filled with similar tales.
During the First World War, the German government was unaware that its telegraph lines were being monitored by the British military in London. That led to the British learning of Berlin's plans to try to entice Mexico to join the war. In January 1917, German Foreign Secretary Arthur Zimmermann sent a coded telegram to the German ambassador in Mexico City, but British intelligence intercepted and decoded the message, sharing it with the U.S. government. It led to widespread anti-German outrage and shifted public opinion towards supporting the Allies in the war.
Two decades later, the U.S. military had cracked the codes of the Imperial Japanese Navy, which contributed to the U.S. Navy's victory at the Battle of Midway – while Nazi Germany also put great faith in its enigma machine believing it was unbreakable, though Allied efforts managed to crack it as well.
"This newest example of leaked military secrets is hardly unprecedented," explained technology industry analyst Charles King of Pund-IT. "This week's embarrassment is closer to the Special Order 191 fiasco during the American Civil War."
That occurred in 1862, when Confederate General Robert E Lee issued an order detailing his plans for the Maryland campaign that culminated in the Battle of Antietam.
"Some feckless idiot wrapped a copy of the order around three cigars that he then proceeded to drop and lose," added King. "The package was discovered by a pair of Union soldiers who made sure that the order was delivered to Union General George McLellan, who was able to match Lee's actions and largely blunt the Confederates at Antietam."
King said it would be wrong to suggest that the Houthi forces targeted by the plans discussed by Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth and his planning group achieved the benefits McLellan enjoyed at Antietam, but it serves to highlight that the weakest link in both situations was human in nature.
"Instead, Hegseth's profound error in trusting state secrets to an insecure and unapproved messaging app might have gone unnoticed if The Atlantic editor Jeffery Goldberg had not been inadvertently invited to the chat," King continued. "Fortunately for U.S. military personnel involved in the attacks on the Houthis, Goldberg seems to have a greater understanding of and respect for maintaining military secrets than Secretary Hegseth and his cronies."
Since the disclosure of the group chat designated the "Houthi PC small group," officials have attempted to deny that the discussion was classified, while Hegseth made the claim "nobody was texting war plans" and further downplayed the significance of the chat. The Pentagon chief also suggested Goldberg is "a deceitful and highly discredited so-called journalist," even after the White House and other officials confirmed the authenticity of the message.
Yet, deflection is now the course of action for the administration and its supporters.
Fox News host Jesse Watters tried to suggest it was an honest and simple mistake, and on his show on Monday, argued, "Did you ever try to start a group text? You're adding people, and you accidentally add the wrong person?"
Though Watters failed to address the gravity of the situation, he is right that social media apps are ripe for such mishaps.
"Unfortunately, we should not be surprised. Washington insiders have been leaking information throughout the last few decades for one purpose or another, but the recent incident shows how out of control this kind of activity has become," said Dr. Julianna Jeanine Kirschner, lecturer in the Annenberg School for Communication and Journalism at the University of Southern California.
"The likely scenario here is that these Washington insiders overestimated their ability to mask messaging on Signal," added Kirschner. "The fact is they used an interface that is not encrypted in any meaningful way, and it has no governmental communicative protections. This should concern the broader public, but it is even more sinister than it appears. It is quite possible that communicating issues of critical war strategy in various forms of non-secure modes is common practice."
Human error is ultimately the problem in situations like this, and it wasn't a case of Goldberg actively trying to hack the Signal group or code breakers working tirelessly to access the information. Instead, this was very much akin to the Special Order 191 wrapped in cigars.
Yet, in this case, Goldberg was invited to the group.
"Hubris is also to blame, because these insiders think they can use an unprotected channel of communication to share critical war decisions and not get caught," suggested Kirschner. "This line of thinking is unhealthy, unsafe, and questionable in terms of strategy. It also suggests a serious lack of judgment by those making life-or-death decisions."
It is also true that social media and messaging platforms have improved their security over the years, but it has not approached any level worthy of sharing such vital information between such high-ranking officials.
"The average person should not be concerned about their everyday use of these messaging platforms," said Kirschner, "Yet, a government official or insider sharing information that is likely classified should consider otherwise."