579
submitted 2 months ago by silence7@slrpnk.net to c/politics@lemmy.world
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] capt_wolf@lemmy.world 223 points 2 months ago

Just remember, no matter what way they spin this, they chose to ignore national security protocols and went out of their way to use an unsecure messaging app. That's the real story. The witch hunt they're undoubtedly going to go on is a perfect opportunity to redirect the public, save face, and further erode our freedoms.

You know, SOP for the whole Trump regime...

[-] blakenong@lemmings.world 93 points 2 months ago

Something something Hillary Clinton email servers

[-] JeeBaiChow@lemmy.world 9 points 2 months ago

Actually, I'm more surprised people continue to believe the 'end to end' claims of these companies.

[-] silence7@slrpnk.net 79 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Signal makes it believable by providing source code and reproducible builds. It doesn't rule out the possibility that they've done something clever with the random number generator, or have the app store you use give you a compromised app, or provide any protection against endpoint compromise, but it's about as good as you can get.

Third party apps derived from theirs, which explicitly promise to log all your messages to a server somewhere, like TeleMessage, are, for obvious reasons, far less trustworthy.

[-] jaybone@lemmy.zip 4 points 2 months ago

Question: how can they even claim it’s e2ee if they also claim to log all the messages? Or is the claim that they log the messages in encrypted form? In which case any client(s) with the only copy of the keys could delete them, making the logs useless.

[-] merc@sh.itjust.works 9 points 2 months ago

how can they even claim it’s e2ee if they also claim to log all the messages?

Who are the various "they"s in that question?

Signal claims that if you use the Signal app, it's end-to-end encrypted. The Trump admin was using an unofficial Signal-compatible app TM SGNL which probably didn't make those claims. And, Signal definitely never claimed that TM SGNL was end-to-end encrypted. In fact, it's likely TeleMessage violated the copyrights and trademarks belonging to Signal with their app.

But, in the end, the messages were still technically end-to-end encrypted. It's just that as soon as the messages arrived at one of those ends, they were sent to TeleMessage who archived them unencrypted in AWS. It's still end-to-end encrypted, it's just that one of those ends is incredibly leaky.

[-] Randelung@lemmy.world 6 points 2 months ago

unencrypted in AWS

oh... mygod.

[-] merc@sh.itjust.works 5 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Yeah. The level of incompetence is impressive. Full data and metadata for all customers all dumped together in one datastore, stored in the clear in AWS.

"The data includes apparent message contents; the names and contact information for government officials; usernames and passwords for TeleMessage’s backend panel; and indications of what agencies and companies might be TeleMessage customers."

...

"The server that the hacker compromised is hosted on Amazon AWS’s cloud infrastructure in Northern Virginia."

...

"“If I could have found this in less than 30 minutes then anybody else could too. And who knows how long it’s been vulnerable?” the hacker said. "

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] huppakee@lemm.ee 21 points 2 months ago

Even with e2e security there is 2 e's that can get compromised, their use of a altered version of the app on one end is enough to cancel out the whole encryption part it, also on the other end.

But in this case it's like they have a lock for their garage door that is different from the lock on their car so they can't steal the car when somebody steals the key to the garage door, but then think they can leave the keys in the lock because there is a lock (encryption) on the doors.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] SpaceShort@feddit.uk 6 points 2 months ago

Also, the reason we know about it is because Mike Waltz invited a journalist to a group chat.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[-] AngrySquirrel@lemm.ee 76 points 2 months ago

Wow. It's almost like there is a reason that all those annoying OPSEC procedures exist.

[-] asteriskeverything@lemmy.world 65 points 2 months ago

We have forked off from the darkest timeline into its stupidest.

[-] rockSlayer@lemmy.blahaj.zone 28 points 2 months ago

I like that your optimism separated the two

[-] Valorie12@lemmy.world 13 points 2 months ago

For now, until they pull request it back to the dark timeline

[-] ABC123itsEASY@lemmy.world 6 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Changes Requested

[-] A_norny_mousse@feddit.org 5 points 2 months ago

Let's put them back together:

"Like Idiocracy, only less fun"

[-] LeninOnAPrayer@lemm.ee 4 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Well it's a fork. So it's technically got all of the darkest timeline up to the point they added the extreme stupidity patch.

There will be a merge PR soon enough.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] kittenzrulz123@lemmy.blahaj.zone 40 points 2 months ago

Daily reminder that end to end encryption only works when both ends are secure

[-] lando55@lemmy.world 5 points 2 months ago

Does that include making sure the people using it are not morons

[-] kittenzrulz123@lemmy.blahaj.zone 5 points 2 months ago

Also reminder, the greatest security vulnerability in every peice of software is the end user

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] RedWeasel@lemmy.world 33 points 2 months ago

Me(deadpan) : Wow, that is surprising.

[-] cabron_offsets@lemmy.world 26 points 2 months ago

You just have to assume that china and the blyats have all our shit.

[-] Xaphanos@lemmy.world 16 points 2 months ago

That was a given when he kept boxes of top secret material in his bathroom.

[-] cabron_offsets@lemmy.world 12 points 2 months ago

Or when he was showing off docs at mar-a-fucko parties.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] Fiivemacs@lemmy.ca 26 points 2 months ago

Hopefully someone releases all their messages to throw more shit in their faces. Overwhelm them with bullshit just like they did to everything

[-] hemmes@lemmy.world 21 points 2 months ago

Cool, cool, cool, cool, cool, cool, cool, cool, cool…

[-] Blackmist@feddit.uk 19 points 2 months ago
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world 15 points 2 months ago

So release the messages. Not that it matters what they said, absolutely nothing will happen except clicks for whoever reports on it.

[-] peoplebeproblems@midwest.social 14 points 2 months ago

Wait they were using an unpublished fork of Signal?

[-] A_norny_mousse@feddit.org 22 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

No. It's a wrapper around Signal that sends everything into a corporate cloud. The Isaraeli miltary/defense/espionage whatever have been using this, then sold it to a US company. I'm guessing the company provides wrappers around other apps as well.

It completely defeats the purpose of E2EE. I'm sure somebody told our oh-so-competent US government that's exactly what they need.

Like, it's actually worse than SignalGate.

[-] Redex68@lemmy.world 4 points 2 months ago

Goverment officials are required to archive all communications, so it doesn't defeat the purposes of E2EE because you can't have full E2EE to start with. If it was propely implemented and didn't get hacked it would be fine. Tho I guess implementation wise if it really sends all the data to a corporate instead of government cloud that's a problem as well.

[-] rumba@lemmy.zip 5 points 2 months ago

If it was propely implemented and didn’t get hacked

If it was properly researched and approved by DoD and used on authorized, secure devices which were running on secured networks, it would be fine.

The baseline for security has been pretty decent for years. It's painfully restrictive which is why they're chomping at the bit to make it easier, but just slamming a corporate product into use with secret data with no oversight has never been fine even if it was secure.

[-] TheObviousSolution@lemm.ee 4 points 2 months ago

So basically, they hacked themselves out of any benefit Signal was giving them, and then an external party finished the hack.

They do provide wrappers for other apps too, I forget the name of the company but they provide them for WhatsApp, Telegram, and others.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] frezik@midwest.social 12 points 2 months ago

These goddamned idiots are going to get at least one supercarrier sunk. At least one.

[-] N0body@lemmy.dbzer0.com 12 points 2 months ago

You can be horrified by the lack of security and its implications, or you can rejoice in the rampant stupidity that will be on display when the leaks begin.

Emojis, ALL CAPS, general cluelessness, the JD Vance “I don’t know about this, but whatever” comments.

[-] 0p3r470r@lemm.ee 11 points 2 months ago

Who could have seen this coming /s

[-] PineRune@lemmy.world 7 points 2 months ago

Sign up for free access to this post

Any copy of the article that doesn't want my personal info?

Release em!

[-] Unpigged@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 2 months ago

Shockingly comes days after the leak that the service is being used by the dork team. Someone really really really wants to get these backups.

[-] dRLY@lemmy.ml 5 points 2 months ago

Funny how the USA went nuts and strong-armed other Western nations to outright ban Chinese hardware and companies due to "security concerns." Yet allowed using a fork of Signal from a foreign nation, and those concerns were nowhere to be found. IOF is already known to be on par (if not better) with the USA in spying on and creating false flags globally. Yet the highest office chose to use it anyway. Which is beyond stupid given that a fork could have been made and ran by a USA company (or the NSA or whichever three letter agency) specifically for the same use. Hell those agencies already are and have been heavily funding the Signal Foundation.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] DrSleepless@lemmy.world 4 points 2 months ago
load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 04 May 2025
579 points (99.8% liked)

politics

24628 readers
1103 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS