Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

U.S. national-security leaders included me in a group chat

theatlantic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

721–730 of 1001 posts

Re: U.S. national-security leaders included me in a group chat

#721

Post by hamasho »

cjohnson318 wrote: post #665
joshuamerrill wrote: post #457

I began my career in a classified environment working on government satellite programs. In my first week on the job, I was told, explicitly, that if I shared Classified or Controlled Unclassified information over unapproved channels, I would be reprimanded—likely fired, or less likely, prosecuted. It was also made clear that safeguarding the nation's secrets from the carelessness of others was my responsibility, too.…

Why shouldn't punishment or prosecution be suggested. I've worked with classified information, and I would have been held accountable for my actions, why shouldn't they? I'm tired of this Too Important To Have Consequences business. It defeats the whole purpose of having qualifications, and security, and rules of any kind.

Honestly, I'm giving up hoping for even a fraction of deserved punishment too. It's hard to handle the emotional dissonance I feel repeatedly when I see injustice, so I've adjusted myself to expect minimal or no punishment and just hope things improve a little. I know this is exactly what those people who repeatedly do malicious things want to happen, and I'm not suggesting we give up seeking social justice. I just can't handle the rage I feel every time or I'll suffer from severe depression again. I need to save my willpower to still hope for a better world and to encourage or support people who are actually working to improve society.

Re: U.S. national-security leaders included me in a group chat

#722

Post by Aeolun »

CoastalCoder wrote: post #711
hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #553

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But the idea that this breach can occur with no accountability, consequences, or operational changes is unacceptable. There will be no accountability, consequences, or operational changes because the American people (a plurality of them anyway) voted for this. I like how people are even bothering to bring up the risk of prosecution, as if Trump wouldn't just pardon the people involved anyway. Look, I am as disguste…

I'm concerned that what brings change won't be a smarter electorate, but instead losing a war or having another civil war. I'm somewhat politically conservative, and I still cannot make any sense of the plurality that voted Trump into office again. I really wonder if I'm in some kind of echo chamber that prevents me from understanding their perspective.

> I really wonder if I'm in some kind of echo chamber that prevents me from understanding their perspective.

I mean, I understand the ‘burn the world down’ perspective. I just don’t think it’s particularly productive.

Re: U.S. national-security leaders included me in a group chat

#723

Post by sterlind »

lmm wrote: post #629
exikyut wrote: post #605

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If they're "just" using Signal, they're likely "just" using stock Android if there isn't a policy requiring iPhones in lockdown mode. It's a very good question as to whether such a policy exists.

Which do you think is more likely to be under foreign control and why? Bearing in mind that iPhones are made in China.

stock iPhones run 100% Apple software, afaik. from drivers to the shell it's one company. the hardware is one series of models by one company.

each Android vendor has a completely random fork of AOSP with who knows what kernel patches, out-of-tree drivers, unremovable apps and customizations. you're trusting an enchilada of your mobile carrier, Google, Samsung/OnePlus/whoever, plus all their vendors.

Android can be highly secure. the NSA's Fishbowl project used vanilla AOSP + SELinux + IPSec on closely scrutinized hardware to make a phone that can be used for Secret text messages. the cheap prepaid phone you buy at T-Mobile is not that.

Re: U.S. national-security leaders included me in a group chat

#724

Post by Aeolun »

Libcat99 wrote: post #579
kelipso wrote: post #420

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The most likely reason is convenience, not escaping record keeping.

The report includes notes on certain messages having durations set before they would disappear. This indicates intent.

Sure, but I’m willing to give them the benefit of the doubt on that count. I’m fairly sure that’s because they felt it would be safer if the confidential info they sent wouldn’t stay around.

Re: U.S. national-security leaders included me in a group chat

#725

Post by fragmede »

egl2020 wrote: post #622
joshuamerrill wrote: post #457

I began my career in a classified environment working on government satellite programs. In my first week on the job, I was told, explicitly, that if I shared Classified or Controlled Unclassified information over unapproved channels, I would be reprimanded—likely fired, or less likely, prosecuted. It was also made clear that safeguarding the nation's secrets from the carelessness of others was my responsibility, too.…

Heck, one of my co-workers at a FAANG freaked out when he realized that he had used his personal phone to take a picture of a meeting blackboard instead of his corp phone. He spent the afternoon trying to figure out how to scrub the photo.

I had that problem, but the FAANG I was at was also the same company as the one running my phone's OS, so it wasn't as bad.

Re: U.S. national-security leaders included me in a group chat

#726

Post by SantalBlush »

CoastalCoder wrote: post #711
hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #553

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But the idea that this breach can occur with no accountability, consequences, or operational changes is unacceptable. There will be no accountability, consequences, or operational changes because the American people (a plurality of them anyway) voted for this. I like how people are even bothering to bring up the risk of prosecution, as if Trump wouldn't just pardon the people involved anyway. Look, I am as disguste…

I'm concerned that what brings change won't be a smarter electorate, but instead losing a war or having another civil war. I'm somewhat politically conservative, and I still cannot make any sense of the plurality that voted Trump into office again. I really wonder if I'm in some kind of echo chamber that prevents me from understanding their perspective.

Their grievances begin with Reaganomics, then NAFTA, then the war in Afghanistan. All Republican projects. Now, instead of directing the blame where it belongs, they've adopted an even more 'enlightened' and destructive form of conservativism that abides corruption in broad daylight.

Re: U.S. national-security leaders included me in a group chat

#727

Post by 20after4 »

Folcon wrote: post #717

I'm an external individual to the US, but I must admit that some of the sentiments being expressed here in this thread and elsewhere about the lack of accountability deeply concern me, it reminds me of many things I saw growing up and still see today in south asia. Independent of anything else, I do see the overton window shifting in the US, the most subtle of which are norms and expectations around acts of corruptio…

It's so much worse than that already. If corruption was the only problem we face in the US then there might be some real hope to reverse course.

Re: U.S. national-security leaders included me in a group chat

#729

Post by awaymazdacx5 »

>"The Houthi-run Yemeni health ministry reported that at least 53 people were killed in the strikes, a number that has not been independently verified."

weird chat, surprised Waltz was active in planning strikes. 18 confidantes - closer knit cabinet from internal coms. was under the impression that signal log was leaked to emulate Spinoza's excommunication decree.

Re: U.S. national-security leaders included me in a group chat

#730

Post by katbyte »

riehwvfbk wrote: post #691
chris_wot wrote: post #609

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the Trump Whitehouse, not only do you believe the rules don't apply to you, but actually the rules don't apply to you.

Use Signal, an encrypted platform from the CIA with a charismatic public persona: the horror! Use an unencrypted email server in a closet for years: that's nothing.

I assume the email server you are referring to is the one Elon installed and then fed all sorts of peoples private information to
Post reply on HN