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

Technical analysis of the Signal clone used by Trump officials

micahflee.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 387 posts

Re: Technical analysis of the Signal clone used by Trump officials

#21

Post by mingus88 »

tedunangst wrote: post #17
voytec wrote: post #16

> 404 Media journalist Joseph Cox published a story pointing out that Waltz was not using the official Signal app, but rather "an obscure and unofficial version of Signal that is designed to archive messages" Wow. And that's while their entire point of using Signal is to have conversations scrapped after a week to leave no no traces of criminal activity.

I don't think it follows that they selected the archiving messenger because they wanted disappearing messages. The whole disappearing messages thing was just internet speculation.

This TM SGNL app is compatible with legit Signal clients and servers.

It’s also possible that they are using this app to archive chats that other parties _believe_ to be disappeared.

In other words, set your chats to disappear in 5 minutes and convince your target to dish some sensitive info. They think it’s off the record, but it’s instantly archived

Re: Technical analysis of the Signal clone used by Trump officials

#22

Post by ceejayoz »

tedunangst wrote: post #17
voytec wrote: post #16

> 404 Media journalist Joseph Cox published a story pointing out that Waltz was not using the official Signal app, but rather "an obscure and unofficial version of Signal that is designed to archive messages" Wow. And that's while their entire point of using Signal is to have conversations scrapped after a week to leave no no traces of criminal activity.

I don't think it follows that they selected the archiving messenger because they wanted disappearing messages. The whole disappearing messages thing was just internet speculation.

Whether it was for that purpose or not, the messages did wind up disappearing. The CIA admitted it in a court filing.

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/04/15/us/politics/cia-director-...

Re: Technical analysis of the Signal clone used by Trump officials

#23

Post by ceejayoz »

dashundchen wrote: post #14
ceejayoz wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The White House communications director lies continually, so the value of that statement is nil.

[flagged]

She’s the deputy. Steven Cheung is the director. Both people issue Baghdad Bob style statements.

Re: Technical analysis of the Signal clone used by Trump officials

#25

Post by ceejayoz »

ipv6ipv4 wrote: post #15
ComputerGuru wrote: post #10

White House communications director previously revealed (after “Signalgate”) that Signal was an approved and whitelisted app for gov’t officials to have on work phones and even discuss top-secret matters on. But I haven’t heard that TeleMessage was approved (and I’d have serious questions if it were given the foreign intelligence factor). Anyone know if there is a clear answer to whether it’s been approved?

It was incontrovertibly approved as it is only installable via MDM. A likely explanation is that the communications director (or the people informing her) wouldn’t know to distinguish between Signal the app, and a Signal compatible app that is nearly indistinguishable from Signal. A lot like Kleenex is a common term for tissue paper regardless of brand. When the leak was first revealed, there was loud speculation abo…

> This additional revelation, about the use of TeleMessage, shows that someone with a security background has actually thought about these things.

We only have evidence they used TeleMessage after the scandal. When the same guy let the press take a photo of his messages with Vance, Rubio, Gabbard and others.

Re: Technical analysis of the Signal clone used by Trump officials

#26

Post by Mbwagava »

spenvo wrote: post #20

There is new reporting that a hacker has breached the parent company, TeleMessage, including live data being passed across servers in production. https://www.404media.co/the-signal-clone-the-trump-admin-use... It was marked as a DUPE of this discussion, despite being a major new development https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43890034 Hopefully that decision can be reconsidered

How does this happen when signal itself is open source?

Re: Technical analysis of the Signal clone used by Trump officials

#27

Post by Mbwagava »

voytec wrote: post #16

> 404 Media journalist Joseph Cox published a story pointing out that Waltz was not using the official Signal app, but rather "an obscure and unofficial version of Signal that is designed to archive messages" Wow. And that's while their entire point of using Signal is to have conversations scrapped after a week to leave no no traces of criminal activity.

You can turn off message disappearance with the app store app so this seems like a red herring.

Re: Technical analysis of the Signal clone used by Trump officials

#28

Post by jasonfarnon »

voytec wrote: post #16

> 404 Media journalist Joseph Cox published a story pointing out that Waltz was not using the official Signal app, but rather "an obscure and unofficial version of Signal that is designed to archive messages" Wow. And that's while their entire point of using Signal is to have conversations scrapped after a week to leave no no traces of criminal activity.

Maybe they wanted to use Signal to thwart eavesdropping but they had to modify it in order to comply with govt record retention requirements?

Re: Technical analysis of the Signal clone used by Trump officials

#29

Post by ceejayoz »

donnachangstein wrote: post #13
ComputerGuru wrote: post #10

White House communications director previously revealed (after “Signalgate”) that Signal was an approved and whitelisted app for gov’t officials to have on work phones and even discuss top-secret matters on. But I haven’t heard that TeleMessage was approved (and I’d have serious questions if it were given the foreign intelligence factor). Anyone know if there is a clear answer to whether it’s been approved?

The correct answer is no one outside US Government IT knows for sure what is or isn't approved per their own rules. Every article (and comments therein) are just speculation and people trying to confirm their own biases, desperately looking for something to blame someone for, to produce more rage-bait and thus feed more ad clicks. Every single article is written with the presumption that there are no actual IT people…

> It's silly and ridiculous.

As is putting someone with a brain parasite and anti-vax beliefs as the head of HHS, but here we are.

“Silly and ridiculous” does not mean “implausible” with this administration. It’s the standard.

Post reply on HN