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

131–140 of 1001 posts

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

#131

Post by overfeed »

chimeracoder wrote: post #125
overfeed wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The fourt cases related to Watergate established that receiving classified information is not illegal, and affirmed 1A rights. I'd argue it's a exactly the same as a journalist overhearing this motley crew discussing the war plan in the halls of the White House without being aware there's a journalist nearby. I wouldn't bank on the current supreme court to uphold precedence, or the current administration persecuting…

> I would bank in the current supreme court to uphold precedence Counting on SCOTUS to respect precedent at this point is either extremely optimistic or extremely naive.

Oh, that was a typo. I do not trust the current supreme court to uphold precedence over naked partisanship.

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

#132

Post by tailspin2019 »

LWIRVoltage wrote: post #53

From people on Reddit: Something that blows my mind- but is fully true "Hell, I've been in fucking EVE Online alliances that had better opsec than this." "I'll raise you one: I've never been in any EVE alliance that didn't have better opsec than this." ..I noted Board Games(Secret Hitler, for example) require better opsec. So do card games- it's mindblowing to note this too... [Main comment by me - technical outlook]…

> As for subtle push app updates by Signal themselves being a vector- i'd think the Open Source nature of the app prevent that

The lack of reproducible builds for Signal’s apps has been a topic of discussion for quite some time:

https://github.com/signalapp/Signal-iOS/issues/641

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

#135

Post by cteiosanu »

neverokay wrote: post #94
dzhiurgis wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> not exactly world war level apps. And what is?

A face to face meeting in a bunker. But seriously, we pondered the psychological damage of those who are drone operators. How is this different? There should be more ceremony when making decisions like this, not an afternoon group chat. Dress for it, look yourself in the face for it. Be present. I’ll just say one thing about this administration. It is often true that when one thing is wrong with a man, then it’s poss…

And women

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

#136

Post by consteval »

cocacola1 wrote: post #51
krapp wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

¯\(ツ)/¯ Plenty of people in Trump's own cabinet used private email servers too, but no one cared. As always, it's only a problem when a Democrat does it.

I’m sort of surprised Democrats haven’t snapped yet.

A few of them held up signs and some were kicked out. Yes, actually - some of our legislatures were removed from the premises for silently protesting!

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

#137

Post by herzigma »

Balgair wrote: post #77

If anything, I'm a bit surprised that Jeff Goldberg burned this source. If anything, I'd suspect that he'd keep the channel open as long as he could. Or, he's got other channels that work better. All the same, I mean, wow. These guys are just morons here, there's really no other way around it. I'm trying to think of a charitable way to spin this and I've got nothing. Like, very clearly, these people are going to get…

Jeff Goldberg loves his country more than he cares about a "source."

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

#138

Post by MrMan »

hnburnsy wrote: post #108
asdff wrote: post #80

304 votes, 75 comments 3 hours after posting and this is already being thrown all the way back to 134 rank on the front page with some 2-3 day old posts. This is very clearly hacker news: a case of opsec slipup in easily the worst fashion coming straight from the SecDef (or one representing the SecDef). A shame it is probably getting flamed and downvoted over partisan reasons, although I know there are many conservat…

>A shame it is probably getting flamed and downvoted over partisan reasons Is this the forum for this type of news? https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html ... On-Topic: Anything that good hackers would find interesting. That includes more than hacking and startups. If you had to reduce it to a sentence, the answer might be: anything that gratifies one's intellectual curiosity. Off-Topic: Most stories about…

[dead]

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

#139

Post by iszomer »

Jtsummers wrote: post #118
sharpshadow wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sounds like he received the message purposefully and pretends it was an mistake? 2h is a lot but also not that much time, everything is prepared already it’s more a countdown I would say. What would be a usual timeframe to inform the people you want to inform about an immediate event which is going to happen?

> Sounds like he received the message purposefully and pretends it was an mistake? Why would he have been added to the group? For what purpose would the current National Security Advisor have to bring in an outsider to discussions that ended up involving almost certainly classified data? > 2h is a lot but not that much time He was added to the group two days (13 March) before the strikes (15 March), not two hours.

My guess is as a honeypot: see who would publish this alleged "leak" and give the administration justification to "open an investigation" on them.

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

#140

Post by cmilton »

hnburnsy wrote: post #112
lcc wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Like the parent said, a tech-related opsec failure at this level is absolutely something a 'good hacker' would find interesting.

>tech-related opsec failure Not sure that 'fat fingering' on a mobile device rises to the level of tech-related opsec. The choice to use a non-government approved device certainly is news, but not necessarily Hacker News. Plenty of better places to debate it.

>Plenty of better places to debate it.

I often see this comment, but there are never any sources provided. Any links to share?

Post reply on HN