• OsrsNeedsF2P@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    10 days ago

    The title really lacks context. The “person in Russia in the group chat” is Witkoff, the US official in charge of the situation in Ukraine and the Middle East

    • PointyReality@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      10 days ago

      That is definitely the context needed. Not sure though if he needed to know the exact details of the battle plans whilst in Russia. Still feels like a slight lack of control of sensitive information. Albeit it’s not as bad as forgetting you had a journalist in the same chat.

      • radiohead37@lemmynsfw.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        10 days ago

        Hillary was crucified over emails on her own server. What these guys are doing is way worse by using a commercial platform to transmit sensitive information.

      • Showroom7561@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        10 days ago

        Not sure though if he needed to know the exact details of the battle plans whilst in Russia.

        Through an unsecure platform, no less.

        There really is no excuse for any of this. And they are denying that a chat existed, or that any classified information was posted, or that there were even plans to attack anyone… imbeciles. Every single one.

          • Skydancer@pawb.social
            link
            fedilink
            Italiano
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            10 days ago

            Unsecure ≠ Insecure

            Unsecure in this context generally means not in compliance with military and classified security practices and procedures for “securing” information.

            Signal is secure in the sense of being strong end-to-end cryptography.

        • PointyReality@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          10 days ago

          Possibly, but by private company owned chat? Also while in a foreign country known to be hostile to the US. If you apply this logic it smacks of lack of thought towards control of sensitive information which is pretty much the incompetence this administration has shown since well a long time.

    • 4am@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      10 days ago

      No doubt on a personal device, surrounded by hostile cell towers and WiFi hotspots and being bombarded with who knows what kind of state-level malware.

      It’s not like they need to break signal; if they can clandestinely screencap, keysniff etc then this chat was completely pwned regardless of how secure it was between TCP endpoints

      This is not even a conversation that should be happening on a government issued smartphone in a hostile foreign country.