That's extremely fucked up and illegal. Not disputing that and clearly stated that.
It looks pretty high level to me. Sloppy? 100%
And I agree completely that Signal should not have been used and despite the encryption, anything that allows potentially any individual to be added to it is inherently unsafe.
Well thank god she didn’t become president.
You haven't worked in government before I presume. Being subject to FOIA or state equivalents is fucking annoying. I basically put nothing in emails unless completely necessary and wrote notes in shorthand so if anyone wanted it, they wouldn't understand it lol.
Hold on a minute. So you're saying all of them are totally incompetent, yet they're smart enough to use the signal app so they won't get caught? lol
It doesn't take much in the way of "smarts" to use an app where the messages auto-delete.
I don't think there was anything smart about it. What Hilary did was terrible, but there's a drastic difference between a self hosted email server vs using a messaging application that auto deletes all messages after a certain amount of time. I'm not going to entertain any questions about what Hilary did. It distracts from the conversation at hand. We're not doing but Hilary, after listening to everyone on the right say "you can't keep saying but Trump"
I think smarts should be replaced with intentionality. Info/documents of some level of classification demand’s intentionality on the daily but those that handle it daily can get sloppy when the job becomes normal and common for them. I am in that space where people have made a dumb decision and text me something they should not have. Often times if you report yourself it’s not that big of a deal if it was an accident or just an oversight.
Pretty sure most politicians do this. I was somehow added to a google hangouts with the republican caucus for a state as a lobbyist. I wasn’t the only outsider, but I was on it and it was pretty damn informative.
I didn’t bring up Hillary, but if you think they used Signal intentionally to allow messages to be deleted, then you have to admit Hillary intentionally kept hers separate so she could delete them when she wanted to. BTW, there is an auto-delete function on Exchange. She wasn’t smart enough to ask about it.
www.spiegel.de
I simply stated comparing the two isn't an apples to oranges comparison and it's not worth using one to distract from the other. Their both terrible, but their is a fundamental difference. Signal messages are automatically deleted after x amount of time and can be adjusted. But no matter what all messages are deleted eventually and can't be recovered. From a pure technology standpoint that's way harder to do via email. Hilary could only delete emails on her server. She would have to rely on every other person she communicated with to also delete theirs. And that's also assuming they self hosted. Otherwise they're relying on who ever manages those servers. At a pure fundamental level it's way different. Again I'm not defending her. I fully believe she got off easy. But comparing one to other only distracts us from focusing on the issue at hand.
abcnews.go.com
I'm programmed to expect the worst when it comes to government regardless of the party, so I'm struggling to see a reason to use signal besides avoiding FOIA requests. Maybe I'm just paranoid, but I have never and will never trust the government. I've also clearly made my position on Trump known, so maybe I'm just extremely pessimistic as to the reason why.While I certainly don’t know a lot about Signal, the more I learn, I’m getting the impression it is preferred over other secure communications simply because of its convenience for non-classified info..I’ve read arguments that parts of the chat reference things that should be talked about on the “high side”, which were the more secure communication methods.
So, while some of the items in the Signal chat probably crossed the line, it appears that they were making a conscious choice that this level of information was OK for Signal. Should someone be fired for this decision? Maybe. Should’ve they just owned it immediately and make corrections going forward? Definitely.
I feel better that I don’t think the motivation was to avoid FOIA, but who knows. Agencies should use this as an opportunity to fine tune or clarify policies.
What to know about Signal, which the Pentagon previously discouraged workers from using
As the White House comes under fire for allegedly using Signal to discuss foreign policy plans, the encrypted messaging platform has now come into the spotlight.
I'm curious what information you've found that allows to feel better about them not using signal to avoid FOIA requests? The only thing I've seen is that when the group was created the messages were all set to delete after 1 week. That to me shows that was the purpose to use it along with ease of useWhile I certainly don’t know a lot about Signal, the more I learn, I’m getting the impression it is preferred over other secure communications simply because of its convenience for non-classified info..I’ve read arguments that parts of the chat reference things that should be talked about on the “high side”, which were the more secure communication methods.
So, while some of the items in the Signal chat probably crossed the line, it appears that they were making a conscious choice that this level of information was OK for Signal. Should someone be fired for this decision? Maybe. Should’ve they just owned it immediately and make corrections going forward? Definitely.
I feel better that I don’t think the motivation was to avoid FOIA, but who knows. Agencies should use this as an opportunity to fine tune or clarify policies.
What to know about Signal, which the Pentagon previously discouraged workers from using
As the White House comes under fire for allegedly using Signal to discuss foreign policy plans, the encrypted messaging platform has now come into the spotlight.
apnews.com
On the one hand, a person could interpret that as an obvious attempt to avoid FOIA.
Thanks for the response. I was genuinely curious if there was something regarding it I missed. From a security standpoint I can appreciate that feature and it at least creates a failsafe should the phone become lost or stolen. Im just extremely skeptical of that with this administration
