Kyle McCurdy
The argument over US officials’ misuse of secure but non-governmental messaging platform Signal falls into two camps. Either it is a gross error that undermines national security, or it is a bit of a blunder but no harm was done.
US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has twice used Signal for sensitive national security conversions, including once in which he and officials discussed planned military operations against Houthis in Yemen. When we consider the security implications of this, we see that classification systems are complicated, subjective and nuanced. Many people, even those who have worked within government for years, don’t understand them.
A classification is simply a label that the originator of the information attaches to it based on his or her perception of the damage that would happen if it became public. Information can be declassified by group consensus and through a proper process, but it is generally up to the originator to make a reasonable judgment at the time.
Only certain government systems are permitted to hold the most sensitive information, and these are highly protected and monitored. They are usually air gapped, meaning they are separated from other networks and not connected the internet. Still today, the most sensitive information is shared only on specific coloured paper that is destroyed after being read in a special room. In 2013, the Russians even bought up a stock of typewriters to make sure they were truly offline. The much discussed secure compartmented information facility (SCIF) is there to protect from physical attacks such as eavesdropping or covert cameras.
No comments:
Post a Comment