The Illusion of Security: Why Senior Officials Using Signal Doesn’t Guarantee Safety

When media reports highlight the frequent usage of Signal for secure communication by senior government officials, people jump to the conclusion that these conversations are safe from prying eyes.

Signal is synonymous with end-to-end encryption (E2EE): messages cannot be accessed while in transit. Yet, a deeper understanding of contemporary cybersecurity threats exemplifies that sole dependence on Signal, or any E2EE application for that matter, creates a perilous illusion of security. Signal security really comes into play after the adversary has breached the device, thereby placing encryption in transit well outside the realm of consideration.

Encryption at Risk: The Endpoint is the Weakest Link

In an end-to-end encryption setup, it is possible for messages to be read only by the intended recipient and cannot be read or heard by anyone else, including ISPs, hackers, and even Signal itself. Note, however, that this protection does not reach the devices. If someone breaks into a smartphone via zero-click vulnerability, Pegasus spyware, or malicious apps, he or she will be able to read incoming messages right after they arrive.

These are of course high-security interests; not just a security agency or military personnel but even a government official is expected to have some level of anxiety regarding just interception. The real concern, however, is that their phones can already be compromised by some sophisticated exploits.

The Signal Scandal and White House Response

According to The Atlantic’s Jeffrey Goldberg, screenshots of Signal messages reveal classified group chats engaged in by Trump administration officials at the very highest levels, including National Security Advisor Mike Waltz. The chat, labeled as the “Houthi PC small group,” includes Goldberg by mistake, thereby allowing him an insight into sensitive information related to U.S. military strikes planned in Yemen.

Goldberg asserted that Defense Secretary Hegseth revealed operational information about the attack sequence and the kinds of weapons to be used. While serious breaches have been downplayed by the White House, insiders are saying that Waltz will remain in his position, notwithstanding cries for him to be dismissed.

“It doesn’t matter what the press says. It will blow over,” a Trump adviser told Axios. “Trump wasn’t pleased, but there’s a Washington feeding frenzy, and we don’t give the mob what it wants,” added the above-mentioned senior official.

Pentagon Warns of Signal Vulnerability

On the very app used in the leaked group chat, new information regarding the security risks associated with Signal has surfaced. NPR’s Tom Bowman brought forth that a week before the scandal, Pentagon-wide emails were sent cautioning regarding vulnerabilities in Signal’s security. “A vulnerability has been identified in the Signal messenger application,” reads one of the emails.

To make matters worse, a Pentagon email later reported Russian hacking groups exploiting Signal’s linked devices to spy on their encrypted conversations. According to varying cybersecurity scientists, this feature means allowing the user to sync Signal on various devices; hence, it has become a playground for state-sponsored hacking campaigns.

The Pentagon’s email specifically says, “Russian professional hacking groups are employing the ‘linked devices’ feature to spy on encrypted conversations.” Such revelations bring to question whether Signal is even a viable communication tool for government discussions of concern.

How Other Governments Handle Secure Communications

While Signal is allowed to some extent inside the United States, it takes stricter forms in other countries:

• In China, western applications are made illegal, and alternative encryption tools are provided which are controlled and monitored by the government.
• Smartphones are completely prohibited from use in important meetings in Russia coupled with encrypted landline phones.
• The EU prefers in-house encrypted platforms over Signal or Telegram.
• Israel has banned Signal for officials’ use and using dedicated military-grade systems.

These governments know that you cannot only rely on encryption-it must be complemented with device security, air gap systems, and hardware encryption. If the U.S keeps relying on commercial apps for classified conversations, it might face some significant compromises.

Congressional Hearings and Political Fallout

The Signal furor has been kept under wraps for the next congressional hearings. CIA Director John Ratcliffe will testify before the Senate Intelligence Committee with Tulsi Gabbard, the Director of National Intelligence, next in line from House Intelligence. Lawmakers on both sides of the aisle have expressed concerns over both of the mishaps and the cybersecurity risks associated with the exploitability of Signal.

Meanwhile, Hegseth had denied The Atlantic’s news saying Goldberg is a “deceitful highly discredited so-called journalist.” Goldberg, on the other hand, said on CNN: “No, that’s a lie. He was texting war plans. He was texting attack plans.”

A False Sense of Security in Government Circles

They have displayed some kind of iron-will in resolving differences within their camp regarding the use of Signal or WhatsApp for other E2EE platforms and assume that security is all in it. There is one harsh reality that one most high-value targets, especially a senior government official, has already been subjected to active surveillance. In other words, the device should actually not matter if compromised because even Signal would be useless with perfect encryption.

Conclusion

The use of Signal by government officials may afford some modicum of privacy, but it is far from being the answer to security. If a journalist can accidentally find himself in a super-sensitive military chat, then the encryption is meaningless due to human error. Governmental adversaries equipped with state-level exploits, supply chain compromises, and backdoors into telecommunications infrastructure, including an E2EE app, will never be secure. The security paradigm, therefore, must shift-and wide-ranging, device-centric security measures must apply beyond a simplistic assumption that encryption machines could suffice. As for Signal, the very security risks accused should be seen, not ignored. In that way, foreign adversaries could eavesdrop on some of the most sensitive government discussions.

Follow us on WhatsApp, Telegram, Twitter, and Facebook, or subscribe to our weekly newsletter to ensure you don’t miss out on any future updates. Send tips to editorial@techtrendsmedia.co.ke