News Writer Shira Crespi reports on the US security breach in March, when a group of high-ranking United States national security leaders engaged in a group chat via an insecure communication service on their personal devices
Between March 11 and March 15, 2025, a significant security lapse occurred when a group of high-ranking United States national security leaders engaged in a group chat via an insecure communication service on their personal devices to discuss imminent military operations against the Houthis in Yemen. Quickly labelled ‘Signalgate’, the incident has generated considerable debate and apprehension regarding the protocols governing the handling of sensitive information by those in key national security roles.
“the incident has generated considerable debate and apprehension regarding the protocols governing the handling of sensitive information
The exchange reportedly involved National Security Advisor Michael Waltz, Vice President JD Vance, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Secretary of Defence Pete Hegseth, CIA Director John Ratcliffe, and Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, with a total of 19 being added to the group. Signal, a widely used encrypted messaging app, served as the group’s primary platform for discussions, which centred on planning and executing military actions against the Houthi rebels in Yemen. The decision to use a non-government-sanctioned platform on personal devices for such sensitive discussions immediately raised concerns about adherence to established security protocols designed to safeguard national interests.
“The controversy escalated when Jeffrey Goldberg, the Editor-in-Chief of The Atlantic magazine, was inadvertently included in the Signal group chat
The controversy escalated when Jeffrey Goldberg, the Editor-in-Chief of The Atlantic magazine, was inadvertently included in the Signal group chat on March 13, 2025. The ‘Houthi PC small group’ chat appeared to reference the ‘Principals Committee,’ a key interagency forum for national security policy discussions. The accidental inclusion of an external individual in these high-level conversations represents a significant breach of operational security, raising serious questions about the effectiveness of existing safeguards in controlling access to sensitive government communication channels.
Within this digital forum, specific details concerning the impending military operations were reportedly exchanged. This included information regarding potential targets, the types of weaponry intended for deployment, such as F-18 aircraft, MQ-9 drones, and Tomahawk missiles, and the planned sequence of strikes. Secretary of Defence Pete Hegseth is alleged to have shared details regarding the launch times of aircraft and missiles, as well as their estimated time of arrival at designated targets. Following the strikes on March 15, congratulatory messages were reportedly shared among the participants. The nature of this shared information strongly suggests that matters of significant sensitivity, potentially classified, were being discussed on a platform not officially authorised for such communications.
The decision to employ Signal and personal devices for these discussions appears to contravene existing government guidelines and introduce substantial security vulnerabilities. The Pentagon had issued warnings in March 2025 and previously in October 2023, against the use of third-party messaging applications like Signal for handling nonpublic government information. Official US regulations generally prohibit the use of personal devices and commercial applications for discussing national security matters. While Signal utilises end-to-end encryption, personal cell phones remain susceptible to sophisticated cyber-intrusions by foreign entities, potentially compromising the security of the exchanged messages. Furthermore, the reported use of an auto-delete feature for messages within the chat raises concerns regarding compliance with federal records laws mandating the preservation of communications related to official government business.
“The decision to employ Signal and personal devices for these discussions appears to contravene existing government guidelines and introduce substantial security vulnerabilities
Security experts and former officials have expressed significant concern regarding this incident. Some experts suggest that coordinating national security operations over an unapproved platform like Signal could potentially constitute a violation of the Espionage Act. Democratic Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer characterised the incident as ‘shockingly reckless’ and indicative of ‘amateur behaviour’. Former defence officials have stated unequivocally that the information shared was ‘obviously classified’ and that the security breach ‘invited danger’. The situation has been described as ‘embarrassing and… mortifying’ by national security experts. Senator Mark Warner labelled the actions as ‘sloppy, careless, incompetent behaviour.’ These reactions from individuals with extensive understanding of national security protocols underscore the potential severity of this lapse in judgement.
“While acknowledging the existence of the chat, National Security Council spokesman Brian Hughes asserted that there were ‘no threats to troops or national security’
In response to the revelations, the White House and Pentagon have sought to minimise the significance of the incident. While acknowledging the existence of the chat, National Security Council spokesman Brian Hughes asserted that there were ‘no threats to troops or national security’. Secretary of Defence Pete Hegseth, denied that ‘war plans’ were discussed in the messages. President Trump dismissed the controversy as an insignificant ‘glitch’ and a ‘witch hunt,’ expressing support for both Waltz and Hegseth. White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt maintained that Signal is an ‘approved encrypted app’ used by government agencies. Similarly, CIA Director John Ratcliffe testified that Signal is permissible for work purposes within his agency under certain conditions, and DNI Tulsi Gabbard stated that no classified information was shared.
The potential ramifications of this security lapse are considerable. The unsecured communication channel could have jeopardised the military operation and potentially endangered American lives. If adversaries intercepted these communications, they may have been able to access valuable intelligence, potentially compromising future operations. Allies may also question the reliability of the US in safeguarding sensitive information, potentially impacting intelligence-sharing relationships. A government watchdog group has already initiated legal action alleging violations of the Federal Records Act, and congressional hearings have been convened to examine the matter.
“This incident may reflect a broader challenge within the US national security community concerning adherence to communication security protocols
This incident may reflect a broader challenge within the US national security community concerning adherence to communication security protocols. Reports suggest that the use of unclassified applications for official communication is not uncommon across different administrations. A prior Defence Department memorandum explicitly cautioned against using ‘unmanaged’ messaging applications for non-public information. Furthermore, previous administrations have faced scrutiny regarding the handling of classified information. This pattern suggests a potential systemic issue where expediency might sometimes take precedence over security or where consistent enforcement of established guidelines is lacking.
The reported use of an unsecured messaging app by senior U.S. national security officials to discuss imminent military operations against the Houthis in Yemen raises serious concerns about security protocols at the highest levels of government. While officials have sought to downplay the incident, the potential risks to national security, strong criticism from experts, and existing government warnings against such practices highlight the severity of the issue. Going forward, it is crucial that officials strictly adhere to established security protocols when handling sensitive information to protect national interests and uphold the trust of both the American public and international allies.
Below is a table containing the names and roles of many notable U.S officials included in the group chat:
Table created by Shira Crespi.
Read more from Redbrick News here:
A Streetcar Named Desire returns to the West End for a limited run
Russia demands UK and Europe stay out of Ukraine peace talks
Comments