---

Tuesday, March 25, 2025, PST | The Trump administration’s use of Signal to coordinate military strikes in Yemen sparks debate over security, convenience, and overlooked government alternatives.

In a surprising revelation, top Trump administration officials, including Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and National Security Adviser Michael Waltz, turned to Signal—a commercially available encrypted messaging app—to plan military strikes against Houthi militants in Yemen in March 2025. The decision, exposed after a journalist was accidentally included in the chat, has raised questions about why a consumer app was chosen over secure government systems and what alternatives were bypassed. With operational details like timing, targets, and weapons systems leaked, experts and critics are dissecting the move as both a practical choice and a security misstep.

Signal’s appeal likely lies in its end-to-end encryption and ease of use. Widely adopted by privacy advocates and available on personal smartphones, it offered officials a quick way to communicate without the setup of specialized systems. Reports from The Atlantic indicate the chat, active in early March 2025, included real-time coordination—details too sensitive for a platform not approved for classified data. The Department of Defense had warned staff about Signal’s vulnerabilities to Russian hacking just days before the March 14 strikes, amplifying concerns. Yet, the administration, barely two months into its term, may have prioritized speed over protocol, a choice Trump later dismissed as a “minor glitch.”

Secure alternatives were readily available. The Joint Worldwide Intelligence Communications System (JWICS) and Secret Internet Protocol Router Network (SIPRNet) are encrypted government platforms designed for Top Secret and Secret-level discussions, accessible via secure devices or facilities. Secure Telephone Equipment (STE) offered encrypted voice calls, while classified email networks tied to SIPRNet provided a slower but safer option for detailed plans. Physical meetings in Sensitive Compartmentalized Information Facilities (SCIFs) or virtual briefings via secure video teleconferencing (SVTC) eliminated reliance on commercial apps entirely. Even the Pentagon’s Defense Collaboration Services (DCS) provided a controlled messaging alternative up to Secret level. Each method, while less convenient than Signal, meets strict security standards the app lacks.

Why bypass these? Speculation points to urgency or familiarity—Signal’s immediacy on personal devices outpaced the logistics of SCIFs or JWICS access. Posts on X suggest a response to the Salt Typhoon Chinese hacking incident, though no official link ties this to the Yemen plans. Critics, including former intelligence officials cited by Reuters, argue these systems exist to prevent leaks like the one to Jeffrey Goldberg, who published the chat’s contents in The Atlantic. The administration insists no classified data was compromised, but the incident underscores a tension between operational needs and established safeguards.

The fallout continues as lawmakers demand answers. Readers can explore the leaked details at The Atlantic and weigh in on whether convenience should trump security in national defense.

---

Sources

• The Atlantic – Published excerpts of the Signal chat, including operational details.
• Reuters – Expert critique on bypassing secure government systems.
• Department of Defense – Warning on Signal vulnerabilities, issued March 2025.
• Signal.org – Technical overview of encryption capabilities.