I'm completely unfamiliar with what systems exist, but here's what the article states:
> the White House had authorized the use of Signal, largely because there is no alternative platform to text in real time across different agencies, two people familiar with the matter said.
> Previous administrations, including the Biden White House, did not develop an alternative platform to Signal, one of the people said.
Are you saying these sources are dissembling? Wouldn't surprise me at this point, but just making sure I understand what you're saying.
The systems exist are in the form of "you go into a secure room with specially-networked computers and do your sensitive comms there." These are secure not only because of the use of strong encryption (which Signal does) but also because of the restricted access (which Signal doesn't). You can't accidentally add a journalist on these secure systems for the simple reason that the US government doesn't give accounts or physical access to randos (which Signal effectively does).
Thanks for clarifying! Certainly seems like dissembling to me. Wish news organizations actually did the due diligence and reported these kinds of details.
I mean, if the devices exist, I'm skeptical its that hard to just give them to whomever you want to use them and give them all DoD accounts or whatever. The people involved being in different agencies seems like a dodge.
> the White House had authorized the use of Signal, largely because there is no alternative platform to text in real time across different agencies, two people familiar with the matter said.
> Previous administrations, including the Biden White House, did not develop an alternative platform to Signal, one of the people said.
Are you saying these sources are dissembling? Wouldn't surprise me at this point, but just making sure I understand what you're saying.