Question of the day
Tuesday, Mar 25, 2025 - Posted by Rich Miller
* Background…
Signal is an open-source, encrypted messaging service for instant messaging, voice calls, and video calls. The instant messaging function includes sending text, voice notes, images, videos, and other files. Communication may be one-to-one between users or may involve group messaging. […]
Signal has a feature for scheduling messages. In addition, timers may be attached to messages to automatically delete the messages from both the sender’s and the receivers’ devices. The time period for keeping the message may be between five seconds and one week, and begins for each recipient once they have read their copy of the message.[
* Washington Post…
Two months into the Trump administration, there’s a sweeping shift underway in Washington as federal workers — and some high-level administration officials — migrate their correspondence to Signal in a zeal for secrecy. On Monday, the Atlantic magazine’s top editor said he was accidentally added to a Signal group in which U.S. officials planned a recent military attack in Yemen.
Until now, Signal was mostly known among Silicon Valley geeks and global dissidents for leaving few digital traces. It was lightly used among federal bureaucrats until they embraced it after Trump’s return to office as a tactic to shield communications, according to interviews with more than two dozen government workers — most of whom spoke on the condition of anonymity for fear of retaliation — and people they have consulted for advice.
These new government users have corresponded with a jolt in the popularity of Signal, which is operated by a nonprofit. The app has been downloaded more than 2.7 million times in the United States so far this year, a 36 percent increase from the same period in 2024, according to estimates from market intelligence firm Sensor Tower.
The changes mark a cultural transformation for federal government officials, employees and the public they serve: Adopting Signal and other surveillance-dodging tactics of spies and billionaires comes at the potential loss of a real-time history of the Trump administration.
Lauren Harper, who leads efforts for a more transparent federal government at the Freedom of the Press Foundation, said Americans will never have a full accounting of the policies made in their interests when officials and workers communicate in private channels that are closed off to U.S. citizens.
When you have “secrecy on each side,” Harper said, “the public has no way to understand what is happening inside the government.” […]
It wasn’t the first time that Signal correspondence has become a flash point for the Trump administration. Chats over Signal and other unorthodox communications by members of Elon Musk’s U.S. DOGE Service so alarmed a federal judge that he recently ordered DOGE to hand over documents, memos and correspondence to a group that had sued for access under public transparency laws.
* The Question: Should Illinois ban state and local government workers and officials from using apps like Signal to discuss official business? Explain.
- fs - Tuesday, Mar 25, 25 @ 11:58 am:
If public officials are using it to discuss public business, then yes absolutely. I’d argue it could already be a violation of open meetings act when those records are deleted.
- Candy Dogood - Tuesday, Mar 25, 25 @ 11:58 am:
===Should Illinois ban state and local government workers and officials from using apps like Signal to discuss official business? Explain. ===
Yes. Signal exists to keep communications private and messages are easily and permanently deleted and can be set to automatically delete.
It is pretty clearly a platform that would make it incredibly difficult to retain official communications in order to comply with the law, it is a platform that can easily be used to prevent any record of the law being broken from existing in order to determine that records were not kept.
Public officials should already know not to use an app like Signal to discuss official business without creating an official record of those conversations. A ban should be unnecessary, but I’d wager that a lot of people don’t know what signal is so it might be appropriate to issue a specific ban.
The application should absolutely not be allowed on any state or government owned device.
- ArchPundit - Tuesday, Mar 25, 25 @ 11:59 am:
Absolutely it should be banned for public business. It is not consistent with open records laws.
- Montrose - Tuesday, Mar 25, 25 @ 12:06 pm:
100%. This is an issue of updating laws to keep up with changing technology. It’s the app version passing secret notes back and forth and burning them after reading. That can’t be allowed in official government business.
- 47th Ward - Tuesday, Mar 25, 25 @ 12:10 pm:
Can a ban be enforced or merely punish after the fact? I’d support a ban, but like a lot of things, banning it and making it stick are two separate efforts.
Also, it’s fun to think of Brendan Kelly, Maj. Gen. Boyd, IEMA director Tate-Nadeau leaking our plans to invade Indiana on Signal.
- West Sider - Tuesday, Mar 25, 25 @ 12:11 pm:
Public Business is the public’s business should be an easy message- even for Democrats
- Give Us Barabbas - Tuesday, Mar 25, 25 @ 12:15 pm:
Ban it, couple reasons; could break the rules on ex parte communications leading to collusion on contracts. Who really owns the server it comes from and could an intelligence agency or foreign actor access that to gather sensitive information. Any communication tools the government uses need to be run from a secure government server, so there is a record.
- Anyone Remember - Tuesday, Mar 25, 25 @ 12:22 pm:
Yes.
“… as a tactic to shield communications … .”
Missouri GOP been doing things like this at least since Matt Blunt (2005-2009).
- Rich Miller - Tuesday, Mar 25, 25 @ 12:23 pm:
===Can a ban be enforced or merely punish after the fact?===
As with most any law, most people will follow the law, some will not, and some of those will wind up being punished.
- Friendly Bob Adams - Tuesday, Mar 25, 25 @ 12:28 pm:
The existing rules on electronic communication for state business are pretty clear. You are only supposed to use state equipment and state email. There’s a required training on this every year.
So I don’t think new rules are needed.
Of course people will still use their personal phones to text colleagues “hey let’s move that meeting to Monday”. They might even make a comment about their boss. Is that official business? Maybe maybe not.
- ArchPundit - Tuesday, Mar 25, 25 @ 12:31 pm:
====Missouri GOP been doing things like this at least since Matt Blunt (2005-2009).
Ed Martin is in the news again. Funny.
The thing about enforcement is that the more people doing it, the more phones and devices that keep a record. Are we going to catch every county board member who wants to hide a discussion? Probably not, but inevitably someone doesn’t follow the rules of getting rid of old messages.
- Candy Dogood - Tuesday, Mar 25, 25 @ 12:42 pm:
=== They might even make a comment about their boss.===
This one is probably protected by the 1st Amendment, if we still have that.
- Original Rambler - Tuesday, Mar 25, 25 @ 12:42 pm:
Yes. Signal usage inconsistent with open records laws.
- AlfondoGonz - Tuesday, Mar 25, 25 @ 12:43 pm:
Yes, but where things get dicey is when deciding what counts as “official business.” To be clear, based on what we’ve seen from the Trump Administration leaks, at least some of what was being discussed on Signal was official business.
However, apps like Signal and WhatsApp are often used by government workers trying to coordinate with their colleagues about things that would be shielded from FOIA requests without risking exposure to a FOIA request. There is a fear among government workers that if our phones were FOIA’d, then private, non-official business may emerge in the search for official business that may be embarrassing or worse. So, conversations with colleagues that are not to do with official business are held on such apps to allow some freedom of communication without violating open records laws while providing some layer of protection.
Unfortunately, the President decided to fill his administration with careless armatures, so now the whole thing looks shady.
- Lurker - Tuesday, Mar 25, 25 @ 12:49 pm:
“run by a non-profit”
I think Russia considers themselves a non-profit. But yeah, it sounds like somebody could throw some serious money at the operators and make them a huge profit.
- Just Me 2 - Tuesday, Mar 25, 25 @ 12:50 pm:
All communications made to or from a government employee/official are supposed to be public documents and FOIA’able. As long as the users create a system to archive communications it doesn’t matter to me what system they utilize.
- Felonious Gru - Tuesday, Mar 25, 25 @ 12:52 pm:
The purpose of Signal is to avoid FOIA, that’s sometimes done for political purposes and sometimes done for corrupt purposes and we will never know the difference, and that means it will tend more and more toward corruption as time continues.
Frankly I do not think anyone with a security clearance should have a Signal account, period. The FBI and other law enforcement agencies cannot secure the government if people are using communications that cannot be subpoenaed.
Signal also violates the Records Retention Act.
- Three Dimensional Checkers - Tuesday, Mar 25, 25 @ 12:56 pm:
Yes, it should be explicit. Enforcement is more important. It is very naive to think some FOIA Officer or even legal counsel is going to stop an elected official from doing this if they are really set on it.
It violates the Local Records Act and may violate 720 ILCS 5/32-8 if the intent is to defraud (which is often the case).
- Three Dimensional Checkers - Tuesday, Mar 25, 25 @ 1:12 pm:
Also, it is not clear to me that Mr. Waltz accidentally added Mr. Goldberg to the war plans group chat as opposed to someone hacking Mr. Waltz’s phone and then controlling his Signal account.
- Norseman - Tuesday, Mar 25, 25 @ 1:35 pm:
Yes. For transparency and accountability for meeting confidentiality rules.
As referenced, the MO MAGA GOP has been using WhatsApp to hide their activity. Hiding actions on encrypted sites to avoid accountability is the operational norm for the MAGA GOP. See no evil that they do, don’t speak of the evil they do, and hear nothing about that evil will ensure folks are blissfully ignorant.
- BackTrack - Tuesday, Mar 25, 25 @ 2:13 pm:
Apps like Signal should be prohibited for official government business, not only because they hinder transparency, but because their core design—end-to-end encryption with disappearing messages—directly conflicts with laws requiring the preservation of public records. Most communications made by government employees or officials in the course of official duties are public records and subject to FOIA or state equivalents.
While not all communications are public—personal messages unrelated to public business are excluded—apps like Signal make no distinction and actively erase history, increasing the risk of illegal concealment. As several commenters noted, using such tools to discuss public business may already constitute a violation of laws like the Open Meetings Act or the Local Records Act if records are knowingly deleted. The concern isn’t hypothetical; there’s a well-documented pattern of political actors using encrypted apps to evade oversight. While enforcement may be imperfect, that’s no reason not to establish a clear, enforceable policy: if a platform cannot retain records and ensure public access where required, it has no place in official government communication. But if communicating with signal to ensure privacy when you need to see a doctor and take time off then it perfectly fine.
- Leslie K - Tuesday, Mar 25, 25 @ 2:21 pm:
I think such use is banned by current Illinois law, but it wouldn’t hurt (and could help) to make that clearer/explicit.
- Jeremy Rosen - Tuesday, Mar 25, 25 @ 3:10 pm:
Not taking an exact position on the question but I’d observe that members of the GA do not have illinois.gov emails or if they do they do not use them. Nearly all have email addresses that are ___@gmail.com, or ___@senatorxxx.com
Do we think emails going to those addresses are currently being retained as public records?
- Anyone Remember - Tuesday, Mar 25, 25 @ 4:13 pm:
“illinois.gov” email is thru DoIT, thought the GA got their IT services via LIS (ilga.gov). Could be in error.
- Dirty Red - Tuesday, Mar 25, 25 @ 5:49 pm:
My understanding of public records retention law already restricts the use of Signal and other messaging services unless they allow for seven years of local retention and public disclosure. Perhaps we could talk instead about how to improve enforcement mechanisms.