711
submitted 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/politics@lemmy.world

Resurfaced comments in which new House Speaker Mike Johnson talked about how he and his son monitor each other's online activity using "accountability software" have raised questions about national security.

Johnson, a Republican who was first elected to Congress in 2016, spoke in 2022 about how he installed software called Covenant Eyes on his devices during a panel called "War on Technology" at Cypress Baptist Church in Benton, Louisiana, Rolling Stone reported.

According to a clip first posted on X, formerly Twitter, by a user called Receipt Maven, Johnson spoke about how the subscription-based service helps people abstain from internet porn and "objectionable" websites.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] rigatti@lemmy.world 5 points 2 years ago

If it's high enough classification, he would not have access on his personal phone though.

[-] Fades@lemmy.world 21 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

The risk does not stop at the line of classification. Comms for example, anyone he texts or is texted to those screens are taken and stored off.

It is a risk to national security, period. It’s a fuckin social engineering jackpot for fucks sake.

[-] NuXCOM_90Percent@lemmy.zip 9 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

If he is following proper protocols and procedures: Yes

If he were following proper protocol, he wouldn't willingly install spyware in the first place.

And unless he is VERY strictly separating his work and his personal devices, there is inevitable leakage. Even something as simple as getting too close to the line on "So I need to fly out to Nevada to check out these weather balloon things and make sure everything is fine" and so forth.

But also? All of this is publicly available information. At a high level, there are two kinds of classified material. Stuff that is classified by specific rules and are generally based on science and technology. And the other is "national security" and is more or less anything a bureaucrat thinks is important.

So the POTUS liking two shots of soy milk in his coffee is not classified because soy milk and coffee are not classified. But if it is decided that "terrorists" might attack the soy milk supply chain? Suddenly there is an argument that that information is sensitive.

And there are a LOT of arguments to be made regarding the Speaker of the House's personal ties and vulnerabilities becoming "sensitive".

And then you have people like trump who just give zero shits and are likely to take a picture of a document so they can show it to other people later.

[-] metallic_z3r0@infosec.pub 3 points 2 years ago

Right, even if he had access to classified information in an unsecured space, the classified system would have its own encryption device and its own systems separate from the unclassified network.

[-] TheSanSabaSongbird@lemdro.id 2 points 2 years ago

That's only part of it though. Another component is that anyone having access to his personal devices --let alone his porn habits-- potentially has compromising information on him. Once he's compromised, he's a national security threat, full stop.

What if he's having an affair and there's evidence of it on his phone? What if he's doing other shady shit that involves not having a bank account? You better believe the Russians and/or the CCP would love to have compromat on the Speaker.

[-] rigatti@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago

Sure, but there's probably already plenty of ways to compromise these idiots.

this post was submitted on 06 Nov 2023
711 points (98.5% liked)

politics

31007 readers
2199 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles. Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to US politics and contain quality and original content. Social Media adjacent hosts like Substack are allowed, but ONLY if they tie back to a company/subsidiary. No personal or friend group blogs and no self-promotion. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and re-hosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing other users of being bots or paid actors.
  3. No memes, trolling, misinformation, or low-effort posts/comments (including reposts). If you see posts like this that anger you, do not engage. Report, block, and live a happier life than they do. Any slap-fight is subject to comment removals. Fights full of rule violations will result in temporary bans to cool off.
  4. No manipulating votes via bots or alt accounts; this will result in permanent bans. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in an account ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be permanently banned.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules and use critical thinking when reading, posting, and commenting. Users that repeatedly have comments or posts removed, weaponize reports, or violate the code of conduct, will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users. The reason(s) behind moderator action(s) are publicly available through the Modlog.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS