A leaked Signal chat has revealed that top officials from the Trump administration, including Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, National Security Adviser Michael Waltz and CIA Director John Ratcliffe, discussed plans for a military strike on Yemen.

The messages were accidentally sent to The Atlantic's editor-in-chief, Jeffrey Goldberg, raising major concerns about the security of sensitive military operations. The administration has played down the incident, saying no secret information was shared. At a Senate hearing, intelligence chief Tulsi Gabbard and CIA Director John Ratcliffe confirmed that the messages did not contain classified material. President Donald Trump also dismissed concerns about the security breach. However, experts warn that even non-classified military planning details in an unsecured chat could be risky, especially since the conversation included real-time operational information. The chat group named "Houthi PC small group" included detailed information about the attack's timing and logistics.

At 11:44 a.m. Eastern Time on March 15, Hegseth sent a message giving a real-time update on the mission. He mentioned that the weather conditions were good and confirmed with Central Command (CENTCOM) that the operation was moving forward. He then shared the planned launch times for F-18 fighter jets and MQ-9 drones, along with a timeline for the expected strikes. According to his message, the first bombs were scheduled to drop at 2:15 p.m. Eastern Time. 

Goldberg accidentally received the messages and saw the details two hours before the airstrikes began. If hostile groups had gotten this information, it could have put American forces in danger. The discussion also included intelligence about targets. Waltz later confirmed in the chat that a key Houthi target had been seen entering a building just before the strike. Vice President J.D. Vance responded to the news with a single word: "Excellent."

According to security experts, the hack is concerning since even military information that is not classified might include useful intelligence. "If adversaries had access to this chat, they could have taken immediate countermeasures, relocated assets, or even pre-emptively struck US forces," said former NSA analyst Jake Williams. "It's not just about classification. It's about operational security." After The Atlantic first reported the story, the administration kept saying the magazine had misrepresented the messages. In response, The Atlantic asked the White House, the CIA, the Department of Defense, and other national security agencies if they had any objections to publishing the full conversation.

White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt clarified that the information was not classified. However, she mentioned that the conversation was "intended to be internal and private" and opposed its release, according to reports by The Atlantic. Experts believe that using an unsecured messaging app for important military discussions is a serious security mistake. Although the messages were not officially classified, they included real-time operational plans and intelligence details. Security analysts caution that even routine military updates should always be shared through secure channels, especially with the growing risk of cyber threats and intelligence leaks.

Cyber intelligence specialist Robert Lee points out that discussing military operations on Signal is risky, even though the app is encrypted. "It's one thing for junior officers to use it for coordination, but for senior administration officials to share time-sensitive operational details in a Signal group chat is a glaring security oversight," Lee said. He explained that while Signal is safe for personal use, it does not meet government security standards for handling sensitive information.

The Trump administration has not clearly explained how Goldberg ended up in the chat. Waltz mentioned that he is still looking into how it happened. Some officials think a staff member may have added his number by mistake, but no one has taken responsibility. This incident has raised concerns about how top officials communicate, and some lawmakers are now calling for stricter rules on military discussions. The incident highlights the need for stricter communication regulations, according to Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Senator Mark Warner. "Whether classified or not, operational details of a military strike should not be floating around in a Signal chat," Warner stated.

"This administration has shown a pattern of carelessness when it comes to national security." This isn’t the first time people have raised concerns about how the Trump administration handles sensitive information. In 2023, reports came out that senior officials often used personal email accounts for government work. Then, in 2024, a leaked audio recording revealed talks about possible secret operations in Iran. These incidents have added to worries about whether the administration is following security rules, The Atlantic reported.

As the fallout from the leaked chat continues, officials haven’t yet confirmed if they will change any internal policies to prevent similar issues in the future. However, security experts warn that this breach could have long-term effects. "Military planning relies on secrecy and unpredictability," said Williams. "Once that's compromised, even unintentionally, it can change the calculus of conflict."

The White House has not taken any disciplinary action regarding the leak, though internal reviews are reportedly in progress. Meanwhile, the Yemen operation continued as planned, with US airstrikes targeting multiple Houthi positions in Sana'a and Hodeidah. CENTCOM has not yet released a complete battle damage assessment, but early reports indicate that the strikes successfully destroyed key Houthi missile sites.