275
Trump’s acting cyber chief uploaded sensitive files into a public version of ChatGPT
(www.politico.com)
this post was submitted on 27 Jan 2026
275 points (100.0% liked)
politics
27588 readers
4261 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- 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:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- 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 another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- 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.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple 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.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
You know... headlines should be a bit more specific.
Sensitive files could mean a lot of things. Like, he uploaded CSAM. or national security secrets. or his personal identfying documents.
Doesn't really matter, since he's incompetent and should be removed.
The information is literally in the first sentence of the article that I don't think you read:
It's not journalists' fault that you want to consume the news as a series of disconnected headlines like you're in a dopamine famine. This headline conveys the gist excellently; the fact that they were contracting documents is superfluous, while the fact they were sensitive is the entire problem.
Also, it can't mean he "uploaded national security secrets" because that's definitionally not what "sensitive" means in the context of US government documents.
it's funny.
You're critizing me for using a headline to determine if the article is worth my time to actually read, while not actually reading my comment. (And by the way, that's exactly what headlines are for.)
And no, not every article posted here is worth my time or my interest.
And yes, in the context of journalism, "sensitive documents" could be anything that is either classified or confidential. that distinction is important. and in a journalistic setting (which this is, and not 'the context of the us government'... ya dingbat), it could be anything from "how much TP is being consumed in the restrooms" which could be considered an analog for staffing levels, to classified materials (aka national secrets.)
Oh. and here's politico reporting on Kegseth's signal leaks. Attack details are definitely highly classified and not merely confidential.
So it was worth the time for a comment but not to read?
If you aren’t going to read the article you really don’t have useful input for the comments.
it was worth the time to comment and bitch about wasting my time.
the headline was clickbait.
You do not know what clickbait means.
How can you know? You still haven’t even read the article.
"in the context of US government documents"... ya dingbat. Living with functional illiteracy must be so difficult, but it understandably makes it really hard to just dip into an article and check the first paragraph before commenting.
Anyway, I acknowledge now that Politico has used "sensitive" in place of "classified". The point about that not being what "sensitive" means, however, is ancillary to the point that it is not hard at all to just check an article every once in a while, and it's not journalists' fault that you're unwilling to do that. The headline got across its point fine. We're not ten years old, and the news isn't a TikTok feed. It took me 10 seconds to click the article and read just the first paragraph. I have really bad attention problems, and this is sad even to me.
since you're also apparently "too lazy to check linked sources:...
here's the screenshot of the politico article I linked:
an article that's about Kegseth's signal leaks regarding the attacks against the Houthis that absolutely did contain classified information
So you can argue that it should be that way all you want, but politico is the one you need to be arguing with. have fun with that.
I hope you realize I said:
The part about "functional illiteracy" was my way of trying to be a rude asshole, but now I'm actually concerned.