When Dominic Cummings, former chief adviser to Boris Johnson, claimed that China had compromised the system used to transfer Britain’s most secret government data, it was more than a political bombshell — it was a reminder of how fragile the world’s most secure communication networks really are. According to Cummings, Beijing obtained “vast amounts” of classified information over several years, including “Strap” material, the UK’s highest level of secrecy. If true, the breach would rank among the most serious in British history.
This incident exposes the paradox of 21st-century statecraft: even the most encrypted systems are never entirely safe from determined adversaries. Recent precedent underscores the stakes: between 2010 and 2012, Chinese counter-intelligence penetrated U.S. covert networks, exposing CIA sources whose identities were then compromised, resulting in arrests and even deaths. A similar breach of Whitehall’s “Strap”-level systems may have allowed China to map intelligence networks and identify key interlocutors.
This battle over secrecy is as old as war itself. Long before fiber-optic cables and quantum encryption, kings sent trusted couriers across enemy territory carrying messages sealed with wax and hope — and those couriers were often intercepted, their letters opened, copied, and resealed before delivery. The interception of the king’s messenger was the medieval equivalent of hacking a government server: an act that could expose alliances, betray armies, or topple a throne. Centuries later, during the Second World War, Allied codebreakers at Bletchley Park achieved the same feat on an industrial scale when they cracked Germany’s Enigma cipher, once deemed unbreakable. That triumph not only shortened the war but also established a pattern that endures to this day: every system built to guarantee secrecy simultaneously inspires an effort to breach it.
The 2015 hack of the Democratic National Committee (DNC) brought that ancient contest into the digital age. Russian operatives infiltrated internal servers, extracted sensitive communications, and turned them into instruments of political disruption. What began as a covert intrusion evolved into a public spectacle — a modern echo of Enigma’s logic, where knowledge itself becomes the weapon. The episode revealed that secrecy, far from ensuring control, can become a liability when states and institutions fail to defend their own information architecture. More recently, reports that members of the Trump administration used the encrypted app Signal for official exchanges have shown that secrecy can falter not only through foreign intrusion but through human error. This isa reminder that in the digital age, even efforts to protect information can expose new vulnerabilities.
Germany has also faced sophisticated cyber-espionage. Starting in late 2022, the Russian-linked hacking group APT 28 targeted Germany’s Social Democratic Party, exploiting a Microsoft Outlook vulnerability to steal emails and access accounts. Using a botnet of hundreds of compromised routers, the attackers concealed their activities until a globally coordinated operation, led by the FBI and Germany’s Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution (BfV), neutralised the campaign in early 2024. Through this attack, the hackers harvested sensitive political communications and gained insight into internal party operations, demonstrating how cyber-espionage can provide direct access to critical information without detection.
In Turkey, the fragility of state communications was revealed by a secret conversation in 2013 between senior officials, including then-Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoğlu, MİT Undersecretary Hakan Fidan and then-undersecretary Feridun Sinirlioğlu. The discussion involved plans for a false-flag operation in Syria, debating how to create a pretext for military intervention. The highly sensitive exchange was later leaked as an audio recording, which a Turkish court officially authenticated in 2019.
Technical intelligence remains and will continue to be one of the main tools and targets of modern espionage. Interception of confidential communications can be used to manipulate decision-making, coerce cooperation, or compromise loyalty, particularly in politically sensitive contexts. If China did indeed gain access to Britain’s most sensitive communications, the potential consequences could be severe for the Five Eyes alliance. The lesson is stark: breaches of secret communication channels are not merely technical failures; they can cascade into human, political, and geopolitical consequences of the highest order, turning information itself into a tool of power.
.svg.avif){kind=small}
