Elon Musk’s team illegally connected the White House to the Starlink satellite internet service without approval from government specialists, causing a wave of outrage and concern about the security of official communications
This was reported by the reputable publication The Washington Post, citing three independent sources close to the incident, which took place earlier this February and has already sparked broad political resonance. According to the sources, at that time representatives of the Department of Performance of the Government (DOGE), which is subordinate to Elon Musk, did not receive any prior warning or approval from White House communications experts before going up to the roof of the neighboring Eisenhower Presidential Administration building. There, they installed a small terminal providing connectivity with Starlink satellites operated by SpaceX, which is owned by Musk himself. The installation of this system allowed White House staff to connect the internal network to a new internet channel without following standard security procedures for official information systems. Sources claim that White House security officials were not informed about these operations, and the relevant technical equipment has remained on the roof ever since. It is unclear whether the terminal is still active or was dismantled following media reports that emerged this month. It is known that in February, a Wi-Fi network named "Starlink Guest" appeared on official White House devices. According to sources, this network only asked for a password to connect, without requiring a username or additional authentication data. It is also reported that this network remains accessible to White House officials and visitors. The White House declined to comment directly on the situation, citing confidentiality and the need to preserve state and military secrets. Secret Service spokesperson Anthony Guglielmi stated that they "cannot discuss technical systems due to security concerns," adding that the incident is not regarded as a breach or security incident. He mentioned that authorities were aware of DOGE’s plans to improve internet access within the campus, and that this initiative did not raise security concerns. Standard practice at the White House involves all personal phones and devices connected to guest Wi-Fi networks being identified by names and passwords, which are verified and regularly updated. According to former staff, interactions between government personnel and the outside world are strictly controlled, and detailed records are kept of device identification times. Conversely, there is information that Starlink does not require such identification at all, allowing data transmission anonymously and without traces. Amid these events, members of the Democratic Party, including the House Oversight Committee, expressed concern about potential risks of confidential information leakage and possible interference with government systems’ operation. Some former White House officials even reached out to lawmakers requesting an investigation, but so far, no responses or additional information have been provided. It is worth noting that this incident has become a kind of episode illustrating the intensifying national debate about information technology security and the role of private companies in government affairs. Previously, it was revealed that former U.S. National Security Advisor Michael Wolff lost his position after a scandal related to his participation in the Signal messenger chat, where military operations in Yemen were discussed. Similarly, it is known that U.S. Secretary of Defense Pita Ghosset actively used this messenger for official purposes in the Pentagon, which may indicate a less strict approach to traditional security measures and diverse approaches to protecting classified information. In conclusion, the situation surrounding the White House’s connection to Starlink, which happened last February without proper approval and prior coordination, once again highlights the necessity of strict oversight over the use of new technologies in national security. This raises questions about the level of trust in private companies, their role within government structures, and potential threats to the security of vital national information systems. After all, it remains unknown what other technologies and networks are being used without proper regulation, and how many such official objects might remain unnoticed or be used without adequate response at the state security level.