Secure Communication for Modern Military Operations

Defence forces depend on secure communication just as much as they depend on firepower. If messages are intercepted, changed, or leaked, military operations and national security can be at risk. As cyber threats grow, consumer messaging apps can no longer meet defence needs. This makes secure, controlled communication essential for all defence operations.

How Military Cyber Threats Are Changing

In recent years, the cyber threat landscape for military organizations has changed dramatically. In the past, military communications were vulnerable mainly to physical interception (e.g., tapping telephone lines, intercepting mail). Now, military Communications Systems face a much more complex array of Digital Threats from Nation-State Actors, Hostile Intelligence Agencies and Advanced Persistent Threat (APT) Groups with vast resources and capabilities that exceed those of typical Cybercriminals.

Since 2015, theU.S. Department of Defense has experienced more than 12,000 Cybersecurity Incidents affecting Department of Defense Systems. However, it is even more worrying that Nation-State Actors have already established a foothold inside Military Networks, not by attacking them but rather by preparing for future conflict. As Political Tensions between the Nations rise, those Adversaries have the ability to activate dormant access to disrupt Military Command Systems, disable Military Communications Networks and compromise Military Operational Security almost instantly.

Quantum Cryptography and the Future of Defence Communication

When it comes to Quantum Computing advancements, the Traditional Encryption methods are becoming more and more challenged by the advancement of Quantum Computer technology. On the other hand, Quantum Cryptography is based on the physical principles of Quantum Mechanics and will allow for secure communications as well as make it possible to detect real-time interception and tampering of transmitted information.

So as Defence and Military organizations develop their Long-Term Communications Security Strategies, Quantum Resistant Communication technology will become increasingly popular for protecting sensitive data from Future Computational Threats, such as those posed by Quantum Computers.

Spoofing and impersonation attacks involve adversaries infiltrating channels by impersonating trusted users, issuing false orders, or portraying the identities of commanders. In the military realm, if a soldier acts on a spoofed command for an action to perform, it can lead to friendly fire and catastrophic operational failure.

Malware: Personal Devices Using Personal Devices in a non-secure environment can be avenues for entry into larger military systems. These devices expose operational data, troop locations, and plans.

Ai Attacks: State actors have developed a means of using AI to perform advanced phishing, voice cloning to impersonate other commanders, and provide an avenue to spread misinformation among military personnel through deepfakes.

Why Public Messaging Apps Are Not Suitable for Defence Use

A lot of service members utilize commercial communications applications like WhatsApp, Signal and Telegram, which provide minimal encryption and privacy. In a military environment these systems can cause huge risks to secrecy, sovereignty, and mission effectiveness.

Secrecy and Sovereignty Concerns: Since messages pass through third-party servers and often across international borders, there is a concern of constant access to these servers and the potential violation of U.S. sovereignty. Therefore, messages discussing military operations should not be transmitted through foreign infrastructure.

Control of Operations: The command structure of military organizations dictates how they must manage their communications regarding policy compliance, collecting message logs for investigation purposes and maintaining an audit trail of communications. Commercial applications do not provide administrative controls, and therefore military leaders do not have access to view or monitor the communications of their personnel to verify policy compliance.

Easier to Intercept: Because commercial applications are designed for the general public and not for use in hostile environments, state actors who have developed advanced malware for phishing and spoofing will generally have an easier time targeting these systems.

Compatibility Issues with Classified Systems—Unauthorized Platforms Do Not Meet Encryption Standards, Identity Assurance Requirements & Compliance Frameworks for Handling Sensitive/Classified Data.

Non-Resiliency—Consumer Platforms Rely on Cloud Services that are Owned by Private Organizations. In crisis situations, there may be outages of these services, blocking through signal jamming, or do these services get compromised during critical times? The Nature of Military Systems Must Support Operational Functionality in Denied Environments, Areas with Limited Communication Capability, and Under Degraded Scenarios.

No Accountability Framework. Public Messaging Apps Allow Users to Remain Anonymous. There is no process to hold users accountable for breaching information, misusing the channels, or not following operational security protocols. Defense forces require systems with built-in accountability and audit trails available.

Foreign Intelligence Collection - Many Public Messaging Platforms Function Under Foreign Jurisdiction, and as a Result, They Can Be Used for Intelligence Collection by Adversarial Countries. All of the data stored on foreign servers is legally accessible by foreign countries; therefore, operational security and intelligence sources can be compromised.

Military-Grade Communication Standards

To comprehend secure communications that are of military grade, it is important to understand technical standards, encryption protocols, security compliance frameworks, and their requirements.

End-to-End Encryption and Cryptographic Standards

Advanced Encryption Standard (AES): AES is the encryption standard for secure military communications across the globe. AES is a symmetric encryption algorithm with key sizes of up to 256 bits and is mathematically so secure that, if an attacker were to try to decrypt an AES-protected message using brute force methods, that would require more power than exists today. This level of mathematical security guarantees the integrity of military communications

RSA and Elliptical Curve Cryptography: Military systems rely upon the use of asymmetric encryption methods to exchange encryption keys and digitally sign messages, which allow military forces to exchange encryption keys securely over potentially compromised channels and to verify that the message they receive is authentic.

Military Certification Standards: The NSA Type 1 standard is regarded as the most secure, with the highest level of assurance for customer confidence in the security of devices in the United States.

The NSA requires a device to be tested thoroughly against the NSA Type 1 standard and proven to have passed a rigorous evaluation process with access to highly classified cryptographic algorithms and to be subject to strict export restrictions.

Other types of military certification standards include the Common Criteria evaluation framework, FIPS 140-3 requirements, and NATO-aligned security standards.

Evolving Concerns Around AES-256 Encryption

Today, AES-256 has become a leading standard for encryption; however, the evolution of computer technologies, particularly quantum computers, has led to increased concerns for the future of AES-256's security level.

Research shows that as quantum technology continues to develop, the effective security margins that classical encryption standards provide may be greatly reduced.

Due to these concerns, many defense organizations are exploring new forms of layered security architectures, such as post-quantum cryptography, in order to protect their communications systems from future adversarial threats that will arise from advances in quantum computing.

Why Secure Communication Is Mission-Critical

Operational Command and Control

Current military strategy is based on instant operational synchronization of all ground actions, air actions, sea actions, and Commander HQ. Secure command communications offer commanders the ability to receive timely battlefield updates, to adapt their tactics on an ongoing basis, and to enable coordinated movements between dispersed ground assets.

Commanders without a secure mode are susceptible to operating off old or incorrect information, having their commands intercepted and so being able to prepare for defensive steps in advance. and have high levels of confusion regarding friendly forces' locations due to spoofing of communications.

Collaboration on Intelligence and Situational Awareness

Current best practice in providing real-time intelligence functionality relies on maintaining total confidence of data contained within an electronic platform shared by coalition partners.
integrity while ensuring intelligence reaches correct recipients without interception.

In coalition operations involving NATO allies or partner nations, secure communication systems must bridge diverse military infrastructures while respecting security protocols and compliance requirements.

Guarding Against Digital Sabotage

To destabilize operations today, adversaries typically use digital attacks against the digital infrastructure. Large-scale disinformation operations are used to create confusion within the adversary and their allies by spreading false orders and giving false information.

• Secure communications counteract such tactics by providing the following

• Verifying Message Source: All messages must originate from a known verified source before they are sent to personnel.

• Role of Access Control: Different channels are available to personnel based on their security clearance levels.

• Identifying Threats in Real Time: Using artificial intelligence, unique methods of machine learning will identify unusual patterns of behavior and unauthorized attempts to gain access.

• Establishing an Audit Trail: An audit trail provides complete documentation of all communications and allows for forensic examinations.

• Operational Continuity when Operating in Denied Environments

Both denied environments and offensive operations take place in degraded infrastructure, areas with active signal jamming, or where there are deliberate efforts to disrupt the operational area.

To ensure that secure communications are effective in these areas, it is essential that the secure communications system does not rely on the use of the Internet for security.

The Military has created Military-grade Platforms to provide:

Offline Messaging: In cases where internet connectivity is unavailable, messages will be queued until a connection has been established.

Alternative Communication Methods: Use of Alternate Satellite, RF Hopping, and Mesh networks ensure that secure communication is possible.

Low Latency Communication. Even when on limited bandwidth, soldiers are able to maintain real time coordination with team members and commanders.

Network Resilience: Redundant systems and automated fallbacks provide for ongoing operational communication in a secure mode.

Protecting Against Digital Sabotage

In modern conflict, adversaries attack digital infrastructure to destabilize operations. Sophisticated disinformation campaigns sow confusion, spread false orders, and deceive allied forces.

Secure communication combats these tactics through:

• Verified Messaging: Only messages from verified, authenticated sources reach personnel

• Role-Based Access Control: Different security clearance levels access different channels

• Real-Time Threat Detection: Machine learning identifies unusual patterns and unauthorized access

• Audit Trails: Complete records enable forensic analysis and accountability

Operational Continuity in Denied Environments

Many operations occur in areas with degraded infrastructure, active signal jamming, or deliberate disruption. Secure systems must operate reliably without depending on continuous internet connectivity.

Military-grade platforms provide:

• Offline Messaging: Messages queue when connectivity unavailable, transmit when restored

• Alternative Communication Channels: Satellite, radio frequency hopping, mesh networks ensure continuity

• Low-Latency Communication: Real-time coordination maintained even with limited bandwidth

• Network Resilience: Redundancy and automated fallback ensure communication continuity

Best Practices for Implementation

Choose Military Grade Platforms

Military seating should use platforms such as Rocket.Chat offering military grade encryption, customizable security for military operations, and complete data sovereignty through either on-premise hosting, or hosting on a sovereign (government approved / compliant) cloud.

Some key selection criteria for military organizations when selecting an appropriate platform include:

• Military Certifications: Government issued certifications from the USA (NSA Suite B), Common Criteria and NATO standards

• E2E (end to end) encryption: All communications on a given platform should use cryptographic encryptions utilizing the approved military encryption standards

• Complete data sovereignty: Military organizations must have total control of their infrastructure and the organization’s data

• Audit and Compliance: Platforms must support detailed audit logs including daily access control logs and provide support for compliance reporting.

Deploy On-Premises or Sovereign Cloud

For maximum security and data sovereignty, military organizations should deploy systems on-premises rather than relying on foreign commercial cloud services. On-premises deployment ensures organizational control over infrastructure, reduces unauthorized access risks, and maintains data within national boundaries.

Establish Backup Communication Channels

No military organization has a sole communication system that will never fail or be compromised. The military command and control organizations must maintain a variety of independent means of communication. Examples of independent means of communication are as follows:

• Military Auxiliary Radio System (MARS): This system uses amateur radio operators to help communicate during times when conventional means of communication are not working.

• Software-Defined Radios (SDRs): These radio systems are highly flexible and can adapt to multiple frequencies or protocols.

• Satellite Communication Networks: The capability to maintain communication with units located far from the land-connected infrastructure.

Communication Systems via Satellite: New technology makes available secure communications via satellite over great areas without dependence on any other type of infrastructure.

Conclusion

The modern battlefield lacks a single point of communication to link individual units into one coordinated entity, so having a secure way to communicate in a decentralized manner has become vital. In addition, command authority will not be established or operational decisions made without secure communications.

The breaking of any secure communication can result in the complete collapse of the mission.

State-sponsored entities are more sophisticated than simply infiltrating computers or intercepting radio transmissions. The technology available to state-sponsored groups provides them with the capability to attack and disrupt secure communications through cyber means and coordinate their information warfare against military forces.

General-purpose consumer messaging apps such as WhatsApp, Signal, and Telegram do not provide the required military-level security, sovereignty, auditability, and operational control over communications in hostile environments.

They are designed for consumer use and convenience and do not meet the requirements of military operations in the presence of an adversary.

FAQs

1) What is the difference between on-premise and cloud communication?

Organizations own and control the resources that power on-premise communication solutions, while public cloud solutions utilize the shared resources of many customers.

Organizations are able to have a greater degree of control over where their sensitive data is stored, who has access to their data, and how they will secure it.

2) Why do defense organizations use on-premises communication as it is considered to be more secure for defense?

The defense organization is able to keep all of their sensitive communications traffic on private, hardened, and secure networks. When this type of communication is sent over the public cloud, it exposes the traffic to an outside environment.

The defense organization can also create custom, military grade encryption, monitore, and access controls, which are specific to classified operations.

3) Is it possible for an organization to use on-premises communication systems without an internet connection?

Yes, air gapped/on-premises communication platforms can be located on highly isolated networks that will continue to operate, even when there is no direct internet connection. This is important for missions where external connectivity may be limited or pose a risk to security.

4) Are on-premises solutions more cost prohibitive than cloud?

On-premises deployments will generally incur greater start-up costs associated with the purchasing of hardware and facility upgrades and hiring skilled labor; however, for the defense, the long-term, operational and compliance value of having greater security, control, and compliance often will outweigh the initial costs.

5) Can defense organizations integrate modern tools with on-premise communication?

Modern on-premises platforms are capable of integrating with various tools such as secure messaging and voice/video conferencing.