Signal phishing campaign targets Germany’s Bundestag President Julia Klöckner


Signal phishing campaign targets Germany’s Bundestag President Julia Klöckner

Pierluigi Paganini
April 24, 2026

Germany’s Bundestag President Klöckner was targeted in a Signal phishing attack via a fake CDU group chat.

Germany’s Bundestag President Julia Klöckner has reportedly become the latest European political figure targeted through a Signal-based phishing attack, reported Der Spiegel. The incident is another reminder that even trusted messaging apps can become entry points when attackers go after the person, not the platform.

The attack targeted Klöckner’s phone through a Signal group chat linked to CDU officials. Chancellor Friedrich Merz was reportedly included but not compromised, and at least one other CDU lawmaker was also affected.

“Chancellor Friedrich Merz is also part of the group, although German domestic intelligence reportedly found no evidence his phone had been compromised. Der Spiegel also reported that at least one other CDU lawmaker was affected.” reported Politico.

What makes this case notable is not just the target, but the method. Attackers did not need to break Signal’s encryption. Instead, they appear to have used a phishing-style technique to trick users into revealing sensitive information, including PIN codes. That is a classic example of how cybercriminals often bypass strong technology by exploiting human trust.

The timing is also important. European cybersecurity and intelligence agencies had already warned earlier this month about a campaign in which attackers posed as a fake Signal support chatbot. The goal was simple: lure users into handing over authentication details. Germany’s domestic intelligence service had issued a similar warning in February, which shows that the threat was already known before this incident surfaced.

This matters because Signal has long been viewed as a secure communications tool. The European Commission has recommended since 2020 that officials use it for non-work communication. But secure design does not protect against account takeover, social engineering, or device compromise. If an attacker can get access to the phone number, the verification code, or the PIN, the app’s underlying security can be undermined.

The broader lesson is that messaging apps are only one layer of protection. Security now depends on the entire chain: the device, the account, the recovery process, and the user’s ability to spot deception. A secure app can still be weakened by weak endpoint hygiene, reused credentials, or a convincing fake support message.

For public officials, the risks are even higher. Their communications can expose political strategy, internal discussions, and personal details that attackers can later use for fraud, espionage, or influence operations. That makes identity protection and device hardening just as important as encryption.

Organizations and public bodies should treat this as a warning for their own staff. Any app used for sensitive communication should be backed by strong mobile security controls, phishing awareness, and rapid incident response procedures. Staff should be trained to ignore unsolicited support messages, verify any request through a separate trusted channel, and report suspicious account activity immediately.

There is also a governance issue here. If officials are encouraged to use secure consumer apps for private communication, those apps need to be protected by clear policies on device enrollment, PIN management, and recovery settings. Otherwise, the security benefit is only partial.

The key point is simple: modern attacks often succeed by attacking trust, not encryption. This case shows how a well-designed app can still become part of a compromise when users are deceived into giving away access. For governments and enterprises alike, the answer is not to abandon secure messaging, but to pair it with stronger identity controls, better training, and faster detection of phishing attempts.

In March, a cyberattack targeting Signal and WhatsApp users hit high-ranking German officials, including former BND Vice President Arndt Freytag von Loringhoven. The official reported being contacted by someone posing as Signal support and asked for his PIN. This incident highlights a broader cyber espionage campaign against sensitive individuals in security agencies and political positions.

“He is far from the only prominent victim of the global wave of attacks against user accounts at Signal and WhatsApp. According to SPIEGEL, high-ranking German politicians have reported themselves to the authorities as victims, and active officials in security agencies have also been attacked.” reads the report published by SPIEGEL. Back in February, the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution (BfV) and the Federal Office for Information Security (BSI) classified the attack as “security-relevant” and urged those affected to come forward. The BfV stated that this warning met with a “high response” and that they believe it prevented even worse damage.”

German authorities warned Signal users to check for suspicious signs, such as unknown devices listed under “paired devices” or unexpected prompts to re-register accounts.

In the case of former BND official Arndt Freytag von Loringhoven, attackers used his compromised account to send a malicious link to contacts. He quickly warned them not to open it and deleted his account. Investigators believe the incident is part of ongoing hybrid campaigns linked to Russia. Given Loringhoven’s work on Russian hybrid warfare and his book Putin’s Attack on Germany, he was likely considered a high-value target.

Signal warned that the attacks rely on social engineering, with attackers posing as trusted contacts or fake support services to trick users into sharing verification codes or PINs. The company stressed it will never ask for these details via messages or social media and urged users to stay vigilant and never share login codes.

Follow me on Twitter: @securityaffairs and Facebook and Mastodon

Pierluigi Paganini

(SecurityAffairs – hacking, Bundestag)







Source link

Leave a Reply

Subscribe to Our Newsletter

Get our latest articles delivered straight to your inbox. No spam, we promise.

Recent Reviews


As I’m writing this, NVIDIA is the largest company in the world, with a market cap exceeding $4 trillion. Team Green is now the leader among the Magnificent Seven of the tech world, having surpassed them all in just a few short years.

The company has managed to reach these incredible heights with smart planning and by making the right moves for decades, the latest being the decision to sell shovels during the AI gold rush. Considering the current hardware landscape, there’s simply no reason for NVIDIA to rush a new gaming GPU generation for at least a few years. Here’s why.

Scarcity has become the new normal

Not even Nvidia is powerful enough to overcome market constraints

Global memory shortages have been a reality since late 2025, and they aren’t just affecting RAM and storage manufacturers. Rather, this impacts every company making any product that contains memory or storage—including graphics cards.

Since NVIDIA sells GPU and memory bundles to its partners, which they then solder onto PCBs and add cooling to create full-blown graphics cards, this means that NVIDIA doesn’t just have to battle other tech giants to secure a chunk of TSMC’s limited production capacity to produce its GPU chips. It also has to procure massive amounts of GPU memory, which has never been harder or more expensive to obtain.

While a company as large as NVIDIA certainly has long-term contracts that guarantee stable memory prices, those contracts aren’t going to last forever. The company has likely had to sign new ones, considering the GPU price surge that began at the beginning of 2026, with gaming graphics cards still being overpriced.

With GPU memory costing more than ever, NVIDIA has little reason to rush a new gaming GPU generation, because its gaming earnings are just a drop in the bucket compared to its total earnings.

NVIDIA is an AI company now

Gaming GPUs are taking a back seat

A graph showing NVIDIA revenue breakdown in the last few years. Credit: appeconomyinsights.com

NVIDIA’s gaming division had been its golden goose for decades, but come 2022, the company’s data center and AI division’s revenue started to balloon dramatically. By the beginning of fiscal year 2023, data center and AI revenue had surpassed that of the gaming division.

In fiscal year 2026 (which began on July 1, 2025, and ends on June 30, 2026), NVIDIA’s gaming revenue has contributed less than 8% of the company’s total earnings so far. On the other hand, the data center division has made almost 90% of NVIDIA’s total revenue in fiscal year 2026. What I’m trying to say is that NVIDIA is no longer a gaming company—it’s all about AI now.

Considering that we’re in the middle of the biggest memory shortage in history, and that its AI GPUs rake in almost ten times the revenue of gaming GPUs, there’s little reason for NVIDIA to funnel exorbitantly priced memory toward gaming GPUs. It’s much more profitable to put every memory chip they can get their hands on into AI GPU racks and continue receiving mountains of cash by selling them to AI behemoths.

The RTX 50 Super GPUs might never get released

A sign of times to come

NVIDIA’s RTX 50 Super series was supposed to increase memory capacity of its most popular gaming GPUs. The 16GB RTX 5080 was to be superseded by a 24GB RTX 5080 Super; the same fate would await the 16GB RTX 5070 Ti, while the 18GB RTX 5070 Super was to replace its 12GB non-Super sibling. But according to recent reports, NVIDIA has put it on ice.

The RTX 50 Super launch had been slated for this year’s CES in January, but after missing the show, it now looks like NVIDIA has delayed the lineup indefinitely. According to a recent report, NVIDIA doesn’t plan to launch a single new gaming GPU in 2026. Worse still, the RTX 60 series, which had been expected to debut sometime in 2027, has also been delayed.

A report by The Information (via Tom’s Hardware) states that NVIDIA had finalized the design and specs of its RTX 50 Super refresh, but the RAM-pocalypse threw a wrench into the works, forcing the company to “deprioritize RTX 50 Super production.” In other words, it’s exactly what I said a few paragraphs ago: selling enterprise GPU racks to AI companies is far more lucrative than selling comparatively cheaper GPUs to gamers, especially now that memory prices have been skyrocketing.

Before putting the RTX 50 series on ice, NVIDIA had already slashed its gaming GPU supply by about a fifth and started prioritizing models with less VRAM, like the 8GB versions of the RTX 5060 and RTX 5060 Ti, so this news isn’t that surprising.

So when can we expect RTX 60 GPUs?

Late 2028-ish?

A GPU with a pile of money around it. Credit: Lucas Gouveia / How-To Geek

The good news is that the RTX 60 series is definitely in the pipeline, and we will see it sooner or later. The bad news is that its release date is up in the air, and it’s best not to even think about pricing. The word on the street around CES 2026 was that NVIDIA would release the RTX 60 series in mid-2027, give or take a few months. But as of this writing, it’s increasingly likely we won’t see RTX 60 GPUs until 2028.

If you’ve been following the discussion around memory shortages, this won’t be surprising. In late 2025, the prognosis was that we wouldn’t see the end of the RAM-pocalypse until 2027, maybe 2028. But a recent statement by SK Hynix chairman (the company is one of the world’s three largest memory manufacturers) warns that the global memory shortage may last well into 2030.

If that turns out to be true, and if the global AI data center boom doesn’t slow down in the next few years, I wouldn’t be surprised if NVIDIA delays the RTX 60 GPUs as long as possible. There’s a good chance we won’t see them until the second half of 2028, and I wouldn’t be surprised if they miss that window as well if memory supply doesn’t recover by then. Data center GPUs are simply too profitable for NVIDIA to reserve a meaningful portion of memory for gaming graphics cards as long as shortages persist.


At least current-gen gaming GPUs are still a great option for any PC gamer

If there is a silver lining here, it is that current-gen gaming GPUs (NVIDIA RTX 50 and AMD Radeon RX 90) are still more than powerful enough for any current AAA title. Considering that Sony is reportedly delaying the PlayStation 6 and that global PC shipments are projected to see a sharp, double-digit decline in 2026, game developers have little incentive to push requirements beyond what current hardware can handle.

DLSS 5, on the other hand, may be the future of gaming, but no one likes it, and it will take a few years (and likely the arrival of the RTX 60 lineup) for it to mature and become usable on anything that’s not a heckin’ RTX 5090.

If you’re open to buying used GPUs, even last-gen gaming graphics cards offer tons of performance and are able to rein in any AAA game you throw at them. While we likely won’t get a new gaming GPU from NVIDIA for at least a few years, at least the ones we’ve got are great today and will continue to chew through any game for the foreseeable future.



Source link