+0.18 Discord says 70k users may have had their government IDs leaked in breach (www.theverge.com S:+0.04 )
780 points by PaulKeeble 142 days ago | 429 comments on HN | Mild positive Editorial · v3.7 · 2026-02-28 12:32:51
Summary Privacy & Data Security Acknowledges
This article reports on a significant data breach at Discord affecting approximately 70,000 users whose government-issued identification documents were exposed via a compromised third-party customer service provider. The reporting documents a serious privacy violation (Article 12), presents Discord's official response and denial of exaggerated breach claims, and notes cooperation with law enforcement and data protection authorities. The coverage is measured and well-sourced but gives no direct voice to affected users, only to the corporation and law enforcement.
Article Heatmap
Preamble: +0.16 — Preamble P Article 1: ND — Freedom, Equality, Brotherhood Article 1: No Data — Freedom, Equality, Brotherhood 1 Article 2: ND — Non-Discrimination Article 2: No Data — Non-Discrimination 2 Article 3: +0.28 — Life, Liberty, Security 3 Article 4: ND — No Slavery Article 4: No Data — No Slavery 4 Article 5: ND — No Torture Article 5: No Data — No Torture 5 Article 6: +0.12 — Legal Personhood 6 Article 7: ND — Equality Before Law Article 7: No Data — Equality Before Law 7 Article 8: +0.06 — Right to Remedy 8 Article 9: ND — No Arbitrary Detention Article 9: No Data — No Arbitrary Detention 9 Article 10: ND — Fair Hearing Article 10: No Data — Fair Hearing 10 Article 11: 0.00 — Presumption of Innocence 11 Article 12: +0.44 — Privacy 12 Article 13: +0.12 — Freedom of Movement 13 Article 14: +0.06 — Asylum 14 Article 15: +0.06 — Nationality 15 Article 16: ND — Marriage & Family Article 16: No Data — Marriage & Family 16 Article 17: ND — Property Article 17: No Data — Property 17 Article 18: ND — Freedom of Thought Article 18: No Data — Freedom of Thought 18 Article 19: +0.12 — Freedom of Expression 19 Article 20: ND — Assembly & Association Article 20: No Data — Assembly & Association 20 Article 21: +0.06 — Political Participation 21 Article 22: ND — Social Security Article 22: No Data — Social Security 22 Article 23: ND — Work & Equal Pay Article 23: No Data — Work & Equal Pay 23 Article 24: ND — Rest & Leisure Article 24: No Data — Rest & Leisure 24 Article 25: ND — Standard of Living Article 25: No Data — Standard of Living 25 Article 26: ND — Education Article 26: No Data — Education 26 Article 27: ND — Cultural Participation Article 27: No Data — Cultural Participation 27 Article 28: +0.06 — Social & International Order 28 Article 29: +0.12 — Duties to Community 29 Article 30: ND — No Destruction of Rights Article 30: No Data — No Destruction of Rights 30
Negative Neutral Positive No Data
Aggregates
Editorial Mean +0.18 Structural Mean +0.04
Weighted Mean +0.17 Unweighted Mean +0.13
Max +0.44 Article 12 Min 0.00 Article 11
Signal 13 No Data 18
Confidence 15% Volatility 0.11 (Low)
Negative 0 Channels E: 0.6 S: 0.4
SETL +0.17 Editorial-dominant
FW Ratio 53% 23 facts · 20 inferences
Evidence: High: 2 Medium: 1 Low: 10 No Data: 18
Theme Radar
Foundation Security Legal Privacy & Movement Personal Expression Economic & Social Cultural Order & Duties Foundation: 0.16 (1 articles) Security: 0.28 (1 articles) Legal: 0.06 (3 articles) Privacy & Movement: 0.17 (4 articles) Personal: 0.00 (0 articles) Expression: 0.09 (2 articles) Economic & Social: 0.00 (0 articles) Cultural: 0.00 (0 articles) Order & Duties: 0.09 (2 articles)
HN Discussion 20 top-level · 30 replies
lschueller 2025-10-08 23:22 UTC link
Asking this out of curiosity: is it a requirement, that such data is being stored once the verification process is completed?
neilv 2025-10-09 01:01 UTC link
This is not OK, and the reporting is not OK.

Opening with:

> Discord has identified approximately 70,000 users that may have had their government ID photos exposed as part of a customer service data breach announced last week, spokesperson Nu Wexler tells The Verge.

Then a big PR quote, letting a potential wrongdoer further spin it.

Then closing with:

> In its announcement last week, Discord said that information like names, usernames, emails, the last four digits of credit cards, and IP addresses also may have been impacted by the breach.

This is awful corporate PR language, not journalism, on a big story about probable corporate negligence resulting in harm to tens of thousands people.

Here's the bare minimum kind of lede I expect on this reporting:

Discord may have leaked sensitive personal information about 70,000 users -- including (but not necessarily limited to) government IDs, names, usernames, email addresses, last 4 digits of SSN, and IP addresses.

I'm ready to block both Discord and The Verge.

PaulKeeble 2025-10-09 01:07 UTC link
The hackers claim they have data of 5.5 million, discord is saying 70k. Hmmmm
tifik 2025-10-09 01:13 UTC link
I don't know if I just became cynical and jaded, but is this really surprising to anyone in any way? Any time I give out my personal information to anyone for any reason, I basically treat it as 'any member of public can now access it'.

Even if a service doesn't have it in their TOS that they sell it to 3rd parties, they might do it anyway, or there will, sooner or later, be a breach of their poorly secured system.

To make it clear - I don't particularly blame any one corporation, this is a systemic issue of governments not having/not enforcing serious security measures. I just completely dropped the expectation of my information being private, and for the very few bits that I do actually want to stay private, I just don't, or allow anyone to, digitalize or reproduce them at all in any way.

fishmicrowaver 2025-10-09 01:18 UTC link
You've got to be a complete moron uploading your gov ID to discord
mikert89 2025-10-09 01:25 UTC link
When can people start going to jail for this kind of thing
elevation 2025-10-09 01:25 UTC link
I didn't feel comfortable giving discord my phone number when they demanded it, so I lost access to the open source communities that insist on collaborating there.

I wish breaches like this would cause people to reconsider their choices but sadly, it's unlikely most users will move.

codedokode 2025-10-09 02:14 UTC link
Companies usually promise that the ID would be used only for validation and then immediately deleted. How so many IDs could leak then? They verify millions of IDs per month?
EGreg 2025-10-09 02:53 UTC link
Those are rookie numbers.

Time to pump up those numbers…

we publish this every year or so: https://qbix.com/blog/

quintes 2025-10-09 02:57 UTC link
Why. I see Australia is intending on blocking YouTube and other platforms. Expect this more regularly
Anduia 2025-10-09 05:22 UTC link
Discord uses Zendesk (1). However in the press release they don't name the third party that was compromised, and Zendesk denies that it was their service.

What other third party was Discord using if not Zendesk? Who's reputation are they protecting?

[1] https://www.zendesk.fr/customer/discord/

Vipsy 2025-10-09 06:15 UTC link
One important problem that's mostly ignored is the lack of transparency about the third-party providers handling such sensitive ID documents. When a breach occurs, public statements rarely name the exact vendor responsible, making it difficult for affected users to understand who actually had access and who might still have their data. This opacity delays accountability and creates ongoing risks, since users have no meaningful way to audit or assess the practices of these shadow providers. Unless this layer of the data-handling ecosystem is discussed and regulated, future breaches will remain inevitable and largely untraceable.
eleveriven 2025-10-09 06:44 UTC link
The whole "it wasn't us, it was our third-party vendor" line is getting way too common. If you're collecting government IDs for age verification, the security bar should be extremely high... no matter who's handling the data
eternauta3k 2025-10-09 06:46 UTC link
More governments should provide a system like the German electronic ID*, which lets you prove your age without revealing other information.

* Tragically underused because impractical

miroljub 2025-10-09 07:31 UTC link
It's great news. Introducing totalitarian laws and rushing companies to implement them, who would've thought something would go wrong?

I hope this incident and future data breaches will finally raise awareness of which direction many regimes are going.

verytrivial 2025-10-09 09:41 UTC link
ID checks, driven by prudishness, are an absolute gift to the big social media companies. They're the only entities whom (a) already know the check's answers, and (b) have the resources to keep hackers largely at bay.

I am not surprised these laws are landing with such little resistence.

ktosobcy 2025-10-09 11:31 UTC link
I kinda hope and root for EU's spec (https://ageverification.dev/Technical%20Specification/archit...) with "Zero Knowledge Proof" that wouldn't require passing actual ID to the service…
atbvu 2025-10-09 12:17 UTC link
Every time I see a data breach caused by a third party vendor, I can't help but wonder why are these big companies so deeply reliant on outsourcing, yet so lax when it comes to controlling security?
kogasa240p 2025-10-09 14:05 UTC link
This is the end result of forcing private companies enforce ID verification.
1970-01-01 2025-10-09 15:27 UTC link
The one approach that has never failed is to use a fake identity when signing up for online services. It is a violation of TOS but not a crime to do so. Only give your real information to the government. If companyX requires hard information but cannot protect this PII, then they don't deserve real data.
dathinab 2025-10-09 00:54 UTC link
in case of the EU it's more the opposite

GDPR requires data minimalism and ~use case binding so if you submit data for age verification there is no technical reason to keep it after knowing your age so you _have to_ delete it.

itake 2025-10-09 00:54 UTC link
Just a guess, but they may store the original ID card to audit duplicate accounts.

If their machine learning models, think that two people are the exact same, having the original image, especially a photo of the same ID card could confirm that.

3eb7988a1663 2025-10-09 01:03 UTC link
That is the bonkers thing about this story. Why take on the liability? Get what you need and toss the responsibility. If you must store it (which seems unlikely) put that extra-bad-if-leaked information behind a separate append only service for which read is heavily restricted.
giancarlostoro 2025-10-09 01:28 UTC link
The issue is if you don't enforce the phone number requirement on your server you get all the trolls who don't use phone numbered accounts. I wish Discord would allow you to restrict known VPNs instead of requiring phone numbers. It would solve so many issues. I know a LOT of VPNs wont be caught, but if you block MOST non-residential IP blocks, you'll capture a lot of them.
giancarlostoro 2025-10-09 01:29 UTC link
It is specifically because you got banned for "being under 13" it comes from someone asking a question like "How many candles in this photo?" then you reply "7" then they edit the message to say "How old are you" and voila, underage ban.

What you are overlooking is that Discord is the new MSN Messenger, YIM, etc your friends are not backed up in a meaningful way, nor the servers you're in, if you lose your account, you lose contact with basically your entire internet life and friends.

Discord should not keep those IDs longer than a month at a time once the user is unbanned it should be deleted a week later, or removed from that panel altogether.

selcuka 2025-10-09 01:33 UTC link
Probably 5.5 million emails/names, 70k photos.
Gigachad 2025-10-09 01:35 UTC link
Discord doesn’t require a phone number. It’s individual community owners who opt to require it. You can create a server that doesn’t require one but it effectively means you can’t ban people since they can just sign up again on a new account.
EarlKing 2025-10-09 01:40 UTC link
Yes, good question: When can we start jailing CEOs and their employees for these blatant violations of the CPRA and GDPR?
zahlman 2025-10-09 01:58 UTC link
> Discord may have leaked sensitive personal information about 70,000 users -- including (but not necessarily limited to) government IDs, names, usernames, email addresses, last 4 digits of SSN, and IP addresses.

Credit card numbers are not SSNs, and I can't fathom why Discord would have the latter (I certainly never gave them any government ID either). Not to mention, "last 4 digits" of a credit card number will commonly appear on, for example, store receipts that people commonly just leave behind. Usernames can hardly be called sensitive information, either. The point is all the other stuff being tied to the username.

Crosseye_Jack 2025-10-09 02:05 UTC link
No need to blame the user for the companies actions.

Company enacts policy enforced on them by law, for example requiring proof that a user is above the age of 18 to be able to use a channel where other users may use naughty words (The Horror!!!).

User struggles to use the automated age check system (I used the "guess age by letting an AI have a look at a selfie" method and it was a pain in the ass which failed twice before it finally worked) so does what is recommended and make a support ticket. [0]

User, relying on the published policy that Discord will delete ID directly after being used to to the age check [1] decides they wish to remain to have communication with their online friends uploads their ID.

Discord then fail to honour their end of the deal by deleting their users documents after use, and then get breached.

Full blame is on Discord for poorly handling their users data by their 3rd parties, and on the Governments forcing such practices. Discord should have their asses handed to them by the UK's ICO.

Sure, us geeks can and will use self hosted systems and find ways to avoid doing ID checks, but your avg joe isn't going to do that.

Hopefully cases like this will help with the push back on governments mandating these kind of checks, but I see the UK government just falling back to "think of the children" and laying all the blame on Discord, (who are not without fault in this case).

[0] https://support.discord.com/hc/en-us/articles/30326565624343...

[1] https://support.discord.com/hc/en-us/articles/30326565624343...

Spooky23 2025-10-09 02:10 UTC link
I’m in a different industry, but when I’ve had to collect identification for reasons we extracted metadata at the time of presentation, validated it, and discarded the image.

We would never get clearance from counsel to store that in most scenarios, and I can’t think of a reason to justify it for a age or name verification.

rr808 2025-10-09 02:30 UTC link
You know it'll be the IT pros going to jail not the execs right?
axus 2025-10-09 02:37 UTC link
A bunch of UK users are blocked from the more "free speech" (over 13) channels unless they prove their identity to Discord, to comply with the Online Safety Act.
heavyset_go 2025-10-09 02:38 UTC link
After a revolution
nulld3v 2025-10-09 02:38 UTC link
I also wish open-source communities would move off of Discord for another reason: Users are limited to joining a maximum of 100 servers.

I've hit the cap and it's driving me crazy. It's really easy to hit it since each friend group, hobby group, gaming community, and open-source community often all have their own servers.

encrypted_bird 2025-10-09 02:39 UTC link
Do they actually say in the TOS that they will delete them? If they do, do they say immediately? How immediately? Right away or, perhaps, 1 month? Unless specified in contractual documentation, words like "immediately" or "soon" do not have any single definition, which allows them to stretch it without technically being in breach of contract. Not to mention that often times, governments mandate data retention for so-and-so amount of time, so the companies are legally required in such cases to keep the data even if they, miraculously, desire not to.
BLKNSLVR 2025-10-09 03:16 UTC link
The Discord message (in Australia at least) specifically says:

The information you provide is only used to confirm your age group, then it's deleted

Refer screenshot: https://www.reddit.com/r/discordapp/comments/1nkrxcp/discord...

I can still swipe the message away, so I haven't done it yet. I'm going to work out how I can fake the face scan. I ain't sending Government ID to some chat app (no matter how big or small) that's over the top.

As an aside, I would have thought the age groups should be: 13 to 18, and 18+. They're the only ones that materially matter to the reason this check exists, in Australia at least. I don't want to contribute to their demographic analysis.

magicalhippo 2025-10-09 03:23 UTC link
From the previous[1] statement:

The unauthorized party also accessed a “small number” of images of government IDs from “users who had appealed an age determination.”

It makes sense they have to hang on to the ID in case of processing an appeal, which probably doesn't have the highest priority and hence stretches out in time.

[1]: https://www.theverge.com/news/792032/discord-customer-servic...

stravant 2025-10-09 03:28 UTC link
Why are people assuming they did store it after the process was completed?

With the relatively low number leaked here it could have been information collected actively during an ongoing breach, not a dump of some permanent database.

SeanAnderson 2025-10-09 03:53 UTC link
ZK proofs for identity can't go mainstream quick enough. I agree with what you're saying completely. It's frustrating that we have the technology now to verify aspects of someone's identity without revealing it, but that it's going to take forever to become robust enough for mainstream use.
0xbadcafebee 2025-10-09 04:20 UTC link
It's not surprising because there's never been a significant penalty for it, I guess because everybody just got completely used to massive breaches without much reaction. But then again it's very hard to get legislation passed that's not in the interests of big business.
SequoiaHope 2025-10-09 06:10 UTC link
It is a common misconception that facts are reported because they are surprising. Facts are reported because they are important. More and more governments are passing age verification laws which put exactly this data in to the hands of even more shady private companies. This breach serves as evidence that those laws are misguided, and spreading news of this event may help build public support for those efforts.
eleveriven 2025-10-09 06:49 UTC link
What's wild is that the burden keeps falling on individuals to be ultra-cautious, while the systems handling the data rarely face meaningful consequences
luplex 2025-10-09 06:52 UTC link
not just impractical, but also not easy and free to integrate with your service. Seems designed to push you to use a commercial product.

https://www.ausweisapp.bund.de/so-werden-sie-diensteanbieter

raxxorraxor 2025-10-09 06:53 UTC link
> I don't particularly blame any one corporation, this is a systemic issue of governments not having/not enforcing serious security measures

Wrong, governments caused the issue because they demand customers to ID themselves. There exists not a single viable security measure aside from not collecting the data. Government is also not able to propose any security measures.

Unlikely that the data will ever be deleted now, no matter if Discord pays any ransoms or not.

eleveriven 2025-10-09 07:04 UTC link
The third-party layer is basically the dark matter of data breaches like invisible to users, barely acknowledged by companies, and completely unaccountable when things go wrong
OvbiousError 2025-10-09 07:12 UTC link
In Belgium we have a service called "itsme". Had it for ages, works very well, used to be mainly for government but banks are also switching to it.
eleveriven 2025-10-09 07:16 UTC link
Either the deletion promise is a lie, or the third-party vendor was storing the data anyway
Hikikomori 2025-10-09 07:26 UTC link
This is what most of journalism has been for quite some time. Read some of Noam Chomskys work.
consp 2025-10-09 07:33 UTC link
As far as I have heard zero knowledge proofs have become optional (thus dead) in the EU wallet specification. I expect selective disclosure in all form to be completely axed next.
Editorial Channel
What the content says
+0.60
Article 12 Privacy
High Coverage
Editorial
+0.60
SETL
+0.49

This is the core article implicated. The article thoroughly documents unauthorized disclosure of private identity documents and treats privacy violation as a serious human rights matter. Specifies multiple categories of exposed personal data and emphasizes user notification.

+0.40
Article 3 Life, Liberty, Security
High Coverage
Editorial
+0.40
SETL
+0.35

The article documents a major threat to personal security through identity theft risk; reports concrete types of compromised data and protective responses.

+0.20
Preamble Preamble
Low Coverage
Editorial
+0.20
SETL
+0.14

Article documents a serious breach affecting human dignity through unauthorized exposure of identity documents; treats the incident with appropriate gravity.

+0.20
Article 6 Legal Personhood
Low Coverage
Editorial
+0.20
SETL
+0.20

The article documents exposure of government-issued documents that are instruments of legal recognition and identity status.

+0.20
Article 13 Freedom of Movement
Low Coverage
Editorial
+0.20
SETL
+0.20

Government ID exposure creates potential for tracking and restriction of movement; article documents this indirectly through identity theft risk.

+0.20
Article 29 Duties to Community
Medium Coverage
Editorial
+0.20
SETL
+0.20

The article documents Discord's failure in its duty to protect user data; treats this corporate accountability seriously.

+0.10
Article 8 Right to Remedy
Low Coverage
Editorial
+0.10
SETL
+0.10

Article mentions law enforcement and data protection authority involvement, implying access to remedial institutions.

+0.10
Article 14 Asylum
Low Coverage
Editorial
+0.10
SETL
+0.10

Age verification photos and government IDs could relate to asylum status documentation; exposure could endanger vulnerable populations seeking asylum.

+0.10
Article 15 Nationality
Low Coverage
Editorial
+0.10
SETL
+0.10

Government-issued identification documents are instruments through which nationality is recorded and proven to state authorities.

+0.10
Article 19 Freedom of Expression
Low Coverage Practice
Editorial
+0.10
SETL
-0.09

The article itself is an exercise of freedom of the press in reporting publicly important information about corporate misconduct and security failure.

+0.10
Article 21 Political Participation
Low Coverage
Editorial
+0.10
SETL
+0.10

Government IDs are used in electoral processes; their exposure could affect voting security and electoral rights.

+0.10
Article 28 Social & International Order
Low Coverage
Editorial
+0.10
SETL
+0.10

The article documents a systemic failure in vendor oversight that prevented full realization of privacy rights.

0.00
Article 11 Presumption of Innocence
Low
Editorial
0.00
SETL
ND

Article presents Discord's statement defending against breach claims without presuming guilt; factual dispute reported neutrally.

ND
Article 1 Freedom, Equality, Brotherhood

Not addressed.

ND
Article 2 Non-Discrimination

Not addressed.

ND
Article 4 No Slavery

Not addressed.

ND
Article 5 No Torture

Not addressed.

ND
Article 7 Equality Before Law

Not addressed.

ND
Article 9 No Arbitrary Detention

Not addressed.

ND
Article 10 Fair Hearing

Not addressed.

ND
Article 16 Marriage & Family

Not addressed.

ND
Article 17 Property

Not addressed.

ND
Article 18 Freedom of Thought

Not addressed.

ND
Article 20 Assembly & Association

Not addressed.

ND
Article 22 Social Security

Not addressed.

ND
Article 23 Work & Equal Pay

Not addressed.

ND
Article 24 Rest & Leisure

Not addressed.

ND
Article 25 Standard of Living

Not addressed.

ND
Article 26 Education

Not addressed.

ND
Article 27 Cultural Participation

Not addressed.

ND
Article 30 No Destruction of Rights

Not addressed.

Structural Channel
What the site does
+0.20
Article 12 Privacy
High Coverage
Structural
+0.20
Context Modifier
ND
SETL
+0.49

Article is freely accessible without privacy-invasive paywalls; professional standards applied; comments enabled for reader engagement; however, site likely includes general analytics tracking.

+0.15
Article 19 Freedom of Expression
Low Coverage Practice
Structural
+0.15
Context Modifier
ND
SETL
-0.09

Site enables freedom of expression through bylined articles, public comment sections, and free access to content; professional structure supports public discourse.

+0.10
Preamble Preamble
Low Coverage
Structural
+0.10
Context Modifier
ND
SETL
+0.14

Free, professional news structure allows distribution of information about dignity violations; no apparent structural barriers.

+0.10
Article 3 Life, Liberty, Security
High Coverage
Structural
+0.10
Context Modifier
ND
SETL
+0.35

Article is accessible and functional; does not compromise user security through site structure.

0.00
Article 6 Legal Personhood
Low Coverage
Structural
0.00
Context Modifier
ND
SETL
+0.20

Not specific to structural implications.

0.00
Article 8 Right to Remedy
Low Coverage
Structural
0.00
Context Modifier
ND
SETL
+0.10

Not specific to structural implications.

0.00
Article 11 Presumption of Innocence
Low
Structural
0.00
Context Modifier
ND
SETL
ND

Not specific to structural implications.

0.00
Article 13 Freedom of Movement
Low Coverage
Structural
0.00
Context Modifier
ND
SETL
+0.20

Not specific to structural implications.

0.00
Article 14 Asylum
Low Coverage
Structural
0.00
Context Modifier
ND
SETL
+0.10

Not specific to structural implications.

0.00
Article 15 Nationality
Low Coverage
Structural
0.00
Context Modifier
ND
SETL
+0.10

Not specific to structural implications.

0.00
Article 21 Political Participation
Low Coverage
Structural
0.00
Context Modifier
ND
SETL
+0.10

Not specific to structural implications.

0.00
Article 28 Social & International Order
Low Coverage
Structural
0.00
Context Modifier
ND
SETL
+0.10

Not specific to structural implications.

0.00
Article 29 Duties to Community
Medium Coverage
Structural
0.00
Context Modifier
ND
SETL
+0.20

Not specific to structural implications.

ND
Article 1 Freedom, Equality, Brotherhood

Not applicable.

ND
Article 2 Non-Discrimination

Not applicable.

ND
Article 4 No Slavery

Not applicable.

ND
Article 5 No Torture

Not applicable.

ND
Article 7 Equality Before Law

Not applicable.

ND
Article 9 No Arbitrary Detention

Not applicable.

ND
Article 10 Fair Hearing

Not applicable.

ND
Article 16 Marriage & Family

Not applicable.

ND
Article 17 Property

Not applicable.

ND
Article 18 Freedom of Thought

Not applicable.

ND
Article 20 Assembly & Association

Not applicable.

ND
Article 22 Social Security

Not applicable.

ND
Article 23 Work & Equal Pay

Not applicable.

ND
Article 24 Rest & Leisure

Not applicable.

ND
Article 25 Standard of Living

Not applicable.

ND
Article 26 Education

Not applicable.

ND
Article 27 Cultural Participation

Not applicable.

ND
Article 30 No Destruction of Rights

Not applicable.

Supplementary Signals
How this content communicates, beyond directional lean. Learn more
Epistemic Quality
How well-sourced and evidence-based is this content?
0.84 low claims
Sources
0.8
Evidence
0.8
Uncertainty
0.8
Purpose
0.9
Propaganda Flags
1 manipulative rhetoric technique found
1 techniques detected
obfuscation
The article accepts Discord's characterization that attackers are spreading 'inaccurate information' without independently verifying the scope or accuracy of competing breach claims.
Emotional Tone
Emotional character: positive/negative, intensity, authority
measured
Valence
-0.6
Arousal
0.5
Dominance
0.6
Transparency
Does the content identify its author and disclose interests?
0.50
✓ Author ✗ Conflicts ✗ Funding
More signals: context, framing & audience
Solution Orientation
Does this content offer solutions or only describe problems?
0.44 mixed
Reader Agency
0.3
Stakeholder Voice
Whose perspectives are represented in this content?
0.30 2 perspectives
Speaks: corporation
About: individualsgovernment
Temporal Framing
Is this content looking backward, at the present, or forward?
present immediate
Geographic Scope
What geographic area does this content cover?
global
United States
Complexity
How accessible is this content to a general audience?
accessible low jargon general
Audit Trail 1 entries
2026-02-28 12:32 eval Evaluated by claude-haiku-4-5-20251001: +0.17 (Mild positive)