A data exposure at Dialog, the private events group cofounded by Peter Thiel, exposed personal information of multiple US national security personnel. These include an intelligence official on the National Security Council (NSC) and an active-duty intelligence officer supporting sensitive military operations, WIRED has learned. The Pentagon is now examining the matter.

Personal information about intelligence and military personnel is among the data most sought by foreign intelligence services, which use it to identify, surveil, and approach US operatives abroad and at home. For active-duty officers and the units they support, the exposure can add operational risks.

The White House asked WIRED to not name the NSC official on national security grounds but otherwise declined to comment about the exposure.

The Dialog exposure, which evidence shows was enabled by a misconfigured website, included the private information and login tokens of 222 Dialog event registrants, including current and former senior military and national security officials from the United States and its allies.

Among them are the NSC official, whose role includes advising President Donald Trump and the national security adviser on sensitive intelligence programs, and a person identified in the records as an active-duty intelligence officer embedded with a “Tier 1” special operations unit.

According to the records, neither has a prior history with Dialog; both were invited and registered as new participants for the group’s retreat this August outside Dublin, Ireland.

Dialog has internally characterized the exposure as a “cyberattack,” but WIRED found that the files appear to have been exposed because of a misconfiguration in the group’s own website. Anyone could create an account with an email address, log in, and access the files simply by loading a landing page for the group’s app. The discovery began with a tip first received by a Swiss DJ and cybersecurity researcher, maia arson crimew. How long the records were accessible, and who else may have obtained them, remains unclear.

Federal prosecutors indicted crimew in 2021 on hacking-related charges, but she has not been arrested or convicted of a crime and has not faced subsequent charges. In 2023, she discovered a copy of the US government’s No Fly List on an unsecured server and made it available to some journalists alongside a technical write-up.

Outside counsel for Dialog issued a letter over the weekend saying the data was “stolen” and demanding WIRED turn over its copy of the data. WIRED declined. Dialog did not respond to questions submitted for this story.

Dialog’s file on the NSC intelligence official, a former CIA officer, includes at least two dozen personal details and survey responses and is similar to its dossiers on tech founders, actors, journalists, and hedge fund managers. Alongside what the records indicate are their date of birth, home address, mobile number, headshot photo, and private authentication token, the file also documents their political leanings and how they came into the invitation-only group’s orbit.

The file includes what appear to be the official’s answers to Dialog’s registrant questionnaire, including a personal prediction (“future espionage will target your behavior more than your secrets”); a book recommendation (Allen Drury’s Cold War political novel Advise and Consent); and private biographical details.

The military intel officer’s dossier is built on the same template, with the same range of personally identifiable information exposed. The file indicates they were nominated to join Dialog by another military officer assigned to a major command headquarters.

WIRED is withholding the names of the NSC official and the military intelligence officer, and the unit to which the latter is assigned, because identifying them could put their safety and work at risk. The Pentagon told WIRED on Tuesday that its operations security team is examining the matter.

Identifying specific special missions units can sometimes “implicate classified information,” says Bradley Moss, a national security lawyer whose practice focuses on security clearances and federal employment law. Certain US intelligence personnel have enhanced legal protections under the Intelligence Identities Protection Act. But Moss questioned whether the intelligence officer meets the statutory definition of a “covert agent” under the IIPA; because it’s a narrow category, he says, most do not meet it.

The records indicate it was another military officer who provided Dialog with the name of the military intelligence officer’s unit. The officer’s member-facing Dialog bio carries a brief, deliberately generic job title. Notes left by Dialog’s staff indicate they understood the sensitivity: One noted the officer was “hard to find online,” and another agreed that the absence of public information “makes sense” given their role.

The officer and the NSC official are among more than 20 current and former military and intelligence officials whose records appear in the same database. Among them: a retired US general who held a senior role in the intelligence community and another who held a senior security role in Israel and the Palestinian territories.

In some cases, the files also include spouses and family members listed as emergency contacts.

Dialog’s questionnaire produced a wide range of thoughts about the future—and a wider range of personal disclosures. A former director of a Pentagon technology office warned of “acts of domestic terrorism against AI datacenters” and volunteered that he had once held one of Saddam Hussein’s gold-plated AK-47s. The head of security at an AI company predicted “significant political violence attributed to AI job displacement.” And a national security lead at another AI lab recalled auditioning to perform on an A-list pop star’s tour.