The Terrorists’ New Weapon — Doxxing LEOs | The American Spectator

It began with a leak — and with it, a warning. In a few short weeks, the personal data of more than a thousand federal officials from DHS, DOJ, FBI, and U.S. intelligence services appeared on encrypted forums used by cybercriminals and foreign operatives. The exposure, first verified by 404 Media, revealed a coordinated campaign against America’s security agencies. It coincided with an intensifying global conversation about cyber resilience and institutional fragility. This isn’t theoretical. It’s now. The United States is confronting a new kind of national security risk — one that bypasses firewalls and firepower alike.

Names, addresses, phone numbers, even family details — all published in Telegram channels frequented by hackers, hostile regimes, and political extremists. The group behind the release, a loose collective calling itself “the Com,” mocked U.S. authorities as it published the files. No classified system was breached. The leak came from America’s soft underbelly: its contractors, cloud providers, and commercial data brokers. It exposed not secrets, but stewards.

The timing could not be more telling. Days before DHS condemned this wave of doxxing, the Justice Department announced the arrest of an illegal immigrant in Texas who offered $10,000 on TikTok to anyone willing to murder ICE agents. The overlap between radicalization, data exposure, and physical threat is complete. The wall between online incitement and real-world violence has vanished. (RELATED: Meet the Criminals Anti-ICE Protesters Are Fighting to Shield)

Almost simultaneously, DHS disclosed that cartels in Mexico were offering bounties for information on ICE and CBP officers operating in Chicago, a disturbing transnational link between organized crime and activist data exploitation. Personal data has become a currency of intimidation, and the market is global. (RELATED: The Human Ledger: How Cartels Reduce Migrant Women to Line Items of Profit)

What might once have been dismissed as fringe activism has evolved into a tool of strategic disruption. The exposure of federal personnel is no longer an act of protest; it’s an act of coercion. The architecture of vulnerability is now international, and adversaries are patient.

These campaigns are conducted through the dual-use infrastructure of the modern web: built by American companies, powered by cloud stacks, and governed by a legal framework that still treats free expression and national defense as unrelated concerns. Each leak flows through engagement algorithms, commercial data brokers, and biometric search engines that provide adversaries with a near-total map of America’s enforcement footprint. Tech platforms treat these exposures as content. Intelligence services treat them as reconnaissance. (RELATED: The Four Rings of Terror — How Violence Targets Conservative America)

The ecosystem of exposure is vast. Misconfigured cloud vendors. Unsanctioned contractors. AI facial recognition models trained on billions of public images. In several confirmed cases, ICE officers were identified from protest footage, cross-referenced through facial search engines, and linked to home addresses purchased from data brokers. This is not accidental exposure; it’s precision targeting achieved without a single exploit. (RELATED: DOJ Files Charges Against Antifa)

Hack-and-leak operations once belonged to state intelligence agencies. Today, they’re hybridized. Iranian operatives indicted in 2023 for election interference combined phishing and document dumps to shape narratives. Russian and Chinese cyber units continue to stockpile personnel data, not to exploit it now, but to weaponize it later. The goal isn’t secrets. It’s leverage. When federal agents can be named, traced, and shamed, hesitation replaces deterrence. (RELATED: DOJ Cracking Down on CCP Espionage)

Domestically, the pattern repeats. In Los Angeles, activists live-streamed themselves following an ICE officer home. In Chicago, a local official helped run a Facebook group that tracked immigration agents until the Justice Department intervened. Such acts, local in execution and global in implication, are studied by foreign analysts as blueprints for hybrid warfare. They reveal not dissent, but weakness. (RELATED: Newsom’s Search for the Secret Police)

This shift is now officially recognized. On Oct. 9, 2025, the Department of Homeland Security issued a public condemnation of what it called a “dangerous escalation” in the doxxing of federal officers. DHS Secretary Kristi Noem stated: “Threats to our personnel are threats to national security.” It was not the language of workplace safety, but of state defense. The adversary had found an open-source route into America’s security apparatus — not through classified systems, but through the data exhaust of the digital age. (RELATED: Abusing Border Patrol Agents: Echoes of Vietnam)

The infrastructure enabling this sits largely beyond U.S. jurisdiction. Telegram is opaque by design. PimEyes, the facial search engine implicated in several doxxing cases, operates abroad and answers to no American regulator. The average activist or foreign proxy now wields more open-source reconnaissance power than Cold War intelligence officers once did. A single search can unmask a federal agent; a single upload can follow them for life. (RELATED: The Geography of Defiance)

Abroad, the pattern holds. In Northern Ireland, a massive police data leak exposed nearly every officer’s name, prompting relocations and resignations. In Israel, Iranian-linked hackers released private records and photographs of Mossad personnel. Across Europe, judges and counterintelligence officers have been publicly identified by extremist groups. Each example reinforces the same point: when anonymity erodes, deterrence fails.

Yet Washington lags behind its allies. There is no national mechanism to remove federal personnel data from commercial aggregators, no cohesive strategy for securing contractor databases, and no unified doctrine that treats the weaponization of identity as a core threat. In this vacuum, adversaries need not hack anything. They can simply collect, correlate, and wait.

DHS reports a sharp rise in harassment of officers. Security briefings now include “digital hygiene” once reserved for covert agents. Recruits are warned that anonymity can no longer be assumed. Veterans quietly ask whether their families can still be safe. These are not abstract fears — they are operational realities.

To treat doxxing as mere online cruelty is to misunderstand its purpose. It is a calibrated instrument of pressure. Each exposure slows an operation. Each hesitation weakens deterrence. Foreign powers need not infiltrate our agencies when exposure alone can paralyze them.

Defending America’s security workforce now requires more than cybersecurity. It requires counterintelligence at the level of human identity. The U.S. must move from reactive mitigation to preemptive control — limiting commercial access to federal data, criminalizing the deliberate exposure of security personnel, and compelling platforms to treat doxxing not as speech, but as sabotage. National security begins where digital privacy ends.

Doxxing is not the conclusion of an attack. It is the opening act. The names circulating on activist channels today may appear in coercion campaigns tomorrow. If the United States cannot protect the operational silence of those who protect it, its next great breach may not involve stolen files, but something subtler: a nation made transparent to its enemies.

“Secrecy is not the opposite of democracy,” the piece might well conclude. “It is what keeps democracy alive.”

READ MORE from Kevin Cohen:

How Cuba Is Becoming Beijing’s Caribbean Outpost

Germany Revoked a Terror Supporter’s Citizenship. Why Can’t America?

Poland’s Fusion of Hard Borders and Human Duty