Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard has directed U.S. intelligence agencies to assess whether implementing random polygraph tests for employees and contractors could help prevent unauthorized leaks of classified information to the press, according to officials familiar with the matter.
The initiative, issued in a classified directive within the past month, seeks to strengthen internal safeguards across the intelligence community after several recent disclosures of sensitive material reached the media. It follows similar actions taken by other federal agencies in recent years to identify and deter internal leaks.
Strengthening Internal Security
Sources confirmed that the review will focus on the feasibility and potential scope of random polygraph testing, including new procedures and questions designed to detect whether employees have discussed or disclosed classified information without authorization.
If adopted, the policy would not introduce an entirely new system but rather expand the existing use of polygraph examinations—already a routine part of many intelligence and counterintelligence programs.
An official with the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) said the goal of the review is to “evaluate whether the frequency and randomness of polygraph examinations can more effectively deter potential leaks and reinforce existing obligations to protect classified information.”
The directive comes amid heightened concern within the intelligence community following a series of unauthorized disclosures that, according to officials, compromised operations and diplomatic relationships.
A Broader Push for Accountability
The initiative also coincides with recent legal and disciplinary actions related to classified information handling across multiple federal agencies. Among the most widely discussed was the indictment of former FBI Director James Comey, who was charged last month with making false statements to Congress after denying that he had leaked information to reporters.
While Gabbard’s directive does not directly reference that case, sources familiar with the matter say it reflects growing frustration among senior intelligence officials about repeated breaches of confidentiality.
Two individuals briefed on the plan told CBS News that Gabbard’s memo includes a specific emphasis on leak prevention and media contact. It directs agency heads to include targeted questions during future polygraph tests related to unauthorized discussions with journalists or the transfer of sensitive information outside official channels.
Statement from the Office of the Director of National Intelligence
An ODNI spokesperson confirmed the existence of the directive, describing it as a “routine reinforcement of existing authorities” rather than a dramatic policy shift.
“Director Gabbard’s guidance reaffirms the intelligence community’s legal and ethical responsibility to safeguard national security information,” said Olivia Coleman, spokesperson for the Director of National Intelligence.
“Since the beginning of President Trump’s second term, multiple instances of unauthorized disclosure have occurred that risk damaging U.S. strategic alliances, weakening operational credibility, and exposing sources and methods essential to intelligence work,” Coleman said.
She added that the timing of new leaks to the press about Gabbard’s directive “underscores the very problem the policy seeks to address.”
Context of the Review
Polygraph examinations—commonly referred to as “lie detector tests”—have long been used within U.S. intelligence and law enforcement agencies to assess employee reliability and detect potential security risks. These tests typically cover issues such as espionage, sabotage, and the handling of classified information.
However, their frequency and enforcement vary among agencies, and their effectiveness has been debated by experts. Some critics argue that polygraphs can produce false results or encourage mistrust among staff. Others maintain that when used properly, they remain a valuable deterrent against insider threats and unauthorized leaks.
Officials said Gabbard’s review was prompted in part by internal findings that the number of polygraph examinations had declined in recent years, potentially reducing deterrence. Intelligence officers reportedly expressed concern that this reduction may have created an environment where some personnel felt less likely to be caught if they shared restricted information.
Renewed Focus on Insider Threats
The ODNI directive forms part of a larger government-wide effort to address insider threats—employees or contractors who might misuse or expose classified data.
Past incidents, such as the leaks by Edward Snowden in 2013 and Reality Winner in 2017, continue to shape how intelligence agencies approach internal security. More recently, smaller but frequent leaks of confidential documents and communications have reignited discussions about the balance between transparency, accountability, and national security.
Officials familiar with the plan said that Gabbard’s directive will require agencies to review existing counterintelligence procedures, assess vulnerabilities in information systems, and recommend additional training on the handling of sensitive data.
Balancing Security and Trust
While the policy aims to prevent leaks, some intelligence community insiders have privately expressed concerns about morale and employee trust. Randomized polygraph tests, they say, could create pressure among personnel who already face rigorous screening, long hours, and classified workloads.
Former intelligence officials who spoke on background suggested that transparency about testing procedures will be key to maintaining confidence. “It’s important that employees understand this isn’t about suspicion—it’s about safeguarding national security,” said one retired CIA officer. “When people see the rationale clearly, they’re more likely to support the measures.”
The Broader Impact
The directive highlights ongoing tension within the intelligence community between the need for operational secrecy and the value of a free press. While federal law prohibits leaking classified information, journalists often rely on such leaks to expose government actions of public interest.
Experts say Gabbard’s proposal seeks to strengthen discipline internally, not restrict media freedom. “This is a workplace security measure, not a press policy,” noted a former national security lawyer. “It’s about ensuring that those with access to classified material handle it properly, not about silencing legitimate reporting.”
If approved, the new testing system could lead to more frequent and unpredictable screenings across agencies such as the CIA, NSA, and DIA. Intelligence contractors could also fall under the same protocols.
Reaction and Next Steps
Reactions to the proposal have been mixed. Supporters within the intelligence community argue that leaks have undermined trust among international partners, damaged active operations, and endangered lives. They view Gabbard’s directive as a necessary corrective measure.
Critics, however, warn that polygraph testing is not a foolproof method and can sometimes yield inaccurate readings, potentially harming careers or morale. They argue that improving workplace culture, communication, and whistleblower protections may be more effective long-term strategies.
The review phase is expected to conclude within 90 days, after which Gabbard and senior intelligence officials will decide whether to implement broader polygraph requirements or pursue alternative methods.
In the meantime, ODNI officials are reportedly working with agency inspectors general to identify trends in recent leaks, determine how classified information reached journalists, and strengthen controls over digital communication and document access.
A Call for Vigilance
In her memo, Gabbard reportedly emphasized that protecting classified information is a collective responsibility shared by everyone in the intelligence community. “Security begins with accountability,” one official paraphrased from the directive. “Every employee, regardless of rank, has an obligation to protect what they know.”
The review, though technical in nature, underscores a broader shift toward stricter oversight and renewed vigilance across U.S. intelligence operations. As agencies adapt to evolving digital and geopolitical challenges, Gabbard’s initiative signals an intent to restore discipline, reinforce trust, and close the gaps that have allowed sensitive information to escape into the public domain.