Radio security checks that warned of a captured agent

Could British handlers have exposed a captured agent's missing security check by asking for it to be restored?

The anecdote is considered possible but unusual: the normal response described is to recognize compromise, maintain contact cautiously, and neither trust incoming reports nor send useful information.

The recalled case involves handlers apparently alerting an agent that a security check was missing. That detail is treated cautiously because it conflicts with the normal protocol described here. A failed check indicated that the agent had been compromised, so acknowledging the warning would reveal that the safeguard had worked. Maintaining contact could still help keep the captive alive, but incoming reports could no longer be trusted. Handlers would therefore avoid sending operationally useful information.