@Tutanota @itaint
what about keeping encryption and not advertising it (don't wake up sleeping dogs) or provide a fake backdoor or provide only personal data of the politician/law enforcement person who asks for the backdoor... what about being creative, like the backdoor loop ends in a loop of loop of a loop and never arrives

@Tutanota i dont get that chat control. how does this work with open source messengers, like dunno, where encryption is client side and the server acts as a broker. how in snowdens name can you add a backdoor in there?

especially if you only act as broker with like a protocol that any app could implement.

like, if i encrypt my mail, is a 3 letter agency taking me to blacksite?!

@Kierkegaanks @Tutanota I've seen multiple claims to this effect with no evidence.

The proposals as stated have been requiring providers of e2ee messaging to do the backdoors, which would basically mean the corporate shit platforms get backdoored and the real stuff first fights then ignores the law if they don't win, and possibly gets removed from app stores, relegated to sideloading.

Nobody wants to be the party doing the backdooring. Apple is not going to step up to do it at the OS level, and ruin their reputation, when they can say "the regulation puts the burden on chat providers, not us" (except iMessage which they'd probably backdoor).