Claims about "accredited technology" don't hold up under scrutiny. The real problem surfaces when end-to-end encryption gets compromised—you're basically dismantling the entire security architecture that protects everyone's data. Instead of peer-to-peer trust, everything funnels through a centralized intermediary. At that point, what's the difference between routing communications through a trusted third party versus letting adversarial nation-states access the pipeline directly? The fundamental security guarantees collapse. You're trading decentralized privacy for a single point of failure.
This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.
14 Likes
Reward
14
3
Repost
Share
Comment
0/400
ParanoiaKing
· 8h ago
Huh, isn't this just disguising a backdoor as security? That's hilarious.
View OriginalReply0
GweiObserver
· 8h ago
Basically, it's self-deception; once end-to-end encryption is broken, the entire security system is doomed.
---
Upgraded middlemen profit margin model, data is directly exposed to intermediary agencies.
---
Single point of failure for privacy, this deal isn't worth it.
---
Authentication technology can't be fooled, the core issue is that encryption has been emasculated.
---
Instead of trusting a "trusted third party," it's better to let the opponent access directly; the result is the same.
---
Decentralized privacy is a joke; it's basically centralized monitoring with a different name.
---
Isn't this just trading one vulnerability for a bunch of vulnerabilities, and pretending to be justified?
---
Broken encryption = the entire defense line collapses, there's nothing to argue about.
---
The so-called authentication technology is purely a distraction; the real problem isn't there.
---
Intermediary routing and hostile countries eavesdropping directly, is there really a difference? They're all sold out anyway.
View OriginalReply0
SatoshiNotNakamoto
· 8h ago
Isn't this just using privacy as a bargaining chip? It will eventually lead to trouble.
Claims about "accredited technology" don't hold up under scrutiny. The real problem surfaces when end-to-end encryption gets compromised—you're basically dismantling the entire security architecture that protects everyone's data. Instead of peer-to-peer trust, everything funnels through a centralized intermediary. At that point, what's the difference between routing communications through a trusted third party versus letting adversarial nation-states access the pipeline directly? The fundamental security guarantees collapse. You're trading decentralized privacy for a single point of failure.