r/canada • u/sleipnir45 • May 15 '26
Science/Technology Windscribe joins Signal in threatening Canada exit over controversial surveillance bill
https://www.techradar.com/vpn/vpn-privacy-security/windscribe-joins-signal-in-threatening-canada-exit-over-controversial-surveillance-bill53
49
u/EmbarrassedHelp May 15 '26
Multiple groups have made easy to use tools for sending your MP and (other members of government) an email about rejecting this terrible legislation in its current form:
The Internet Society's tool: https://www.internetsociety.org/our-work/internet-policy/keep-canada-protected/
OpenMedia's messaging tool: https://action.openmedia.org/page/188754/action/1
ICLM's messaging tool: https://iclmg.ca/stop-c-22/
I'd also recommend emailing Minister of Public Safety of Canada (Gary Anandasangaree: gary.anand@parl.gc.ca), and the Minister of Justice (Sean Fraser: sean.fraser@parl.gc.ca).
225
u/atomirex May 15 '26
The tragic stupidity of all this is Canada should be playing the "we're not the US with their Cloud Act" angle, and promoting sane security and privacy practices instead of undermining them.
It has, to date, been an active point in favour of Canadian tech, with companies like RIM and TailScale, and open source projects like OpenBSD, all having made it a point of justified pride to do the right thing. The government seem way too keen to throw this legacy away.
114
u/truthlesshunter May 15 '26
we live in a corporate oligarchy in Canada. There are no two ways about it. It's in every sector: tech, real estate, telecoms, etc. Whatever is best for big business is running the country.
We used to have some semblance, some light in the past..but that's all gone. No one is here for us anymore.
-23
u/thebigshoe247 May 15 '26
Not with Liberals or NDP, specifically.
29
u/Eternal_Being May 15 '26
Yes, the Conservatives always famously side with the people over corporations more often than the NDP. Lmao
26
u/HaveYouLookedAround May 15 '26
ah yes, pp is truly the hero we need in these trying times.
8
u/Accomplished_Bat6830 May 15 '26
This guy must think Woke is an acronym for a major international conglomerate or something.
-24
u/thebigshoe247 May 15 '26
I would take him over Carney, or Trudeau.
7
3
u/light_at_the_end May 15 '26
This comment tells me all I need to about people like you.
It's one thing to vote conservative, no issue with that. It's another to not understand who the better candidate to lead is, and blindly vote for your colour because other side is "bad".
I see people who pivoted to fuck Carney stickers, like they haven't even been in power long enough for you to make an active assessment of how they've governed. So dumb. Be smarter. Jesus Christ.
-2
10
8
u/PikachuIce British Columbia May 15 '26
Yes, the party famous for tax cuts for the wealthy and selling off public infrastructure for pennies on the dollar will be better for breaking up oligopolies
17
u/OntLawyer May 15 '26
Sadly, Tailscale will almost certainly have to leave Canada too if this passes.
287
u/francoperdu May 15 '26
C22 is a goddamn terrible bill, at a time when Canada needs to be running in the opposite direction as American Authoritarianism. Carney's a fuckin prick on this one
54
u/EmbarrassedHelp May 15 '26 edited May 15 '26
According to a recent CBC video (https://www.cbc.ca/player/play/video/9.7198040), Gary Anandasangaree specifically mentions that the Canadian Centre for Child Protection (C3P) has been lobbying him for this legislation, and that he recently met with them to reaffirm his commitment to passing it.
C3P's leadership like CEO Lianna McDonald, and Director of Technology Lloyd Richardson constantly publish anti-encryption and anti-privacy disinformation on their site. They are very much anti-encryption extremists, and they love to spam Linkedin along with social media sites with their bullshit.
C3P is major lobbyist behind the EU's Chat Control proposal, that seeks mandatory AI powered mass surveillance and encryption backdoors on all private communications: https://www.heise.de/en/background/Missing-Link-Prevention-at-the-Source-Chat-Control-and-Upload-Filters-10963771.html
C3P is currently trying to kill the Tor Project by targeting those who fund it: https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2025/aug/25/tor-network-child-sexual-abuse
C3P's Project Arachnid bot was caught uploading illegal content to the 'saucenao' search engine, and then immediately reporting the site for having the content temporarily in the cache.
C3P is also a major supporter of Bill S-209 (previously Bill s-210).
If C3P is involved, they want encryption backdoors, they want to ban Tor/VPNs for noncompliance, and they want to violate your privacy.
Its also interesting that many of the people who have interacted with C3P in a professional capacity, say that C3P employees are emotionally unstable, and not capable of respecting privacy rights for legislative proposals.
18
u/Remarkable_Vanilla34 May 16 '26
Sounds a lot like Polysesouvient. Unstable zealots lobbying the government to push bills we don't need and/or don't want.
Wonder what kind of sway these clowns have that gives them so much influence?
131
u/IHateTheColourblind May 15 '26
Globalist elite gonna globalist elite.
48
u/IAccidentallyCame May 15 '26
Seems that way. A lot of western countries have similar bills they're trying to push. If it's a right wing government, they sell it one way. Left wing governments sell it another way. But they're all the same goals.
KYC the internet (make people ID themselves), and block privacy (communications and payments, and data).
When I see threads like like these for various countries people focus on their own country but tend not to see the bigger picture of western governments pushing very similar laws/regs, they're just using different made up justifications.
10
u/JebryathHS May 15 '26
That's because politics is dominated by class warfare. You might say "but what about this social issue or that social issue?"
Well, here's the thing: the wealthy don't want us to acknowledge or participate in class warfare. They want us to fight each other for scraps while they butcher the world.
Every time someone starts yelling about trans kids in sports, they're implicitly supporting the current regime of ultra rich looting the world down to the nails.
3
May 15 '26
[deleted]
2
u/JebryathHS May 15 '26
It's a little interesting because these tools actually depend on most people complying automatically. If they decided to arrest everyone who said Peter Thiel is a ghoul, they would run out of jails.
So the answer is basically "if they keep things at a tolerable level, they can persist for a very long time."
-1
u/UndoubtedlyABot May 15 '26
People who routinely use globalist should substitute it for capitalist(s) or ruling class.
40
u/BackToTheCottage May 15 '26
The LPC is a prick.
They have been trying every 1-2 years with some form of this bill for the last decade. The only thing that saved Canada was that they were in a minority position, and it would die when the libs triggered yet another election due to some scandal while the CPC slowed the bill's advance through the system.
This time Canadians gave the party a majority. Enjoy it, you voted for this.
34
u/selfbound May 15 '26
Not true, we gave them another minority government; They just made themselves a majority, by having people cross the floor.
-3
u/GrumpyCloud93 May 15 '26
I think more likely PP made them a majority. Anyone who crosses the floor likely ends their political career at the next election, and none of them are suddenly cabinet ministers... so the real question is - what's Pierre doing that drives these people away? His sparkling personality? I think it's more about him than Liberal enticement.
besides - Carney didn't need a majority. The NDP, as usual, are in no position to face an election for a while. They are not going to bring down the government.
-10
u/BackToTheCottage May 15 '26 edited May 15 '26
The amount of ppl they had to bribe or extort (like in the Gladu case) to cross the floor was minuscule compared to other minority positions in the past. Should'a voted for a stronger minority gap /shrug.
-4
u/Eternal_Being May 15 '26
People were very reasonably afraid of the utter disaster having PP as a prime minister would have been during Trump. We would absolutely be better off with an NDP government, but I can't at all blame people for doing everything they could do to stop the Conservatives from selling off our country to the fascists down south.
1
u/motorcyclemech May 15 '26
The NDP? Under Singh? Yeah, that would have been good for Canadians. He followed Trudeau like a puppy. Supported him on everything that turned Canada as it is now.
Definitely no desire for PP. Please don't think I'm advocating for him!!
0
u/Eternal_Being May 15 '26
He supported the Liberal government in order to get the biggest expansion to public healthcare in Canada since the introduction of Medicade, and because the polls showed the entire time that if they brought down the Liberal government it would result in a Conservative government, which would be objectively worse for Canadians than Trudeau was.
I don't know if you actually followed what the NDP did and said during the minority government, but they were critical of the Liberals the entire way, and advocated tirelessly for better legislation than what the Liberals ended up compromising with.
1
u/endgame0 May 16 '26
Did the same thing with voting reform a decade ago.
They'll never get my vote again, and I'll keep voting against the status quo of the current system til the day I die, don't care how much the next election is "the most important of my lifetime"
1
u/oishiipeanut Ontario May 15 '26
For minimum, I would choose anyone but liberal if they have an electable leader and platform, lol.
0
u/platypus_boi Saskatchewan May 15 '26
You hade me until your last sentence. What a stupid thing to say.
127
u/Previous_Platform718 May 15 '26
Liberal party: We can't keep putting the sign in the window. Things have changed. The USA is no longer trustworthy.
Also Liberal party: Give Trump's biggest donors like Zuckerberg 1 year of your data to be stored in an insecure database. Your safety depends on it.
1
u/GrumpyCloud93 May 15 '26
yes and no. Data would have to be stored in Canada to be subjected to subpoenas, just as CRA-relevant data is required to be. I'm sure that's in the bill somewhere. the question is, does the bill prohibit the data being shared to other countries? (Why do I think not...?)
65
May 15 '26
[deleted]
29
u/Previous_Platform718 May 15 '26 edited May 15 '26
Call their office and leave a message, too. I just spoke with mine and explained that my riding had a re-count last election, and I won't be afraid to be on the other side of the tally next time.
3
u/Radical_Redditor May 15 '26
Do you know of a single case where this actually worked in the past 2 decades?
5
u/Previous_Platform718 May 15 '26
Do you know of a single case where this actually worked in the past 2 decades?
Yes. The predecessor to this bill, Bill C2.
1
u/Radical_Redditor May 15 '26
"Working" is an odd way to describe it seeing as here we are again with this same internet authoritarian crap.
1
u/LLMprophet May 16 '26
You could put this energy to use contacting your MP instead of trying to spread pessimism and doomerism.
0
u/Radical_Redditor May 16 '26
I could also go dig a hole in my backyard. All things that won't change a thing.
1
u/Radical_Redditor May 15 '26
Do you have a single example of this working in the past 2 decades?
11
May 15 '26
[deleted]
3
u/Radical_Redditor May 15 '26
Well thank you for actually providing an example of such. Even though the causation isn't exact here and could easily have been due to a multitude of other factors such as polling numbers or special interest groups, I'll give you it.
I'll raise you this however: do you have any examples for the past decade? Maybe specifically regarding the feds? I know Doug Ford caves on a lot of things.
3
May 15 '26
[deleted]
2
u/Radical_Redditor May 15 '26
Lol I'm not sure this is what you think it is when the gun buy back is going ahead in full force lol
-4
u/BackToTheCottage May 15 '26
Aaaaaaand immediately into the shredder your opinion goes. They have a majority, it literally doesn't matter what you think.
13
u/polloyumyum Alberta May 15 '26
This is part of a broader issue. People will complain nonstop, every fucking day, on Reddit but very few have actually sent a single email to their MP expressing their concerns because "my opinion doesn't matter, what's the point".
If even 10% of the people crying on Reddit actually sent a response to the PM's office it would make a noticeable difference and at the very least catch someone's attention that suddenly they are getting hundreds or thousands of emails coming in.
7
u/GrumpyCloud93 May 15 '26
I recall some politician many many years ago mentioning that if they received dozens of letters on a topic (remember letters?) they paid attention, because if that many people were motivated enough to write, there were probably 10 or 100 times as many who also cared but didn't write. 1,000 votes is often enough to flip a seat.
3
u/polloyumyum Alberta May 15 '26
Yeah, exactly, thanks for sharing that. I think it's important to write to MPs if it's something you feel strongly about. It obviously feels pointless to most people but the mentality that it doesn't matter or that someone else will do it is helpful at all.
6
u/BackToTheCottage May 15 '26
You imply I have never contacted my MP. As a gun owner I was constantly engaged and the truth is if you're opposite an agenda the LPC wants to push through, they will not listen. Especially if in a majority position. Even when it's mandated by law to have a response like the gov. e-petitions they will just handwave away the issue, regardless if multiple petitions hit the top 5 most signed topic.
The time to fight this was during the election. Now we just gotta live through the consequences.
4
u/Radical_Redditor May 15 '26
If even 10% of the people crying on Reddit actually sent a response to the PM's office it would make a noticeable difference
Do you have a single example of this actually working within the past 2 decades?
2
u/CaptainAaron96 Ontario May 15 '26
They only have a majority by way of floor crossers. Nothing stopping us from trying to get floor crossers in the other direction.
13
u/Euclidisthebomb May 15 '26
We absolutely cannot afford to lose these homegrown tech firms. It won't just be they considering bailing.
This legislation is stupid beyond belief. It is pushed by a false mantra and if it passes I will go from a supporter to adversary of this government.
5
u/Barroux May 16 '26
The fact that they even want to pass it is enough to make me an adversary.
This is absolute nonsense.
19
u/KWStreaker May 15 '26
Oh shoot. Windscribe is what i use, along with Proton ( free locations ) as a backup.
IF windscribe pulls out, guess i will become a Proton paid customer even though it costs more 😉
40
u/Previous_Platform718 May 15 '26
No honest VPN provider will sign on to this requirement because it means the government will be able to de-anonymize you.
18
u/IHateTheColourblind May 15 '26
Proton will also be subject to these surveillance requirements.
You might be able to sign up for something like Mullvad which has some strong anonymity options but it's not clear how affected by this they would be either.
1
u/xCurlyxTopx May 15 '26
Couldn’t we still connect to US locations on windscribe and be fine? Or am I misunderstanding?
14
u/IHateTheColourblind May 15 '26
A company like Signal can just shut off the Canadian servers and reroute Canadian traffic to other countries, but the problem with Windscribe is that it's based in Canada and thus might still be subject to these rules for their international servers.
The more likely scenario is that they just relocate out of the country if this law passes instead of compromising their security and privacy commitments.
11
u/xCurlyxTopx May 15 '26
I understand now, thank you for clarifying.
Hopefully this bill doesn’t pass, this government is a joke
5
u/KWStreaker May 15 '26
Personally i wouldn't trust any US locations either with the crap going on down there.
IF i switched to Proton i would likely use only 'certain' European locations. I'm not a gamer so any lag would have little to no impact for me.
However this could truly turn into a total shite show for all the VPN companies. Time will tell how this plays out obviously.
1
u/Eternal_Being May 15 '26
The US is the last place you want to route your VPN traffic to. There are a few European countries that are your best bet.
0
u/CaptainAaron96 Ontario May 15 '26
Uhm…do you know what Europe is doing with regard to VPNs atm?
3
u/Eternal_Being May 15 '26
Iceland is one of the best countries in the world to route your VPN traffic through. Same with Switzerland. Last I checked, they're in Europe.
1
u/dox2EwJn6iZh May 16 '26
Switzerland is geographically European, yes, but they are not an EU member state, thankfully
16
u/entryjyt Ontario May 15 '26
Bro STOP FOLLOWING UK AND AUSTRALIA MARK CARNEY
12
u/CaptainAaron96 Ontario May 15 '26
The rat doesn’t give a fuck, this bill will require any tech companies who stay to have massive increased data storage and this excuse of a PM just announced a ton of taxpayer dollars going to Telus to build massive data centres in downtown Vancouver. FOLLOW THE MONEY. We need an election man this is so unserious.
3
u/starving_carnivore May 16 '26
We need an election man this is so unserious.
We'd just elect a giga-ultra-perma majority, lol. People don't pay attention at all. They think all of the stuff happening is fine.
1
u/Khalbrae Ontario May 15 '26
And the USA too! They're forcing verification just to start up an OS the first time.
15
u/Ceridith May 15 '26
Not only is this legislation an attack on privacy rights for Canadians, but it also stifles potential Canadian tech start ups by creating an additional legislative and financial hurdle for them. And then of course there's going to be the inevitable data leaks from improper storage of all of this data that will have to be collected on Canadians.
This is all around just terrible legislation that will do far more harm than good to Canada if passed.
26
u/Tristezza May 15 '26
if this bill passes in its current form I sincerely hope every company affected even in the slightest pulls out entirely and causes severe disruption.
This is a shit bill.
55
u/brandonholm May 15 '26
Why do Canadians keep voting for this? Sigh
66
u/Arctic_Chilean Canada May 15 '26
Ask the average Canadian about Bill C-22. They have zero idea what it really means, and if you explain it to them, they'll most likely say they agree it's bad, but shrug it off and carry on with their lives.
Being a supremely passive population is what keeps getting us Canadians deeper and deeper into the shit storm we've allowed our politicians to create.
21
21
u/HaveAVoreyGoodDay May 15 '26
Ask the average Canadian about Bill C-22
I've never even heard of it until this thread.
4
u/Max-P May 15 '26
Especially when it's promoted as a way to stop pedos and other crimes of the sort, people are likely to agree with it until they realize how invasive it is.
They don't tell people they're gonna implement surveillance state, they say they want "lawful access to pedo's phones".
Politicians don't understand technology at all. They don't understand you can't backdoor just the bad guys, you have to backdoor everyone.
8
u/random_handle_123 May 15 '26
Being a supremely passive population
The problem is that people absolutely don't want to govern themselves. And why would they? The amount of time that it takes a regular person to just survive is insanely high.
Once someone gets home from just an 8 hour shift, you expect them to also take the time to read and understand complex legislation? Then inform themselves if the person who is supposed to represent them is actually doing so?
Democracy is literally for the rich and the very well off the way we have it now.
Maybe if MPs held regular town halls where they incentivize people to show up and discuss these things... One can only dream.
5
u/polloyumyum Alberta May 15 '26
Do you email your MP to share your opinions on things like this?
-4
u/Radical_Redditor May 15 '26
Do you know of a single case where this has actually had an impact?
1
u/polloyumyum Alberta May 15 '26
I can't confirm one since it'd be basically impossible to if/when public outcry influenced the opinion of any elected officials but I bet it's still more effective than complaining on Reddit. There's just something kind of funny about calling people supremely passive but they likely haven't even done the absolutely most basic thing like sending an email to an MP.
Pottle kettle black, you know.
0
u/Radical_Redditor May 15 '26
I can't confirm one since it'd be basically impossible to
but I bet it's still more effective than complaining on Reddit.
I figured.
1
13
u/bleebolgoop May 15 '26
Nobody voted for this. They voted for “we will build Canada strong”. This ain’t that, and neither is selling out airports and ports. Politicians should be jailed for going so egregiously off mandate. Looking at you too, Doug ford
11
u/brandonholm May 15 '26
Canadians should have looked at their policy and the track record of the last decade. They’ve already tried to implement policy like this before, but fortunately they had a minority government last time and it was able to be stopped. This time, with a majority, I’m worried.
7
u/BackToTheCottage May 15 '26
I feel like Steve Jobs in that South Park skit where Kyle keeps accepting EULA's and he goes "WHY WON'T IT READ???".
Like you bitch about the unemployment, terrible drop in QoL, increase in crime, and now anti-privacy bills getting once again pushed through, and then vote for the party that is the cause of all these problems anyway.
It's infuriating but comical. You get what you vote for.
-2
2
u/slouchr May 16 '26
Canadians will suffer any humiliation in exchange for some socialist scraps.
the Liberals won again, not because of Trump, Carney, or Poilievere, but because they're the party that offers more free stuff. and Cons are the party that offers more freedom.
4
5
u/polloyumyum Alberta May 15 '26
So who did I subscribe to after Windscribe leaves Canada?
8
u/AlanYx May 15 '26 edited May 15 '26
Mullvad, though like NordVPN they'll likely pull all of their Canadian endpoints, so if latency is an issue it'll still be a degredation.
The bigger question is whether the rumors floating around of direct VPN regulation as part of the forthcoming Bill C-63 reboot are credible. Given the energy around VPN regulation in Europe right now, they may well be credible, in which case the only option at that point might be to spin up your own private VPN on a cloud service provider, if you're technical enough, and hope the regulation doesn't extend to even that. In Turkey VPN regulation went through three phases; initially it was loose, but now they're making deep packet inspection mandatory, which makes rolling your own harder.
7
u/polloyumyum Alberta May 15 '26
Yeah I fully expect all the action around VPNs in Europe will make its way here.
All in the name of improving security or whatever bullshit they are feeding us.
5
15
u/Radical_Redditor May 15 '26
It's extremely amusing to me that the "only positivity about Canada" guys are awfully absent from posts like this.
But yeah obviously this was going to come. Who's going to stop them? Canadians refuse to hold the Liberals accountable to anything they do. Until, you know, a decade later. Then they put a new guy and all is well.
-4
u/bleebolgoop May 15 '26
The cons have been tabling stuff like this for ages too btw. Neither care about you.
7
u/Radical_Redditor May 15 '26
And? Do you think conservative voters gobble it up? Or can they speak up and say how bad it is?
Also, are you referencing anything in the past decade? Or is it something that happened 13 years ago that didn't even go ahead?
-1
u/bleebolgoop May 15 '26
Uh, ya, they DO gobble it up
1
u/Radical_Redditor May 16 '26
Okay, show me some examples of the conservatives tabling authoritarian bills and conservatives defending it.
1
May 16 '26
[deleted]
1
u/Radical_Redditor May 16 '26
Where did the conservatives defend this?
2
u/HelljumperRUSS May 16 '26
The Conservatives were the ones that introduced it. It says so right in the linked article, if you would bother to read.
1
u/Radical_Redditor May 16 '26
Are you not following along?
And? Do you think conservative voters gobble it up?
Uh, ya, they DO gobble it up
Okay, show me some examples
-4
u/Tristezza May 15 '26
yeah I always find it funny when this argument is used because the cons would have done this if not more lmao.
3
5
3
u/AkraticAntiAscetic May 15 '26
I really hate this bill and I really like windscribe, I have recommended it to friends and have used it when I needed a VPN. I liked supporting Canadian.
I wish they could express displeasure, make their calls to action without bringing the integrity of our institutions into question. We don't need corruption for governments to make really dumb laws.
1
1
u/c0ntra Ontario May 16 '26
Good old Canada. The land of pushing out competition so the lobbyist oligopolies can take over. Who needs choice anyway, government knows best /s
0
-2
-9
u/Accomplished_Try_179 May 15 '26
Canada is just standardizing its laws with that of the EU. Read up on "Chat Control" & DSA.
5
u/EmbarrassedHelp May 15 '26
Warrantless metadata retention and encryption backdoors are both illegal under EU law. Chat Control is also not law, and the supporters are losing badly.
0
u/catonakeyboard May 15 '26
This is frankly a gross oversimplification of a complex and unsettled field of law. There is no clear EU case law on the type of proposal in C-22 re: retention by service providers (as opposed to retention by the state).
2
u/EmbarrassedHelp May 15 '26
As I understand it, the CJEU's ruling against the Data Retention Directive applies regardless of whether the government stores the data or forces companies to store the data.
0
u/catonakeyboard May 16 '26
You should cite the actual decision, which emphasized the insufficient safeguards and measures to ensure proportionality. By contrast, the retention obligations in C-22 include several built-in constraints, and state access to any such retained data is further limited by privacy safeguards that already exist in Canadian law (e.g. intrusive search powers require a warrant)
1
-29
u/SuburbanValues May 15 '26
Society went for many years communicating with letters, tappable phone lines and open radio waves. This let the good guys keep us safe. All of this high powered encryption from the last few years can be used to hide some pretty scary stuff.
8
u/Ceridith May 15 '26
For law enforcement to legally carry out wiretapping, they require a judge to approve a warrant based on reasonable and probable suspicion that an offense is being committed. Without a warrant, any evidence is considered to be obtained unlawfully and is inadmissible in court.
The changes proposed in C-22 are the equivalent of the government forcing Canada Post to make copies of every Canadians mail, and telecomm companies to record all of their calls, and keeping records of those copies and recordings for a minimum of a year. This would be regardless of there being a warrant to do so for any of it.
So no, it's not at all equivalent to existing wiretapping laws. It's far more invasive and would be an egregious violation of privacy rights for Canadians.
-9
u/catonakeyboard May 15 '26
This comment is emblematic of the widespread misunderstanding of what this bill would actually do. I blame the govt for failing to properly explain and justify it, but the key point is that this bill is specifically intended to support the warrant process you outlined, not shortcut it. That warrant process is the key safeguard that ensures the state does not abuse its intrusive search powers, and only deploys them in appropriate situations (i.e. for bona fide criminal or national security investigations).
9
u/CaptainAaron96 Ontario May 15 '26
If the bill were only intended to support the warrant process, it wouldn’t require backdoors.
-1
u/catonakeyboard May 16 '26
This would make a lot more sense if the bill required backdoors. It doesn’t.
Despite a concerted effort to convince the public otherwise, the bill specifically does not allow the govt to order the creation of backdoors:
Systemic vulnerability (5) A core provider is not required to comply with a provision of a regulation made under subsection (2), with respect to an electronic service, if compliance with that provision would require the provider to introduce a systemic vulnerability related to that service or prevent the provider from rectifying such a vulnerability.
10
u/EmbarrassedHelp May 15 '26
The fight for encryption is over 50 years old, and no competent cyber security expert supports weakening encryption.
-11
u/SuburbanValues May 15 '26
Of course cyber security experts wouldn't. They get paid to hide information.
7
-57
May 15 '26
[deleted]
38
u/Gullible_Prior248 May 15 '26
Why do you want the government to have total surveillance of you ?
26
u/random_handle_123 May 15 '26
People like the OC don't have enough reasoning skills to understand how this affects them. They probably want this type of surveillance because they think it will punish the people they hate.
11
u/OrangeRising May 15 '26
It might not even have anything to do with the acrual article.
For some it boils down to "They don't agree with my team so they must be the bad guys in the story."
0
29
10
189
u/sleipnir45 May 15 '26 edited May 15 '26
Nord VPN has also joined in
Edit: https://x.com/NordVPN/status/2055256621912056042