>Lawyers, for example, are trusted third parties that provide this sort of protection in certain cases. "[Attorney-Client Privilege] It applies in all situatio

>Lawyers, for example, are trusted third parties that provide this sort of protection in certain cases. "[Attorney-Client Privilege] It applies in all situations, though a lawyer may be required to testify regarding client communications under compulsion of law." [0] All that you do in that system is shift the risk from the client to the attorney. If the attorney is not willing to lay down their life for you then you're out of luck. How does one verify that an attorney will not give them up if compelled? > We ought to spend some time thinking about them rather than simply accepting as dogma that anonymity is an unalloyed good, and that anyone who challenges this view ought to be downvoted into oblivion. People raping children and spreading the depiction of those acts is bad, but if you want provable protection then you have to take the bad with the good. If the anonymity or pseudo-anonymity is not trustless then it should not be trusted in life or death scenarios. [0] https://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/administrative/professional_responsibility/confidentiality_or_attorney.authcheckdam.pdf https://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/administrative/p...