The essential problem is that governments treat elimination of private and secure methods as a game of whack-a-mole. As soon as a new service/software/protocol

The essential problem is that governments treat elimination of private and secure methods as a game of whack-a-mole. As soon as a new service/software/protocol pops up, the government either bans/eliminates it or forces a backdoor. In this environment, we should expect that any service/software/protocol which survives for a prolonged period is insecure, regardless of proofs, because it probably would not have been allowed to remain secure by the 'authorities'. This is, again, a political problem, because the populace supports Stasi-like surveillance.[1] The people are getting exactly what they want, and what they want is a horrific system. As H.L. Mencken said: "Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard". I understand that this seems a bit conspiratorial or paranoid, and I wish it were. If you want an example of how our expectations of surveillance have changed, please watch the 90s conspiracy-thriller "Enemy of the State". [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stasi https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stasi