> He specifically mentions that he is against backdoors and excludes them from the topic. While he put backdoors in quotes, his end argument is that "different

> He specifically mentions that he is against backdoors and excludes them from the topic. While he put backdoors in quotes, his end argument is that "differential traceability" gives just that - a backdoor that only law enforcement has access to that can be used to identify the activities of every user. It doesn't matter who says it, or with what vocabulary used -- a backdoor is a backdoor, and I argue that tracking all netizens is going to be, as I said before, a slippery slope. THAT BEING SAID, let me just give an example where this is not a slippery slope and we do this and all goes well and nobody does anything shady within the small "privileged" group of surveillors -- imagine this identification/"differential traceability" system gets hacked.