No it's not. I found two dismissive lines somewhere towards the end of you link. That's not addressing it at length somewhere worth clicking towards. Saving ot

No it's not. I found two dismissive lines somewhere towards the end of you link. That's not addressing it at length somewhere worth clicking towards. Saving others a click: > Re end-to-end encryption, that can be considered for the inner layer protocol. I don't rule it out, but it's not a priority at present.