I think his point is you can never be sure when someone is trying to break in to your house/subvert your communications, so it makes sense to take precautions.

I think his point is you can never be sure when someone is trying to break in to your house/subvert your communications, so it makes sense to take precautions. I don't want the government actively working to weaken house lock standards for a lot of the same reasons I don't want them working to subvert privacy technology. Admittedly, in this case the metaphor is kind of flawed since SR2 is the equivalent of a drug dealer's home, which the Feds would have no qualms about breaking in to.