Is the desire for e2e/zero knowledge encryption (Skiff, Proton, Signal etc) a stated preference with a much smaller TAM vs the revealed preference of 'just good enough' or 'the devs will add it later' encryption?

Building Chamber. Prior: VP at Adobe, Head of Behance, co-founder of the Content Authenticity Initiative, early days at TED. https://withchamber.com/

BDFL of Quilibrium, Eng @ Farcaster, ex-Coinbase, always opinionated, never hydrated

Part of this is because it is incredibly difficult to retain the security guarantees by smoothing some of those rough edges. Part of it is because a more holistic solution is required (PKI, such as Apple's iCloud Keychain infrastructure and Advanced Data Protection, has now enabled equivalent security with easier use)

Part of the stated vs revealed preference of E2EE, ZK, MPC, and other cryptographic approaches, hell, even cryptocurrencies, is that the value delivered has to be greater than the investment. With Signal, a lot of heavy lifting is done to make it as usable as possible, and even then, there are still rough edges.

🇧🇷🇺🇸-  Book: Making Things Think: https://holloway.com/mtt. Investor in Wander, Ocho, Footprint, Merkle Manufactory, Dynamic, Yuzu Health, and more!

My take on that is they get someone who had access to the group chat to copy/screenshot/etc. I don’t think the encryption is broken (or at least I tell myself that!!)

I wonder how the FBI gets access to signal messages though if it’s truly encrypted. One example is Tucker and his planned meeting with Putin.

My info is four years out of date, but when I was working on Graphite Docs, it was a revealed preference but for a very small TAM.