Maybe if you made your point straight instead of making laconic remarks this discussion would be more constructive…
All I got from your few words is that apparently you consider the NSA breaking into a random foreign app a reasonable threat model to design around. Abduction from the CIA being only marginally more unlikely, why bother with anything?
Or maybe I misunderstood your point but then again when you can't bother writing down two consecutive sentences how am I supposed to read your mind?
I can't help you with any of this, but again: the argument you made about cryptography and jurisdiction, nobody on this thread has taken the other side of.
It's getting outright fascinating, why do you even stick in this conversation if you don't want to engage in it with more than one ambiguous sentence at a time?
All I got from your few words is that apparently you consider the NSA breaking into a random foreign app a reasonable threat model to design around. Abduction from the CIA being only marginally more unlikely, why bother with anything?
Or maybe I misunderstood your point but then again when you can't bother writing down two consecutive sentences how am I supposed to read your mind?