

Except it notes that the wireguard dev definitely complied with that so while Microslop might be hiding behind that fiction it is just a fiction and not the real cause.
I’m suspicious if it isn’t because the US has discovered something exploitable in both wireguard and veracrypt and want to prevent it being patched while they (the US) unleash it against their enemies over a prolonged period. That or just crushing privacy.
Linux stay winning I guess as this would be the first case in history where Microsoft has used its position as gatekeeper to prevent Windows users from running software they want to run in this manner. Even worse you have to disable driver signature enforcement system-wide to bypass it, it’s more locked down than Apple which can grant per application gate-keeper exemptions. It’s just up until now Microsoft handed out driver signing like candy.
It’s interesting both of these are also tools likely be targeted by the “child safety” panic being shopped around to enact ID laws. Encryption without a backdoor is something they really hate whether it’s for data in transit or at rest.
One last thought is that Microsoft mentioned kicking third parties out of the kernel after the Crowdstrike fiasco where they borked a ton of airline computers due to awful practices. Many hoped it would mean kicking anti-cheat out of the kernel but it would be very Microsoft to start with kicking privacy tools out instead and simply insist that using Windows bitlocker is enough and Windows VPN settings are adequate and therefore these software needn’t be in the kernel.








Then they will break you and industry that wants data will win. You vs bourgeois governments, you will lose.
This is a serious push and though children are the cover they’re after surveillance. Take away their talking points, give them what they claim to want but in a privacy-preserving way and this goes away for another 10 years before they can make another push.
If we win this fight by doing a zero knowledge form they have no scaffolding to use on which to build anything further. If we lose and they build something that isn’t zero knowledge it will 100% be used in a few years to iterate on to build more surveillance and control.
Basically if we don’t push for this privacy alternative and instead fight like hell against it entirely they’ll listen to the only voices putting forward a solution which is meta and the other privacy invasive actors who want an invasive approach. If it’s made heard that people will accept this we can shunt them onto this path.
Ideally we’d push onto this path but make demands that it doesn’t require verification. That parents can set it up at phone/computer setup and it cannot be changed without reinstalling the OS or erasing the phone and that on phones it gets tied to a Google/Apple account. That way there’s not even any identity aspect involved but tools given to parents who want to do this. Shove it back to parental responsibility. But this would be a compromise we could live with and still have some privacy with.