The "backdoor" is that the receiver has no privacy or has to trust the sender. But thats by public design .. its a public announced feature of the software. Thats not a secret backdoor .. a public front door for the government at best.

And thats OK is people choose that by choice. GNU Taler promises eCash sender privacy .. that is even better compared to Bitcoin onchain (leaving an pseudonym public trace). But is transparent to the givernment on the trustless receiver side. That is still better then any digital payment like Visa, PayPal and a like.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

Its different from Bitcoin, sure. But in a normal western world where every commercial merchant needs to disclose received payment thru detailed booking to the government anyways its a common model they replicate - tranparency on the merchant side (receiver) and perfect privacy the customer side (sender) is a valid compromise for an commercial payment system. As long as Bitcoin for private to private payments is not illegal on the side .. I have no problem with that.

Describe a fashist turned world where GNUTaler would nit work for you? You have perfect sender privacy - your OK. If you wanna support the resistance you trust them anyway and can just give them your tokens (double spend is not relevant here) and now the resistance can spend with perfect sender privacy. So where would be the problem?

A backdoor is a backdoor whether it’s described in the documentation and public or not.

OK I consulted my LLM on that definition. It says to me if its as "public upfront design decision" in a software it is not a backdoor by definition. But I can see your case here. If you come from classic ecash it might feel like a backdoor because its privacy is weakend on one side by design. If you come from PayPal, Visa or SEPA system it still feels like a big privacy improvement .. and would be so much better what mainstream uses right now.