"rdohm: the EFF in conjunction with the Chaos Computer Club announced a new secure Instant Messenger called: GoldBug" "rdohm: We all need to evaluate this and will come back to you"
You have to audit the code to claim it is faulty.
No one ever claimed the code was faulty, only that the group was and is still doing things that are disreputable... lying about nonexistent press releases to con users into using it, censoring user inquiries, refusing to code signing reproducibility, dodging and faux-assert-confirm based redirecting tactics instead of simply answering simple questions, and questionable actions and methods irregular to usual work in the field... all documented on the internet, which people are too lazy to follow, to lazy to even get a copy of the PR from the EFF CCC. The advice has always been to audit code. Many people won't bother using or auditing any codes that come from groups that have disreputed themselves... that works for them. Others make careers out of analysing malwarez. And careers spreading it all over the net. No one ever claimed or forced that dev groups cannot or should not be anon, that's just as utterly ridiculous a position as claiming that posing any given question/request to anon devs is improper, that such queries are somehow not freespeech, that the askers should be cancelled. In fact, other than confidants, and the NSA GCHQ FBI etc, Satoshi was anon. (Satoshi never claimed EFF+CCC announced or had anything to do with Bitcoin, never disreputed the Bitcoin project by doing any of those type of shady and suspicious things.) The world needs anon devs to code the important softwares. And there are a lot more anon codes coming ;) Is GoldBug an op... you decide. Regardless... Expect Ops.