Well, it has been a generation since this standard business practice
was challenged. And then went to covert cooperation to placate consumer
anger. Why would a new generation not do the same as their mentors?

Even here, among hackers, in universities, in corporations, in government,
hats change colors, as heads and wallets and guts fatten.

Hellman has said he regrets releasing PKC, succumbing to a young
man's and scholar's desire for publicity over bland government secrecy.
Now thinks national security is bigger than individual desire. This is
the arc of maturity, especially from those who did gain publicity early
on and now welcome invitations to serve as official advisors.

Our cpunk heros Whit Diffie and David Wagner are serving as reviewers
for NSA best cybersecurity paper. Others are invited to NSA and Congress
to provide counsel to policymakers. Others peddle crypto to governments
and corporations as if RSA, Google, Apple, Facebook, Twitter, the AV
hustlers are the required standard of duplicity demanded by investors.

At 12:08 AM 2/14/2015, Travis Biehn wrote:

From the article http://www.cbsnews.com/news/obamas-cybersecurity-plan-why-the-government-cant-protect-us/

"Dave DeWalt, CEO of security firm Mandiant, a participant in Friday's summit, hopes that fear of privacy invasion won't get in the way of the work that needs to get done. He pointed to the way the way public backlash to government surveillance programs revealed by former NSA contractor Edward Snowden stymied previous efforts to effectively open the lines of communication.

"This balance between privacy and security ebbs and flows and unfortunately that was a huge setback -- a setback to the tune of several years," he said.
"

This is the first that I've ever heard of a tradeoff between privacy and security in the context of 'cyber security'.
It's interesting to see this common trope for justifying widespread erosion of privacy in meatspace applied to 'cyber', where it is even more egregiously wrong.

Travis