>The comments that followed were a bit off the rails. There's no conspiracy here from Microsoft. But the Internet discussion wound up catching the attention of Microsoft, and a day later, the account was unblocked, and all was well. I think this is just a case of bureaucratic processes getting a bit out of hand, which Microsoft was able to easily remedy. I don't think there's been any malice or conspiracy or anything weird.

it was a bit crazy how quickly people got conspiracy-minded about it.

microsoft fucked up, and as per typical big-tech, only fixed it when noise got made on social media. but not everything is a grand conspiracy orchestrated by microsoft or the government or whatever. incompetence is always more likely than malice.

any news from the veracrypt maintainers? i would imagine whatever microsoft employee got tasked with resolving this issue would have also seen that one.

---

edit: well, i certainly underestimated the response to this comment. my mistake for using a common saying rather than being extremely explicit when it comes to something as emotionally charged as microsoft. i dont think i have seen a comment of mine go up and down points so many times before.

what i intended to get across was: "this was not a deliberate, coordinated, purposeful attack on the wireguard project, at the behest of some microsoft executive, to accomplish some goal of making encrypted communication impossible or whatever. instead, this was the result of a stupid system, with a stupid resolution process (social media), that is still awful, but different in important ways from a deliberate attack. this is the typical scenario (stupid system, stupid resolution). the non-typical scenario would be a deliberate choice made and executed by microsoft employees to suddenly destroy a popular project".

i shortened the above paragraph to the common saying "incompetence is always more likely than malice". i shouldnt have. my bad.

> incompetence is always more likely than malice.

"Incompetence" of this degree is malice. It is actively malicious to create a system that automatically locks people out of their accounts with absolutely no possibility for human review or recourse short of getting traction in the media. "No sir, I didn't grind those orphans up. It was this orphan grinding machine I made that did it, teehee!"

With the way things are going right now with all the corruption in governments and corporations were way past the point of giving the benefit of the doubt. These organizations are clearly making changes to their OS's to slowly remove user control.

Everything should be treat as suspicious moving forward and I am glad of the skepticism.

Society is a bit fatigued of big tech companies making their various accounts essential and then locking people out of them without any due process.

All this doesn't matter. What matters is the destructive potential and a breach of trust. CAs have been distrusted for less.

Microsoft lost the benefit of the doubt decades ago.

Who needs conspiracy?

Microsoft has entitled itself to decide what I can and cannot run on the computer and OS that I paid for, this earns them no additional revenue, so they don't care to do a good job.

This system will never work properly.

> it was a bit crazy how quickly people got conspiracy-minded about it.

That's just the side effect of the Soross tracking chips hidden in vaccines activated by 5g towers

Conspiracy 1: rules from on-high about encryption projects to be suppressed. Debunked.

Conspiracy 2: Copilot all the things! Probably not too far off.