zlacker

I've found our problem. It appears the meaning has (apparently?) changed around 2014. Many search results you can find, including from IBM, and EFF, use the "old" (our) definition.

See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/End-to-end_encryption#Etymolog...

> The term "end-to-end encryption" originally only meant that the communication is never decrypted during its transport from the sender to the receiver.

> ...

> Later, around 2014, the meaning of "end-to-end encryption" started to evolve when WhatsApp encrypted a portion of its network. ...

But, I don't have confidence that the policy makers will make this distinction.

>>nomel+(OP)
So we're expected to use the layman's definition just because the technology became popular?