Is White Noise going to represent a protocol then? Like in the Blossom sense?

Just make sure it works all the time.

Thank you for your service 🙏

Tell me please. Am I some kind of retarded or is the backdoor claim just technically not enforcable on opensource? I mean whatever stock-traded company maby can be pressured to implement something on their server. But when someone forks Signal for example and adds a backdoor, it is just a bit unlikely, that many people will start to use it. And all these laws can also not enforce to unlearn all cryptographic algorythms that are prooven to work. So eighter I am very naive or cryptography will work no matter if some law would request a backdoor or not.

It already does.

GitHub

Add NIP-EE: E2EE messaging using MLS by erskingardner · Pull Request #1427 · nostr-protocol/nips

Take 2! This NIP outlines a way to do secure direct and group messaging on Nostr using the MLS protocol. Easy to read

Means NIP-EE is intended to be seen as not just a NIP but a protocol (that'll be split out and have it's own separate NIP-like docs)? Keychat is not on NIP-EE, so that would make Keychat on another protocol? Or what's the wider lay of the land here?

Governments be like: "How do we ban math?" 🔢🚓🤡

So NIP-EE is all about how to apply the MLS protocol to Nostr. MLS is a true protocol but is agnostic in how implementations do message delivery and identity (the specifically call out that this is the domain of the implementations). NIP-EE fills in the blanks for how to use Nostr for those two services. It's probably won't have it's own NIPs per se, but maybe it should given the overall complexity of MLS messaging and the additional protocol features we'll want to add over time. Keychat is off spec and won't be interoperable until they change. But many other apps will be implementing NIP-EE messaging so we'll have interoperable uses of MLS all over nostr soon.