I think words are not meaningful for this issue; the measure is the actions they take to promote legislation securing private data. Consider:<p>1) A &#x27;backdoor&#x27; is only one of an infinite variety of exploits. Forswearing backdoors doesn&#x27;t mean they don&#x27;t help government access data otherwise.<p>2) The companies themselves collect and utilize private data on a massive scale. For most people, they are a much greater risk than government.<p>3) No matter what they say all of them will help government if the stakes are high enough. Imagine another major war like WWII, with America&#x27;s future on the line and tens of millions of lives at risk and the whole country behind the war effort. These companies would do whatever they could to support the effort (and probably that would be the right thing to do). That&#x27;s an extreme example, but my point is that blanket assurances are not meaningful; what matters is how they balance various priorities and respond to pressure.<p>Finally, talk is cheap; it costs them nothing and they do nothing. Let&#x27;s see them invest their resources and reputations in standards and legislation protecting private data from everyone, government and business.