I don't know about the name "technet" in particular but there are services that aggregate technical service bulletins released by car manufacturers to make them more easily available to independent (non-dealer) mechanics.
It's more than just service bulletins. It aggregates service bulletins as well as common failures, steps to diagnose, and common repair procedures. Most of the data is via 3rd party repair centers as dealers quit sharing this data ages ago. Shops across the country use it to generate estimates and pay their techs. This ensures all work gets logged and that diags and standard procedures improve over time.
I don't know if that's an official term, I think it might refer to a legacy platform that doesn't exist any longer. It's a software package that aggregates common failures and repair procedures across 3rd party repair shops. They use it to do estimates and pay their techs as the techs are on contract and paid per the job.
A major reason for these people using Signal is specifically to avoid government access to records of these chats. In particular access by future administrations, or current or near future judicial or congressional investigations.
Now the task of an adversary is to simply enable the backdoor rather than create it from scratch. The people using Signal for this are doing it on their own devices, so now you have multiple problems.
Eg how to get non technical people to know when they’re using the civilian version.
Alternative crazy universe:
Just use the tech that was created for the government and does all the right things.
I'm not defending the use of signal. That said this strawman is very weak. It's not uncommon to have two versions of the same app on your phone these days. My Google drive instance changes from personal to company based on my identity. This isn't hard to implement securely these days.
But then you’re required to archive the discussions for the public to access. That’s much worse for these people than foreign agents (and journalists apparently) listening in and taking notes.
When I left microsoft, I kept everything EXCEPT data bearing devices. I got the sense they REALLY didn't want to have to collect the laptops either, but the VPs were forced to by compliance.
In every instance where I've been privvy to government partnerships, the version of the solutions we deployed were modified to meet regulatory standards.
I'm 4 years into having to use outlook after switching jobs and no longer being able to use google workspace. I continue to be frustrated by the confusing and arcane processes required to do basic stuff like fine previously declined meetings, book an out of office that doesn't spam everyone, use search and actually have it find stuff, automatically place emails into folders in a sane fashion, actually accept/decline a meeting and not have it randomly stay as "tentative" and so on.
Comparatively, outloook feels like a complete mess.
It put some really old ones in a the top as the most relevant. Then in a section titled "Older" it put the most recent ones. The sort column was by date.
There has never been a good first-party answer to that in the past, though there were various third-party extensions and tools. Today the answer is just add the copilot license to your o365... its automatic rag over all your stuff is better than anything available before.
Having worked on the infra side of azure, I'm not surprised. Network is centrally managed and that team was a nightmare to deal with. Their ticket queue was so bad they only worked on sev 1 and the occasional 0. Nothing else got touched without talking to a VP and even then it often didn't change things.
Apple has been advertising security and privacy as a top feature for years now. It would make sense for people to get upset if those features were removed.
How many times have we been down this path? Tcp/IP, dos/windows, Linux, virtualization, and on and on. Open platforms always seem to find a way to usurp everyone else. In the end, it's better to be a service provider.
reply