Neither of these hacks involved "back doors" as they are normally defined. One was an authentication bypass; the other was a supply chain attack. Neither involved any sort of deliberate covert access mechanism.
Let me be cystal clear. I've worked in domestic violence. Cops will use various tools to stalk their ex'es despite your claims that back door or priveleged access will not be abused.
Jump over to healthcare, the worker with full access to the govt it system for cases WILL lookup their friend / family members / neighbors / famous person if they see them on site or realize they are in system.
I have one experience with a private health HMO. A close relative, senior doctor, absolutely knew they would be immediately fired if they looked up family records. It was crazy, they would not do ANYTHING related to family stuff even by request of person involved. Obviously this place had some type of audit trail, some type of monitoring team for non-assigned patient record lookups etc.
My govt IT job, to do billing you had to be able to see case notes, and the system was integrated across of a ton of agencies, so everyone basically had access to everything and because you had to share logins and passwords (it took like 6 months to get a new account setup) there wasn't any accountability (not that I think they monitored anyway).
I came away very unimpressed. We had to use outdated IE / Java combos etc. as well and block all system updates. The default landing page was an unregistered domain name.
I don't think OP meant to imply that backdoors had anything to do with this. It's meant to underscore the argument against backdooring encryption by pointing out that when you trust some entity with a backdoor, you're potentially opening that backdoor to anyone who can break that entity's security, which may be very, very flawed.
That's unrelated to backdoors (deliberate covert access mechanisms). All parties with access to data, regardless of whether it is via a backdoor, can put that data at risk due to their own security.
This is only unrelated if you don't consider government-mandated master key escrow a "backdoor," which seems deliberately obtuse to me. Regardless, the OP's point was that this is an additional argument against governments mandating a way to access your encrypted data, because you shouldn't be compelled to trust anyone else with a "don't worry, only we will have access" sort of system.
