I like being contrarian as much as the next guy, but "Actually, having security is worse for security" is taking it a little too far.
It is however in the interest of the people to keep the systems running in an untainted way.
As said, on the individual level it's a tragedy, but one that can be absorbed somewhat. Democracy itself failing otoh is kinda hard to absorb.
C2PA is not "having security". It is "having an illusion of security for compliance and CYA reasons, that can be fairly trivially exploited by nation state actors". Banality of evil. Again.
___
Actually, come to think of it, "security" is the wrong term there. Signatures don't secure anything. They attest.
Those are different things. Argh and I ran with your term aah
Not to mention, democracy is under just as much or more threat from "banal" fake news created by citizens. People gonna people. They don't need the DPRK lying to them to fool themselves.
And I agree on state actors. If a major one is invested in something like this they might have well compromised the signing project itself, the verification process, or even the court system or media. That seems like a rare and extremely high bar to guard against.