Signal May Leave Canada Over Bill C-22

Image credit: Shutterstock

Signal has warned it could leave Canada rather than comply with Bill C-22 if the proposed law forces the company to weaken the privacy protections behind its encrypted messaging service.

Signal vice-president of strategy and global affairs Udbhav Tiwari said the company “would rather pull out of the country” than compromise the privacy promises it has made to users.

Part 2 Raises Encryption Access Concerns

Bill C-22, introduced in March as the Lawful Access Act, 2026, would create a framework for electronic service providers to help authorities access information under existing legal powers. The Canadian government says the bill would support access under current authorities in the Criminal Code and the Canadian Security Intelligence Service Act. It says the proposal does not create a new standalone interception power.

The concern for encrypted messaging companies centers on Part 2 of the bill. That section would allow regulations and orders requiring designated providers to develop, test and maintain technical capabilities to extract, organize and provide authorized access to information. Critics say that language could pressure companies to redesign secure systems in ways that weaken encryption.

Apple and Meta Also Oppose Bill C-22

Signal’s warning follows public opposition from Apple and Meta. Apple said the bill could allow Canada to force companies to insert encryption backdoors into their products. Meta said the proposal could require providers to build or maintain capabilities that break or bypass encryption and other zero-knowledge security systems.

Those concerns matter because encrypted messaging services rely on systems that prevent even the provider from reading user messages. Signal says any access mechanism created for government use would also weaken security for everyone else.

Public Safety Canada Denies Backdoor Claims

Public Safety Canada has rejected the companies’ interpretation. A department spokesperson said Bill C-22 would not force companies to create systemic vulnerabilities in encryption or other security protections.

Government material says the bill is meant to ensure providers can comply with lawful orders under existing authorities, not create new surveillance powers. The dispute now turns on whether Canada can require technical access capabilities without weakening end-to-end encryption. For Signal, the position is clear. If Bill C-22 forces it to compromise encryption, the company says it would rather leave Canada than break its privacy commitments.