Isn't the resistance to official backdoors the enormous downside to a crack or hack? That is, everyone knows there's an official backdoor in Chromium encryption. All criminals and all nation state cryptanalysis orgs start in on it. The Romanians crack it. The crack gets used to siphon money from all kinds of accounts. Now Google has to replace all instances of Chromium for everyone to be safe. Huge PR and money downside.
You can change "Chromium" to "Safari" and "Google" to "Apple" and "Romanians" to whoever you like. Once the encryption or the backdoor or whatever is broken, there's a crisis. Google/Apple/Microsoft has to figure out what to do, and how to get the change past the various government certifications, and deal with the PR fallout.
If this happens 3 times, e-commerce becomes a thing of suspicion: nobody will want to have bank accounts on line.
There's some obvious 2nd order effects:
Slower development cycles. Every change has to be certified as a good back door by opaque government entities, from multiple governments. What a nightmare!
Open source goes away. If the source is available, someone recompiles without the backdoor. Illegal! Now we've got to ban open source. This is probably a good thing from the copyright maximalist position, but for nobody else.
Next order effect, is that governments will periodically sample traffic or test the backdoors to see if they work. They will find shady people with fake backdoors or encrypted-encryption with an unknown/better interior algorithm. This will lead to a lot of monitoring to ensure that only criminals have fake backdoors or better encryption.
There's a whole row of knock-on effects, every few of them with any benefit.