This reminds me of when Apple first introduced, with great fanfare, their pivot to privacy-first and “Differential Privacy.”

However, when privacy experts later examined Apple's implementation, they found that the promised privacy was largely an illusion. The parameters Apple had chosen for their Differential Privacy were so weak that only a few data exchanges would be enough to de-anonymize individual users.

I don't know if they improved on it, but back then it was less about true privacy and more about the appearance of privacy and an unfortunate example of marketing (core differentiator, premium justification) taking precedence over meaningful protection.