He's talking about his need to bear firearms. SCOTUS in Heller was talking about his right to bear firearms. There's no disagreement here at all.
- I don't need firearms.
- I need encryption, as it is the equivalent of a weapon in the information age.
- I have a right to bear arms
- The Feds consider encryption to be a munition.
If these assumptions are true, I think you can make an argument that wielding strong encryption is conceptually equivalent to having a rifle.
He's talking about his need to bear firearms. SCOTUS in Heller was talking about his right to bear firearms. There's no disagreement here at all.