Centralised WalletConnect servers as security/censorship choke point?

I'm trying to understand the resillience and security as well as censorship resistance of the Ethereum smart contracts space. I'm fairly new, so please understand,if my question is already resolved/easy to answer.

WalletConnect is the most widely used standard for dapps and wallets to be agnostic to the concrete counterparty they are connecting to. I was asking myself, how resillient this setup is.

For instance, if a dapp's UI is hosted on ipfs and it connects via metamask, then that connection is directly via the browser and local (afaik), and it cannot be intercepted (assuming browser not hacked etc.).

However, with WalletConnect there are relays running on wallet-connects servers which make this concrete connection between the dapp and the wallet. This is a centralised security/censorship issue. As far as I can see, it's not possible to host these relays yourself at the moment..

I also don't know the specifics of WalletConnect relays. What is the worst thing that can happen, if they become compromised? Can compromised servers deny people using a dapp? Can compromised servers make nasty things via mitm attacks?

I am aware, that the direct interaction with the smart contract can happen without the UI. But I don't think that the majority of users in crypto can actually do that when in emergency.

Given the value of decentralisation and Trustlessness, I am not sure, whether the widespread of WalletConnect relays is really all that ok. After all, if a powerful actor wants, they might approach the WalletConnect and force them to change their servers to do a specific thing.

It would be great, if this couldn't be used for censorship just like the tornado cash was blacklisted.

What do you think? I'm curious to hear from everyone.