• 9point6@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 months ago

      Wrong bogeyman here, the more worrying problem is the CEO endorsing the US republicans, seemingly (and charitably) due to the ostensibly pro-privacy policy position, ignoring all the other policy advocation attached to endorsing them or their track record of doublespeak particularly around things like privacy.

    • RedPandaRaider@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      No so does France. Proton helped convict a French environmental activist by providing the courts full access to their private proton account.

      • Vinstaal0@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        Proton nor Tuta nor anybody else is above the law, you can read independant reports on the matter https://scroll.in/article/1084862/why-a-court-ban-on-encrypted-email-service-proton-mail-has-sparked-digital-privacy-fears or Proton’s own post about it https://proton.me/blog/climate-activist-arrest

        But I don’t believe that their entire account was shared with the police, but if that actually did happen and you have a proper source for it I gotta think to move my mail after all, so could you please share with the class where you read this?

        • philpo@feddit.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          Tbh, it’s not the worst thing when a service does that. There are cases where it is indicated - cartels, CSAM, etc. do not deserve a safe haven. The bad part about the France issue is the fact that the Swiss court system willfully allowed a case that was not per se illegal in Switzerland and had rather controversial legal grounds in France to proceed. This is very similar to the cases where Switzerland simply ignored their own laws under pressure from the US government in terms of bank accounts 15 years earlier.

          This is rather concerning and many Swiss legal experts did not share the opinion of Proton that there was nothing Proton could have done.

        • RedPandaRaider@feddit.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          It’s not about the law, but what’s right to me.

          Proton according to this post is virtue signalling. Claiming one thing, then doing the other.

          • Vinstaal0@feddit.nl
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 months ago

            It is about the law, though. Proton has always been clear about the possibility that they are required to hand over data if the Swiss government requires it: https://proton.me/legal/transparency

            So IDK where you are getting that they are saying one thing and doing another thing and even more important where you got that they shared ENCRYPTED data. Cause if they have the ability to even do that I have to rethink my choose since that should be impossible if Proton did it correctly and are trustworthy.