Proton’s reputation has been getting shaky. First it was the poorly worded communication regarding support for Republicans. Then the privacy in question when they handed user’s data over to authorities. Now this.
Yen’s support for republicans wasn’t poorly worded. He explicitly said they are for the little man while the democrats are for big business and praised one of trumps cabinet picks.
He’s a piece of shit. Nothing about that was poorly worded.
It was poorly worded because he was meant to target a specific portion of something about antitrust. What he ended up doing is blatantly supporting something a Republican brought up. I guess he couldn’t have found someone within spitting distance that wasn’t Republican and also supported antitrust. Don’t know how, but that’s how short-sighted Andy is.
Ok, the first 2 instances are wildly out of context, don’t know how much it is the case in the newest case.
The congratulations to Trump were for the appointment of Gail Slater, which he very much agreed to because of Slater’s reputation as being “not good for big tech”. (Slater did not last long, as expected)
And the “data transfer” to authorities was a legal requirement imposed by the courts of the country they are in (based on “terrorism” charges by the french authorities - for essentially squatting), with no actually doable legal recourse left (as it often is in “terrrorism” cases). No preexisting data was available. They had to wait for the activist to log in, to catch the IP address of the client connecting to the surveilled account in the live system.
Refusing to comply with lawful orders of the country you are seated in can absolutely wreck your shit, and you might even lose control over your infrastructure people depend on.
And had the activist used an VPN to connect to his mailbox, the story would have probably ended there, especially if the VPN had been Proton itself - the injunction was only for the Mailbox, and VPNs are pretty much untouchable regarding surveillance in Switzerland.
After a Swiss court order, and they only could provide an IP adressen where the account was first made. Don’t spread partial information that doesn’t reflect wat happened.
This is exactly the sort of thing why im baffled that people are leaving for companies in countries with either little or literally no data privacy laws.
Sure andy is a dipshit. But at least he doesn’t get a god damn say over how some things are done. Because the law sits out side his control.
I think I was pretty clear I didn’t know the full details in my comment. Besides, I don’t see what is misinformation here. And IP address is a user’s data.
Say and do stupid shit, get stupid prizes.
Proton’s reputation has been getting shaky. First it was the poorly worded communication regarding support for Republicans. Then the privacy in question when they handed user’s data over to authorities. Now this.
How’s that for loser thinking, Andy?
Yen’s support for republicans wasn’t poorly worded. He explicitly said they are for the little man while the democrats are for big business and praised one of trumps cabinet picks.
He’s a piece of shit. Nothing about that was poorly worded.
It was poorly worded because he was meant to target a specific portion of something about antitrust. What he ended up doing is blatantly supporting something a Republican brought up. I guess he couldn’t have found someone within spitting distance that wasn’t Republican and also supported antitrust. Don’t know how, but that’s how short-sighted Andy is.
So… he meant to lick some boots while maintaining optics, but he ended up fucking himself with a red hat?
Don’t forget about Proton sponsoring Nazi YouTubers.
Ok, the first 2 instances are wildly out of context, don’t know how much it is the case in the newest case.
The congratulations to Trump were for the appointment of Gail Slater, which he very much agreed to because of Slater’s reputation as being “not good for big tech”. (Slater did not last long, as expected)
And the “data transfer” to authorities was a legal requirement imposed by the courts of the country they are in (based on “terrorism” charges by the french authorities - for essentially squatting), with no actually doable legal recourse left (as it often is in “terrrorism” cases). No preexisting data was available. They had to wait for the activist to log in, to catch the IP address of the client connecting to the surveilled account in the live system.
Refusing to comply with lawful orders of the country you are seated in can absolutely wreck your shit, and you might even lose control over your infrastructure people depend on.
And had the activist used an VPN to connect to his mailbox, the story would have probably ended there, especially if the VPN had been Proton itself - the injunction was only for the Mailbox, and VPNs are pretty much untouchable regarding surveillance in Switzerland.
There was something before that about providing a journalists data to authorities or something too.
After a Swiss court order, and they only could provide an IP adressen where the account was first made. Don’t spread partial information that doesn’t reflect wat happened.
This is exactly the sort of thing why im baffled that people are leaving for companies in countries with either little or literally no data privacy laws.
Sure andy is a dipshit. But at least he doesn’t get a god damn say over how some things are done. Because the law sits out side his control.
You make a great point.
But have you never met a CEO who used their access to break the law?
Trust is tricky, and an individual choice.
My security use case isn’t preventing government access.
I think I was pretty clear I didn’t know the full details in my comment. Besides, I don’t see what is misinformation here. And IP address is a user’s data.
Do share how much data they could actually provide