208
submitted 2 days ago by jrcruciani@lemmy.wtf to c/privacy@lemmy.ml

Awesome...

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Doomsider@lemmy.world 1 points 2 hours ago

Proton, if it cared, could have taken any number of steps to mitigate this problem. Like I said, they created a false image of what they provided to the public and have been back peddling ever since. I get it you don't see it that way and that you don't view yourself as a shill.

[-] redpulpo@lemmy.world 3 points 2 hours ago

You’re still confusing two completely different things: privacy and anonymity. Encryption protects the content of messages, not every piece of metadata around an account. Proton has always been clear about that.

In the 404 Media case, the identification came from payment information, not from Proton breaking encryption. If someone pays with a credit card, their identity is already tied to the account. That would happen with any provider under legal jurisdiction.

Honestly, the way you’re framing this suggests you don’t really understand how encryption, metadata, and OPSEC work. Encryption ≠ anonymity. Anyone who actually works in security knows that.

[-] Doomsider@lemmy.world 1 points 2 hours ago

I was never confused about the issue. Honestly you are just shilling for Proton.

[-] redpulpo@lemmy.world 2 points 1 hour ago

I’m not shilling for Proton. I’m pointing out a basic distinction you keep ignoring: encryption protects message content, not identity.

Calling Proton’s encryption a “lie” just shows you’re arguing emotionally rather than technically. Anyone who actually understands the space knows encrypted email was never meant to guarantee anonymity.

[-] Doomsider@lemmy.world 1 points 1 hour ago

I said their marketing was a lie. Hey I get it, reading is hard.

[-] redpulpo@lemmy.world 2 points 1 hour ago

I read it just fine. What you’re doing is calling it a “lie” because you expected anonymity from a tool that advertises encrypted email. Those aren’t the same thing.

Anyone who actually understands the basics of privacy tools knows that. Your argument sounds more like frustration than a technical point.

[-] Doomsider@lemmy.world 1 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 1 hour ago)

Please, they changed their marketing and had to make several clarifications. They were deceptive to begin with. It was always dumb considering they only ever followed the law. It was never like they went above and beyond.

Hey we are company that follows the law pick us just doesn't have the vibe that got them their business.

I criticize the company for their practices you are playing shill pretending to "inform" me about technical issues.

this post was submitted on 05 Mar 2026
208 points (100.0% liked)

Privacy

46940 readers
586 users here now

A place to discuss privacy and freedom in the digital world.

Privacy has become a very important issue in modern society, with companies and governments constantly abusing their power, more and more people are waking up to the importance of digital privacy.

In this community everyone is welcome to post links and discuss topics related to privacy.

Some Rules

Related communities

much thanks to @gary_host_laptop for the logo design :)

founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS