it's in the reply they copied
Regarding Phrack’s claim on contacting our legal team 8 times: this is not true. We have only received two emails to our legal team inbox, last one on Sep 6 with a 48-hour deadline. This is unrealistic for a company the size of Proton, especially since the message was sent to our legal team inbox on a Saturday, rather than through the proper customer support channels
artyom@piefed.social 5 weeks ago
You can blame them for being slow but I don't think you can reasonably assert that they're malicious, which I think is the implication.
limer@lemmy.ml 5 weeks ago
The important thing to me is not maliciousness, but reliability under political , social and legal pressure.
All of this is hard to understand, much of what is happening is opaque.
Also this does not apply to all people. Depending on hundreds of variables, one person’s issue is not relevant to another.
I am in a country that can exert legal pressure on them; and so I cannot use their services
artyom@piefed.social 5 weeks ago
There's no legal pressure here. Just a request. A request that it makes sense for them to respond to, for the sake of their own users.
What service do you think isn't subject to legal pressure?
limer@lemmy.ml 5 weeks ago
Under USA law proton cannot reveal some requests, or even talk about deeper collaboration.
This is why some services use canaries. When something is removed from a page it can be assumed they ante under a gag order. This has happened many times ,see en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warrant_canary
By and large political opposition in an authoritarian country should not use tools under that jurisdiction.
I would definitely base my email outside of that influence.