I’m comparing Mullvad (a company) to Proton (a company) not their products. They both have a no-log policy (that’s a company policy) only one is actually no logs, and the other is “we sometimes log.” I don’t think you’re stupid either, so I don’t get what’s not getting through.
But like Proton, their VPN is incapable of logging access.
Mullvad’s VPN is incapable of doing so because their infrastructure is entirely built on volatile memory. This obviously doesn’t work with email because the emails need to persist, but this is isn’t a very big problem as that storage is encrypted.
My problem here is that access logs don’t need to be stored permanently. That could definitely be stored on a volatile medium, and then authorities could come over and confiscate it as much as they want. That sort of software architecture is entirely possible to set up, but Proton has made a decision not to.
“No personal information is required to create your secure email account. By default, we do not keep any IP logs which can be linked to your anonymous email account. Your privacy comes first.”
~Protonmail.com
That is a choice. They could’ve chosen to not comply, they could’ve chosen to let the authorities raid their servers, and had their servers been set up in such a fashion that no data could be obtained, there wouldn’t be a problem.
They’ve chosen instead to log and give up information on a climate activist; not a ring of traffickers, or a terrorist group, but some dude or dudette that thinks that climate change is a bit of a problem and that the people in charge aren’t doing enough about it.
You’re being dishonest, is what’s not getting through.
I guess we’ll have to agree to disagree. Do I realise that this creates legal problems for Proton? Yeah. So what? They’re a corporation, they get to deal with it. What this incident has shown is that their word doesn’t mean a thing. What happens when the fascist American regime starts demanding information on dissenters? Are they just going to fold and serve up whatever they ask on a silver platter, too?
What’s dishonest is saying “we don’t log, except when we do, and only when they’re serious criminals, or climate activists.”
To be fair, the IP is basically the only thing they can get, due their encryption they have access to the email body, which complies with privacy, but not anonymity.
deleted by creator
I’m comparing Mullvad (a company) to Proton (a company) not their products. They both have a no-log policy (that’s a company policy) only one is actually no logs, and the other is “we sometimes log.” I don’t think you’re stupid either, so I don’t get what’s not getting through.
deleted by creator
Mullvad’s VPN is incapable of doing so because their infrastructure is entirely built on volatile memory. This obviously doesn’t work with email because the emails need to persist, but this is isn’t a very big problem as that storage is encrypted.
My problem here is that access logs don’t need to be stored permanently. That could definitely be stored on a volatile medium, and then authorities could come over and confiscate it as much as they want. That sort of software architecture is entirely possible to set up, but Proton has made a decision not to.
That is a choice. They could’ve chosen to not comply, they could’ve chosen to let the authorities raid their servers, and had their servers been set up in such a fashion that no data could be obtained, there wouldn’t be a problem.
They’ve chosen instead to log and give up information on a climate activist; not a ring of traffickers, or a terrorist group, but some dude or dudette that thinks that climate change is a bit of a problem and that the people in charge aren’t doing enough about it.
I guess we’ll have to agree to disagree. Do I realise that this creates legal problems for Proton? Yeah. So what? They’re a corporation, they get to deal with it. What this incident has shown is that their word doesn’t mean a thing. What happens when the fascist American regime starts demanding information on dissenters? Are they just going to fold and serve up whatever they ask on a silver platter, too?
What’s dishonest is saying “we don’t log, except when we do, and only when they’re serious criminals, or climate activists.”
To be fair, the IP is basically the only thing they can get, due their encryption they have access to the email body, which complies with privacy, but not anonymity.