Awesome…

  • redpulpo@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    22 days 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.

      • redpulpo@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        22 days 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.

          • redpulpo@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            22 days 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.