I’m not suggesting that you should. But if the government that controls a TLD is not trusted, then no site under that TLD should be trusted either.

If you trust the government that controls a TLD, then use the site. If not, proceed with caution.

Good to know. Thanks!

It would also be nice if there were a way to use them anonymously. ChatGPT seems to allow this, but I’m not entirely comfortable with OpenAI.

Yeah, that’s one of the complaints I have about them. Of course, if I need PGP, I prefer to encrypt an attachment myself offline and just send that, so it’s not a dealbreaker in my case.

Out of curiosity, and if you don’t mind my asking, which provider do you use?

Fair question. For everyday, run-of-the-mill, don’t-care-who-sees-it, a postcard is fine; I have a Gmail account for those. For anything more sensitive, I have a couple of Tuta accounts. If it’s truly confidential, I prefer to just say it in person.

For the second time conversing with a Proton apologist, we will simply have to agree to disagree.

There was no wait period when I signed up for their service, but that was several years ago. Things always change.

Other than not requiring a second email address linked to their service, being covered by German rather than Swiss law, actually fighting back against information requests, and not sucking up to the Chinese Communist Party, Tuta is probably fairly similar. Those differences, though, are persuasive.

Always good advice. But at least make the second basket one that you can trust. Proton ain’t it.

Anonymity is an aspect of privacy. Arguably, it is even expected. Proton pat themselves on the back about privacy without being honest about what that includes. They even have a blog post victim-blaming when their “privacy” marketing is shown to be false.

Admittedly, I don’t like Proton. They were far too quick to try to jump in bed with the Chinese Communist Party when Google was kicked out. It left a bad taste. I’ve seen absolutely nothing in the years since to make me question that position.

if the user practiced proper opsec it wouldn’t be an issue

Agreed

Proton provides privacy not anonymity

Anonymity most certainly is a part of privacy.

• https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/it-privacy/
• https://epic.org/issues/democracy-free-speech/anonymity/
• https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/2013/09/05/anonymity-privacy-and-security-online/
• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Privacy

The point is that Proton, a company that sells privacy, violated that trust, apparently without much of a fight.

The Spanish police didn’t even allege that the person is a terrorist.

I think we’re done here. We’re not even speaking the same language.

Have a nice life.

Questionable and not the point.

Its a very clear case that is painted in the story.

Indeed it is. The police asked and Proton provided. Very clear indeed.

At last, something we can agree on.

So there’s no real evidence of Google doing what you accuse them of?

Again, I’m no gigantic fan of Google, but they don’t seem any less reliable than Proton.

Did you read the story? Or are you just here to stir the pot and display your Proton Fanboi bona fides?

This person isn’t a terrorist.

Proton also don’t allow temp addresses.

Can you? Didn’t someone else mention that Proton don’t allow another Proton account?

Fair point.