this post was submitted on 06 Mar 2026
12 points (65.0% liked)

Proton

9015 readers
76 users here now

Empowering you to choose a better internet where privacy is the default. Protect yourself online with Proton Mail, Proton VPN, Proton Calendar, Proton Drive. Proton Pass and SimpleLogin.

Proton Mail is the world's largest secure email provider. Swiss, end-to-end encrypted, private, and free.

Proton VPN is the world’s only open-source, publicly audited, unlimited and free VPN. Swiss-based, no-ads, and no-logs.

Proton Calendar is the world's first end-to-end encrypted calendar that allows you to keep your life private.

Proton Drive is a free end-to-end encrypted cloud storage that allows you to securely backup and share your files. It's open source, publicly audited, and Swiss-based.

Proton Pass Proton Pass is a free and open-source password manager which brings a higher level of security with rigorous end-to-end encryption of all data (including usernames, URLs, notes, and more) and email alias support.

SimpleLogin lets you send and receive emails anonymously via easily-generated unique email aliases.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Is this true??

top 38 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Nelizea@lemmy.world 12 points 19 hours ago* (last edited 19 hours ago) (2 children)

First, let's correct the headline: Proton did not provide information to the FBI. What happened is that the FBI submitted a Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty (MLAT) request, which was processed by the Swiss Federal Department of Justice and Police. Proton operates exclusively under Swiss law, and we only respond to legally binding orders from Swiss authorities, after all Swiss legal checks have been passed. This is an important distinction.

Second, let's talk about what this case actually involved. This wasn't a routine investigation. Swiss authorities determined that the legal threshold was met because a law enforcement officer was shot, and explosive devices were found during a protest in 2024. Switzerland has one of the strongest legal frameworks for privacy in the world, and its standard for granting international legal assistance is exceptionally high. This case met that standard.

Third, let's talk about what was actually disclosed. No emails were handed over. No message content. No metadata about who the user communicated with. The only information Proton could provide was a payment identifier because the user chose to pay with a credit card. This is information the user themselves provided to us through their choice of payment method. Proton also accepts cryptocurrency and cash payments, which would not have been linkable to an identity.

If anything, this case demonstrates exactly what we've always said: Proton holds very little user data by design. Even under the most serious legal circumstances, the only data that could be produced was a payment record. Our encryption means we simply cannot access email content even if ordered to.

We understand that stories like this can be alarming, and we take our users' trust seriously. We will continue to fight for privacy and challenge any legal order we believe does not meet the strict requirements of Swiss law. But we also want to be transparent: no service can operate outside the law entirely, and Swiss law requires compliance with valid legal orders in serious criminal cases. What we can promise is that the legal bar in Switzerland is among the highest in the world, and our architecture ensures we have as little data as possible to hand over.

For users who want maximum anonymity: use Proton VPN or Tor, pay with cash or cryptocurrency, and don't add a recovery email.

https://old.reddit.com/r/ProtonMail/comments/1rlt75p/proton_mail_helped_fbi_unmask_anonymous_stop_cop/o8yccme/?context=3

[–] meldrik@lemmy.wtf 3 points 15 hours ago (1 children)
[–] nocturne@slrpnk.net 2 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

https://proton.me/support/pay-with-bitcoin

Not sure why it does not appear for you. Maybe you have to use the web interface?

[–] meldrik@lemmy.wtf 1 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

Nice, but then you might as well pay with a credit card.

[–] GraveyardOrbit@lemmy.zip -2 points 17 hours ago

Cooperating with a terrorist state is plenty of reason for me to pass your service by. Fuck amerikkka

[–] Luminous5481@anarchist.nexus 17 points 1 day ago (3 children)

Proton didn't "help the FBI". Proton was forced to help the Swiss government. By law, Proton has to refuse to help the FBI, because that would break Swiss privacy laws. But if the FBI convinces the Swiss government to help them, then the Swiss can just kick in Proton's doors and seize all their servers if Proton refuses a legal warrant.

Proton is privacy focused email, it is not anonymous email unless you use Tor and pay with Bitcoin.

[–] Steve@communick.news 2 points 20 hours ago (2 children)

Since they "helped" the Swiss court by following necessary Swiss law, didn't they "help" the FBI?

If they didn't even know the FBI was asking the Swiss courts, one could still say they were "helped" to the FBI. What they did was "helpful" to the FBI.

[–] Luminous5481@anarchist.nexus 3 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

don't be pedantic. you know exactly what I meant when I said they didn't help the FBI.

[–] Steve@communick.news 1 points 15 hours ago

No. That's the point. We have different ideas about what it means to help. I think help is simply doing something (or not doing something) that benefits someone else. You (and others) seem to also give it some additional qualities related to consent, agrement, or support. Since I don't ascribe any moral judgement to the word and only use its most limited literal meaning, I hope it's more clear to you how confusing ican be when you infer morality from amoral terms.

[–] ZombieCyborgFromOuterSpace@piefed.ca 1 points 15 hours ago (1 children)

You're being very pedantic for nothing.

[–] Steve@communick.news 0 points 15 hours ago (1 children)

Yes. It would save a lot of confusion online if people were more pedantic. One might even call it helping.

[–] ZombieCyborgFromOuterSpace@piefed.ca 0 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

No. You're creating debates and arguments over insignificant shit.

[–] Steve@communick.news 0 points 13 hours ago

The two aren't mutually exclusive.

[–] cypherpunks@lemmy.ml 0 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

Proton chooses to retain data associating accounts with personal information from credit card payments, and they choose to advertise Swiss legal jurisdiction as a privacy feature.

[–] Luminous5481@anarchist.nexus 2 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

they choose to advertise Swiss legal jurisdiction as a privacy feature.
Swiss legal jurisdiction as a privacy feature
privacy feature

if you stick a privacy fence up around your house, does it make you anonymous? of course not, because privacy does not mean anonymous. you should not blame someone else because you are confused on the difference between privacy and anonymity.

[–] cypherpunks@lemmy.ml 2 points 15 hours ago* (last edited 15 hours ago) (1 children)

given that Swiss law means complying with MLAT requests from many countries including the US, why do you think Proton chooses to retain data linking user accounts with payment identities?

if you stick a privacy fence up around your house, does it make you anonymous? of course not, because privacy does not mean anonymous. you should not blame someone else because you are confused on the difference between privacy and anonymity.

i am not confused at all about "the difference between privacy and anonymity"; the former is a broader concept which includes the latter. Privacy regarding one's identity (or avoiding revealing the link between related identities, which is what is usually meant by "anonymity") is one of many types of privacy.

Proton mail advertises "privacy", not "privacy except not with regards to your legal identity which we needlessly retain information about and which you should obviously expect us to give to the authorities upon request".

where did you get the notion that "privacy" excludes "anonymity"? this is not a rhetorical question, i am interested to know because I see these "difference between privacy and anonymity" comments frequently lately and i wonder where this meme originated.

[–] Luminous5481@anarchist.nexus 0 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

why do you think Proton chooses to retain data linking user accounts with payment identities?

fraud prevention and account security, which they specify on their website. especially if you opt into their increased security protocols, your payment information can used to validate your identity to protect your account from being stolen.

where did you get the notion that “privacy” excludes “anonymity”?

the dictionary. proton does not advertise themselves as anonymous email. since the two words have wholly different meanings, where did you get the notion that someone advertising apples was selling oranges? idk if you're trying to be argumentative for the sake of it, but your position is ridiculous because anonymity was never advertised, and you're trying to infer it is to justify your position that proton has done something wrong. you've already reached your conclusion and are trying to twist the literal meaning of words to justify your biases.

[–] cypherpunks@lemmy.ml 1 points 13 hours ago* (last edited 13 hours ago)

proton does not advertise themselves as anonymous email.

So, i just checked, and they actually do (albeit with caveats, including not using your name when signing up, but no mention of when paying) here and here among other places.

I see also that those pages are promulgating exactly the "anonymity vs. privacy" false dichotomy that you are. Proton writes (emphasis mine):

Privacy means controlling who receives specific information. In the email context, this means encrypting your message so no one besides its intended recipient and you can read it — not even the service provider.

Their very narrowly-scoped definition of the word privacy is inconsistent with how most of the world uses the word. Proton is defining email privacy to mean solely the confidentiality of the body of the message (which they also provide a trivial-for-them-to-circumvent protection of, incidentally) but the word "privacy" elsewhere (eg, in law, technology, academia, and colloquially) has a much broader meaning.

Or, to put it more simply: Category:Anonymity is (literally) a subcategory of Category:Privacy.

Proton isn't even consistent in their own usage of their absurdly-narrow definition of privacy: in their How to send an anonymous email guide they write:

Where your email provider is based affects your privacy. Privacy laws can vary dramatically, and some countries have data retention laws that require companies to store and hand over sensitive user data. Email services based in a privacy-friendly countries, like Switzerland, can offer stronger protections.

Do you think by "privacy" and "sensitive user data" they're only talking about the body of email messages here, as per their earlier definition?

And, regardless of whether or not a company advertises its services for anonymity (as Proton does): after clicking the above links and thinking about it a little more, do you still think that retaining and revealing links between users' pseudonyms and legal identities is really not a privacy issue?

[–] zerobot@lemmy.wtf 0 points 23 hours ago (1 children)
[–] Luminous5481@anarchist.nexus 1 points 17 hours ago

not if you're an average internet user who thinks bitcoin can't be anonymous, no.

[–] PiraHxCx@lemmy.dbzer0.com 15 points 1 day ago (1 children)

No. Proton followed Swiss court orders to hand over data from a user, and the user had used his own credit card to pay for Proton instead of any of the available anonymous methods.

[–] Steve@communick.news -5 points 1 day ago (4 children)

You say no, then explain exactly how it's a yes.

[–] UnfortunateShort@lemmy.world 2 points 22 hours ago (1 children)

You force me to give you a gun, you give the gun to terrorists. Have I supported terrorism?

[–] Steve@communick.news -3 points 20 hours ago

You certainly "helped" the terrorists.
I don't know if you support them. That's not even the question here.

[–] originalucifer@moist.catsweat.com 6 points 1 day ago (1 children)

paranoia-level anonymyty doesnt happen by default. this guy failed to due his due diligence to utilize a anonymous payment method, and that was literally the only piece of data it took 2 governments to get out of proton.

how any of that equates to proton doing something wrong is baffling to me.

[–] Steve@communick.news 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Who said Proton did anything wrong?

[–] halcyoncmdr@piefed.social 5 points 1 day ago

It's the clear assumption people have in nearly every comment in all of these threads. Because no one ever reads the articles, and the headlines are certainly implying people make that assumption.

[–] PiraHxCx@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 1 day ago (1 children)

"Helped" is a very proactive term, they didn't even comply to the FBI request, the FBI had to get a court order from the Swiss government. The title could as easily say it was the user that helped the FBI unmask him by giving personal information that wasn't required.

[–] Steve@communick.news 2 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Is it proactive? Sometimes doing nothing can be helpful to someone.

Nobody disagrees with what the literal events were. It just seems like some people feel like helping the FBI collect evidence against a suspect is a bad thing, and don't want to frame Proton that way.

That's crazy of course. Proton never sold itself as a tool to protect criminals. Nobody want's them to be that. They need to comply with all legal requests for information. That's what they're supposed to do.

If they didn't they'd be shut down. And the rest of us would loose the reasonable privacy protection we want and they offer. That would be very bad.

[–] halcyoncmdr@piefed.social 4 points 1 day ago (1 children)

It wasn't proactive at all. It was in response to a Swiss court order. Which they are required to comply with since they are based on Switzerland.

[–] Steve@communick.news 1 points 1 day ago

PiraHxCx said "helped" is a very proactive term. I was asking about the implications of the word helped. Pointing out that it doesn't necessarily imply anything active. I wasn't talking about any specific example or event.

[–] green_red_black@slrpnk.net 1 points 1 day ago

It's not a yes. The headline makes out that Proton told the FBI who the activist was. When the reality is all they did, per a court order from the Swiss government, was hand over receipt information. Information that of course is going to be documented because payments are taxed.

Had the Activist used a valid Crypto Currency or paid in cash (with delivery through a burnable alias) he probably wouldn't be found out.

Proton didn't break any privacy promises.

Proton never ever promised to hide anyone's Proton payment info from govts. not even for Proton crypto wallet.

privacy ≠ anonymity

privacy ≠ security

they are not the same but they intersect. do web search for a venn diagram.

[–] cypherpunks@lemmy.ml 1 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

OP, why did you put "news media claims" at the beginning of this post title? are you doubting the veracity of it? the journalist and outlet reporting this are both well known and reputable, and they have quotes from Proton's head of communications confirming it.

Btw, you can read the whole article here on archive.org.

[–] Bullerfar@lemmy.world 1 points 16 hours ago* (last edited 16 hours ago) (1 children)

Yes, I wanted to know if it was a legit story. Saw it come up everywhere, and I doubted about the source and if it was only a "headline" for the clicks. And I couldn't read any of the articles written about it.

[–] cypherpunks@lemmy.ml 2 points 16 hours ago

now that i've linked you to the paywall bypass and pointed out that it is a credible journalist and outlet reporting that Proton confirmed that this happened, why not update your post title to match the article's accurate headline?

[–] Steve@communick.news 6 points 1 day ago

Probably.
If the FBI had a proper warrent from a judge, and convinced the Swiss government it's all good. Then yah, the Swiss ask for the data, Proton will absolutely hand it over. They follow Swiss law. The real content is all encrypted, but the metadata isn't.

In this case they matched the email address with the guys credit card.