![](https://files.mstdn.party/accounts/avatars/109/316/180/302/552/236/original/6442c7de678f8c9e.png)
![](https://lemmy.one/pictrs/image/0f5e05b5-d351-4add-9667-1df4c43091b4.png)
@CaptObvious that’s a valid setup. I was thinking about tuta but no pgp :)
45 6E 63 72 79 70 74 69 6F 6E 20 69 73 20 74 68 65 20 77 61 79
@CaptObvious that’s a valid setup. I was thinking about tuta but no pgp :)
@CaptObvious fair enough. What email provider do you use? Just curious :)
@[email protected] can definitely be an aspect of privacy but privacy ≠ anonymity. Proton explicitly states this. They arnt going to disobey law, which they also state. I don’t see what the issue is here? They obeyed the law and the user made a mistake on there end. Proton didn’t do anything wrong or tricky
@CaptObvious Proton never claims to provide anonymity though. They even state that it depends on proper opsec. It was the user fault for proving an email as a recovery that led to a more “willing” company that gave his data to police. If they had never done that, it would be a different situation.
@CaptObvious @Mikufan if the user practiced proper opsec it wouldn’t be an issue. Proton provides privacy not anonymity. Those are 2 different things. The second requires opsec in the users end.
@CaptObvious I currently use proton as my main provider. I still have a gmail and iCloud as well as some accounts haven’t been transferred over yet, but those pretty much just get used for 2fa codes until I switch them