this post was submitted on 06 Mar 2026
18 points (70.5% liked)

Proton

9015 readers
88 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 29 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Nelizea@lemmy.world 7 points 4 hours ago* (last edited 4 hours ago) (1 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

[–] GraveyardOrbit@lemmy.zip -1 points 2 hours ago

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

[–] cypherpunks@lemmy.ml 1 points 5 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 1 hour ago* (last edited 1 hour 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 1 points 1 hour 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?

[–] Luminous5481@anarchist.nexus 18 points 14 hours 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 0 points 4 hours ago* (last edited 4 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 what they they did was "helpful" to the FBI.

You're being very pedantic for nothing.

[–] Luminous5481@anarchist.nexus 4 points 2 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 9 minutes ago* (last edited 2 minutes 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 it can be when you infer morality from amoral terms, and try to refrain from doing so in the future. Communication would be much smoother if people were more deliberately literal with their word choice.

[–] cypherpunks@lemmy.ml -1 points 5 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 3 points 2 hours ago* (last edited 2 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 1 points 39 minutes ago* (last edited 15 minutes ago)

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 that their service is designed for "privacy", not "privacy except not with regards to your legal identity which we decided to 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.

[–] zerobot@lemmy.wtf 1 points 8 hours ago (1 children)
[–] Luminous5481@anarchist.nexus 1 points 2 hours ago

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

[–] PiraHxCx@lemmy.dbzer0.com 21 points 15 hours 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.

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.

[–] Steve@communick.news 7 points 15 hours ago* (last edited 15 hours ago)

Probably.
If the FBI had a proper warrent from a judge, and convinced the Swiss court 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.