3 ms·

While I have no data to discuss the second item, regarding the first item you seem to be misinformed. PM did _not_ cooperate with a random foreign police. PM ha

by yaris 5y ago

While I have no data to discuss the second item, regarding the first item you seem to be misinformed. PM did _not_ cooperate with a random foreign police. PM had to execute on _their local authorities_ order, and judicial oversight was present - three authoritative entities in two countries had to approve the order. If this is not judicial oversight then my imagination fails to suggest what could serve as such oversight. And in their clarification PM state that there was no possibility to challenge the order in court (maybe because the order came from a court already?).

southerntofu 5y ago
> three authoritative entities in two countries had to approve the order What's that worth when your entire judicial apparatus is corrupt (doesn't respect separation of executive/judicial branches) and all it takes is asking nicely to get a request granted? > my imagination fails to suggest what could serve as such oversight Protonmail did not have a chance to defend itself before the judge, to face the alleged lies of the prosecution. You may consider that's still a form of judicial oversight, i don't. > no possibility to challenge the order in court Yes there is. Don't collaborate. Send a notification that you're waiting for a judge hearing. Wait for news. Either case is closed and you're good, or you get summoned to court and you can argue you have no criminal intent but strongly doubted the legality of the request.
NotSammyHagar 5y ago
The key point is that any country could make a request through Interpol or the Europol. Proton mail bragged about their great fortune to be under Swiss law but it turns out it's subject to the lowest common denominator, a request through Interpol or Europol. What if Poland starts wanting to find out who whistleblowers are who have protonmail email addresses? Or China inevitably wants to unmask some democratic leader from Hong Kong?
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]

by yaris 5y ago

southerntofu 5y ago

> three authoritative entities in two countries had to approve the order What's that worth when your entire judicial apparatus is corrupt (doesn't respect separation of executive/judicial branches) and all it takes is asking nicely to get a request granted? > my imagination fails to suggest what could serve as such oversight Protonmail did not have a chance to defend itself before the judge, to face the alleged lies of the prosecution. You may consider that's still a form of judicial oversight, i don't. > no possibility to challenge the order in court Yes there is. Don't collaborate. Send a notification that you're waiting for a judge hearing. Wait for news. Either case is closed and you're good, or you get summoned to court and you can argue you have no criminal intent but strongly doubted the legality of the request.

NotSammyHagar 5y ago

The key point is that any country could make a request through Interpol or the Europol. Proton mail bragged about their great fortune to be under Swiss law but it turns out it's subject to the lowest common denominator, a request through Interpol or Europol. What if Poland starts wanting to find out who whistleblowers are who have protonmail email addresses? Or China inevitably wants to unmask some democratic leader from Hong Kong?

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]