4 ms·

You can't(as a single company/entity) find a work around something like this. Proton had a court order from the country they operate from. You can fight court o

You can't(as a single company/entity) find a work around something like this. Proton had a court order from the country they operate from. You can fight court orders but you can't usually disclose them(gag orders and all). The only reasonable way(i can think of) to make it a bit harder for this to happen would be to have a second(and maybe a 3rd)unrelated entity/company in an adversarial country that you can use as a relay. In this case use it as a VPN service to access the e-mail on Proton servers. Anonimity is inconvenient these days... and next to impossible if any govt agency is out to get you. The only way you can make it hard(er) is to spread over multiple jurisdiction and rotate accounts/discard them after a few uses. A system similar to one time pads of sorts combined with PGP.

nix23 5y ago
> can't usually disclose them(gag orders and all). Switzerland has no "gag orders", that's a exclusive US-open-democracy-thing ;-)
- White_Wolf 5y ago
  :) I didn't know that. I though most/all countries in the west have an equivalent. In UK we have something like that(can't remember the name of it though). The courts can forbid all parties involved to have any public discussions, They can ban topics from reaching the public through normal mass media means. To make it even worse, they can prevent individuals to do this sort of thing too. Prison time and/or fines if you don't comply. Democracy at it's finest.
  - nix23 5y ago
    >I though most/all countries in the west have an equivalent. Well there is no direct gag-thing (because it would undermine free speech) BUT it could be interpreted ~sometimes and in "theory" as "obstruction of a police investigation", so it's a case to case thing and not direct law.
    - White_Wolf 5y ago
      Aaah.. I see what you mean. Tbh that sounds reasonable as long as it's applied without political pressure and such.
  - JimDabell 5y ago
    > In UK we have something like that(can't remember the name of it though). Super-injunction: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super-injunctions_in_English_law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super-injunctions_in_English_l...

nix23 5y ago

> can't usually disclose them(gag orders and all). Switzerland has no "gag orders", that's a exclusive US-open-democracy-thing ;-)

White_Wolf 5y ago
:) I didn't know that. I though most/all countries in the west have an equivalent. In UK we have something like that(can't remember the name of it though). The courts can forbid all parties involved to have any public discussions, They can ban topics from reaching the public through normal mass media means. To make it even worse, they can prevent individuals to do this sort of thing too. Prison time and/or fines if you don't comply. Democracy at it's finest.
- nix23 5y ago
  >I though most/all countries in the west have an equivalent. Well there is no direct gag-thing (because it would undermine free speech) BUT it could be interpreted ~sometimes and in "theory" as "obstruction of a police investigation", so it's a case to case thing and not direct law.
  - White_Wolf 5y ago
    Aaah.. I see what you mean. Tbh that sounds reasonable as long as it's applied without political pressure and such.
- JimDabell 5y ago
  > In UK we have something like that(can't remember the name of it though). Super-injunction: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super-injunctions_in_English_law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super-injunctions_in_English_l...