3 ms·
I just love people who go on their soapbox to complain about a newer alternative when the status quo is worse "nooo but proton mail complies to court orders!!1
by raverbashing 7mo ago
I just love people who go on their soapbox to complain about a newer alternative when the status quo is worse
"nooo but proton mail complies to court orders!!111" wow shocking I know right? Do you think the other providers don't?
These are usually the same people who forget rubber-hose decrypting works
"But they use LiveKitCloud" yes - however we don't know half the story
Can Proton BYOK over their infra?
LiveKit's website TOS with a generic user - not ProtonMail. We don't know if there are any agreements there
> "all disputes are governed by the laws of the State of California"
Yes this is common with TOS.
> Their privacy policy explicitly acknowledges FTC jurisdiction and states the company will "access, preserve, and disclose your information"
This is the important part, not the other one above it
> showed active connections to 161.115.177.32 on port 443, a LiveKit-owned IP block (ARIN OrgId LIVEK) hosted on Oracle Cloud Infrastructure
Good test, but what/where was the originating IP? Was it using Brave's VPN (to the US) by any chance?
TBH I'm still more annoyed about the 90 day cookie - that was just rude
So again "why don't we have better privacy respecting options?" Maybe because if we try to do it some "privacy advicates" will throw a massive fit complaining about all its shorcomings (and still not pay for the service)
- ashikns 7mo agoPeople complain because Proton specifically advertises privacy, mainstream providers don't. Which is pretty reasonable as far as complaining goes. Good job on mocking others though :*
- InsideOutSanta 7mo agoProton does offer more privacy than mainstream providers, because they have less information to hand over when courts compel them. Proton isn't perfect by any means, but the idea that there is no meaningful privacy difference between Proton and (for example) Gmail because both respond to court orders is flat-out false.
- defrost 7mo agohttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deniable_encryption https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deniable_encryption
- readthenotes1 7mo agoYour complaint is not at all what the article is about. The article is showing that the proton claim that their new service is private from the US government data acquisition, including inability to access call metadata, is a lie (an intentional misrepresentation of the known truth by Proton).
- sevg 7mo agoYou’ve missed the point: being deceptive is not ok, regardless of whether “the status quo is worse”.
- DoingFedTime 6mo agoThe Oracle IP (161.115.177.32) was present before video was enabled, and the Amazon EC2 node (44.224.75.233, us-west-2) appeared specifically when video started which is precisely how LiveKit SFU routing behaves. On the ToS point: LiveKit's DPA, not their generic user ToS, explicitly classifies LiveKit as an independent controller for operational metrics, including call detail records. That means Proton's own DPA constraints don't govern that data. LiveKit can respond to a US CLOUD Act request for those records without notifying Proton.