Comment by commmentator
4 hours ago
You'll note that Proton's PR only mentions the second date - " last one on Sep 6 with a 48-hour deadline."
Proton doesn't mention that the first email from Phrack which Proton ignored was weeks prior to that, which is what led to the second email in the first place.
You'll also note that Proton doesn't mention that their Abuse Team refused to re-anable the account after the article author did the appeals process, as per Phrack's timeline at the top of their article.
That's a great point. I guess at this point it'd be ideal for them to treat this an incident and do a proper postmortem with timelines and decision calculus.
Definitely agree. A frank postmortem would be a good thing to see.
But that would be contrary to their clear intention thus far: to sweep this under the rug. /s
I had previously liked Proton. I started seeing bits and pieces of info about their security being lackluster over the past year or so, causing doubt about their credibility. I'm definitely done with them after this.
This is honestly sad to see. I use Proton and advocate it to others. This does make me rethink my position somewhat - although I’d argue it’s still better than Google / Microsoft-owned email services.