Again, they’re just a lazy government. They don’t want to deal with the actual threat and instead they want to go with the “lazy” route, this will not stop criminals to use other services…
For me it stinks more of politics surrounding encryption, and advocacy for it. Its disappointing to read but thanks for putting the article here.
3 Likes
So if this was sent via Gmail would they ban google too?
This is just bonkers.
1 Like
I think the main reason for banning Proton Mail is cause they didn’t comply and help the government in this investigation. If this was done via Gmail, Google would have happily shared all your information with the government since it’s a matter of “national security”.
3 Likes
That’s true but someone could easily just make a Gmail account with a VPN and they would be in the same place.
For that matter the bomb threats could have been sent with snail mail and it would be just as anonymous.
1 Like
Well I’m not sure how snail mail works but I think the whole point here was of encryption. With Proton Mail, the Government even if they wanted couldn’t see the contents of the mail, on the other hand they could’ve if the person was using Gmail by sending in a request to Google. In the later, even if they couldn’t find out who it was (since they were using a VPN) they could have atleast stopped the bomb blast which in-itself is a big thing.
I don’t really know who’s right or not in this case, national security surely is a matter of concern but at the same time in todays world we keep on getting farmed for data by big companies.
1 Like
India is a government known for not respecting user privacy. Clearly they will use events like this to further certain politically-motivated actions/strategies.
2 Likes
There were no real bombs in this case, just threats. While the people who sent the threats used Protonmail, it was Protonmails refusal to provide IP addresses that has caused the friction with the government.
My point is that this is grandstanding and excuse seeking by the government to ban proton over an issue (anonymous bomb threats) that is far from unique to proton.
I’m glad I started using SimpleLogin a while ago and went through a long process of changing my email everywhere. If this ban becomes a reality, I can change my mailbox to my Tuta email ID. I don’t think banning Proton would affect SimpleLogin so I guess I’m good to go. Though, I feel like it’s a case of our government’s ego, rather than their stance on privacy since they already track us enough already LMAO. But for now the ban is just proposed. I don’t think it’s really going to happen. But yeah, use email alias service guys.
2 Likes
Do stay safe. Hopefully your government won’t crack down extensively on people who use these services but do use appropriate measures. Is TOR allowed in India?
1 Like
Yeah, Tor is legal here. Other similar services like proton are also legal like Tutanota. It’s just Proton they dislike because they moved their servers out of India after they told Proton to log the activities. I guess they were pretty butthurt from that and this was the final hit on ego.
3 Likes
I’m surprised how WhatsApp still works there since it’s completely E2EE
Because Meta has no problem sharing user details with the govt if asked. Also wasn’t there a case recently where they arrested a dude who made a joke about bombing the plane in his WhatsApp friends’ group? So much for E2EE
1 Like
Meta can only share meta data and not the contents itself.
I’m pretty sure it was Snapchat.
2 Likes
Oh I didn’t know that. Apologies.
1 Like
and we’re going to continue to call India a free country?
Even among opposition politicians, most of the country seems to be blissfully unaware of the evil direction that the government is taking when it comes to privacy. They also claimed to have banned Briar, Element, and Threema among other apps, though I don’t think the ban was fully enforced. I mean, good luck banning Briar.
I don’t care about your political position, fuck any government that sees it fit to remove personal liberties.
3 Likes
That is delicate political matter. Most of the population are happy Modi keeps pushing other minorities by any means necessary, while not realising they themselves are the proverbial frog in the pot. Alas, if the ban of Proton made any sense, India should also ban the use of knives, lest someone might get hurt for threatening to hurl one at some official. Think of the children!
In fairness to the Indian government, stopping crime is a very hard problem. Societies spend hundreds of millions of dollars on this, and still have crime to deal with. Part of this is because the money is spent on flashy visible programs rather than ones which have a strong evidence base, but even the best programs cannot eliminate crime, only reduce it. So saying ‘they should just stop the Bad People doing the Bad Thing’ is completely ignoring the difficulty of the problem.
That said, this step won’t help anyone at all, so it’s still a dumb thing to do. That said, if Proton does not adhere to Indian law (for example, if it’s prohibited from doing so by Swiss law) then what would you want a government to do regarding a company which is not following the local law? I don’t think it’s necessarily as clear as we might like it to be.
1 Like
The real reason this is so controversial is because of their previous attempt at cracking down on encrypted messaging apps, citing terrorist threats. While this is a definite issue, it also affects people’s general right to privacy. And yet Whatsapp is perfectly alright?
If you’re asking for perfect consistency in laws being enforced, then you’re going to be disappointed, regardless of the country or context. That’s just the reality of existence - between scenarios being legitimately complex in ways that we don’t easily understand, limited resources, trade-offs between competing values and preferences (even within a given individual, never mind different groups), and good old fashioned errors of judgement, there’s a lot of scope for what can appear as unequal treatment.
And of course there’s issues like imperfect reporting, cultural misunderstandings, and psychological biases all along the line making things even harder.
Which is why I don’t find it terribly helpful to look at ‘right’ or ‘wrong’ - better to look at, for example, why this decision? And if it went the other way, would that be preferable? For example, in this situation, let us assume it unfolded differently: the threats were sent, the Indian government reached out to Proton.
Scenario 1: Proton, in accordance to Swiss law, refused to hand over the information. India decided that a foreign company violating Indian law is no big deal, and left it alone.
Scenario 2: Proton breaks Swiss law and does hand over the information of a user - who may or may not be in Switzerland, India, or some other country, a question to which Proton may or may not know the answer to - to a foreign government.
Which of these two scenarios is preferable to you? Yes, we’d all prefer the laws be different and the threats were not sent, but that’s not the world we live in. In this world, can you honestly say one scenario is obviously better than another, both in terms of this individual situation but also precedent set?