Proton Mail Suspended Journalist Accounts at Request of Cybersecurity Agency

Proton Mail Suspended Journalist Accounts at Request of Cybersecurity Agency

https://theintercept.com/2025/09/12/proton-mail-journalist-accounts-suspended/

[…] last month, Proton disabled email accounts belonging to journalists reporting on security breaches of various South Korean government computer systems following a complaint by an unspecified cybersecurity agency. After a public outcry, and multiple weeks, the journalists’ accounts were eventually reinstated – but the reporters and editors involved still want answers on how and why Proton decided to shut down the accounts in the first place.

Summary pasted from source article.

I don’t know about you guys, but I find it insane that Proton, a company that prides itself on privacy and digital freedom, just suspends email accounts of cybersecurity journalists. Journalists of all people should be able to use private and safe communication methods.

Proton claimed that their account “has been disabled as a result of a direct connection to an account that was taken down due to violations of our terms and conditions while being used in a malicious manner.“ But Proton also says that they cannot see the content of an account (generally a good thing) and can not always determine whether there were ToS violations or just a byproduct of legitimate journalism.

I find it deeply troubling that Proton can and does seemingly willfully suspend email accounts. To me this sends the message that Proton is not safe to use if you e.g. live in a state where personal and journalistic freedom is not a given.

I don’t know about you guys, but I find it insane that Proton, a company that prides itself on privacy and digital freedom, just suspends email accounts of cybersecurity journalists.

Firstly I want to point out that suspending, disabling or deleting accounts has nothing to do with privacy or security.
Secondly we should also acknowledge that Proton is a legal company in the jurisdiction of the Swiss government. They are bound to the law of swiss and need to obey them.

Proton claimed that their account “has been disabled as a result of a direct connection to an account that was taken down due to violations of our terms and conditions while being used in a malicious manner.“ But Proton also says that they cannot see the content of an account (generally a good thing) and can not always determine whether there were ToS violations or just a byproduct of legitimate journalism.

They can. If the receiver (South Korean) just screenshotted the e-mail and sent it to proton.

1 Like

Fair points, it just seems odd to me that this kind of news comes from a company that has a detailed online security guide for journalists and claims that “Proton Mail stands with journalists“.

2 Likes

Hi everyone,

No, Proton did not knowingly block journalists’ email accounts. Our support for journalists and those working in the public interest has been demonstrated time and again through actions, not just words.

In this case, we were alerted by a CERT that certain accounts were being misused by hackers in violation of Proton’s Terms of Service. This led to a cluster of accounts being disabled.

Because of our zero-access architecture, we cannot see the content of accounts and therefore cannot always know when anti-abuse measures may inadvertently affect legitimate activism.

Our team has reviewed these cases individually to determine if any can be restored. We have now reinstated 2 accounts, but there are other accounts we cannot reinstate due to clear ToS violations.

Regarding Phrack’s claim on contacting our legal team 8 times: this is not true. We have only received two emails to our legal team inbox, last one on Sep 6 with a 48-hour deadline. This is unrealistic for a company the size of Proton, especially since the message was sent to our legal team inbox on a Saturday, rather than through the proper customer support channels.

The situation has unfortunately been blown out of proportion without giving us a fair chance to respond to the initial outreach.

Thank you for your understanding,
The Proton Team

There’s some misinformation floating around that I think is worth a post to clarify.

Proton generally only suspends accounts if 1) forced to do so by a Swiss govt order 2) we are sure beyond a reasonable doubt the user breached Protons Terms of Service (ToS) or 3) we detect that the user has been compromised.

Contrary to what some people think, Proton generally only suspends a single service and not all services. For example, let’s say you decide to start sending spam in violation of Proton ToS, Proton Mail may be suspended, but Proton Pass will continue to work. There are of course exceptions to this (for example, if an attacker is hitting your account or has already gotten in, we’ll lock the whole thing down until you get in touch with us).

In general, account suspensions due to (1) and (2) are extremely rare, with (3) being slightly more common. (2) typically happens with newly created accounts with are used for spamming or registering large number of accounts at third party services (such as Instagram, etc). The odds of an account you have been using for a while suddenly being suspended is virtually zero, and even then, we have a 24/7 team you can contact to appeal.

For ToS violations, it is irrelevant who reports the violation to us, if the violation is verified beyond a reasonable doubt, Proton will suspend the account. Proton data is encrypted, but we use OSINT techniques, our datasets of dark web chatter, information shared with us by other tech companies, and various other methods to do verification.

From time to time, there are claims that Proton is suspending accounts improperly. Our policy is not to comment publicly on specific cases, but there is usually more to the story than meets the eye, and the anonymous posters on the internet generally don’t disclose the full story. Such claims should therefore not be taken as fact, as the facts themselves are usually wrong.

To give an illustrative example, recently it was claimed that Proton was blocking the account of journalists. However, these were not “journalists” in the traditional sense, but hacktivists who were involved in a number of hacking incidents, which is a violation of Proton’s ToS, and therefore subject to suspension of all accounts. In this case, I made the decision to exceptionally restore two accounts because hacktivism cases are not always black and white. However, Proton’s policy is that if you use some accounts for illegal purposes, you will also lose access to the accounts where you have not yet conducted illegal activities.

Proton has no choice but to enforce ToS, because if activities which are illegal under Swiss law, or other activities which are technically not illegal but damaging to Proton (such as sending spam) where not forbidden, Proton would unfortunately become blocked by other email providers, hurting legitimate users.

In enforcing our ToS, we show no favor or bias. It does not matter your ideology or which “side” you are on, Proton enforces the ToS uniformly.

Proton’s ToS can be found here: Terms of Service | Proton

Proton’s abuse appeal form can be found here: Abuse appeals form | Proton

Abuse and ToS violations can be reported here (all reports are treated confidentially): Report abuse form | Proton

Thank you for your understanding.

- (2nd one is) Andy Yen

I am throwing that since they responded here with much more clarity, I would normally close the thread after but I’ll leave it in case of objections among other things which I feel is more correct this way.

1 Like

Proton really needs to stop treating Reddit as its official channel. They should host their own forum, but Reddit is hugely controversial (IPO, data collection, blocking VPNs, etc.). I don’t understand what they’re doing with Reddit. For me, Reddit is dead. There are plenty of federated systems out there.

4 Likes

says to a company who had to offload their mastodon for some reason they specified themselves, just a hint that’s all

1 Like