If the owner of the standard notes will now be a proton, doesn’t that contradict this principle? I have a proton email account but I don’t want it linked to my standard notes account. I don’t strongly trust companies that offer packaged services like google or Microsoft. I prefer to have one service from one company. I am afraid that now I will have to change where I save my notes. What do you guys think about this?

  • Imprint9816@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    “All security is porous” is pure FUD reasoning and, completely disregards the security audits Proton does to make sure its not anything like LastPass.

    Using LastPass as a strawman is not a compelling argument.

    OP and You are also assuming if Proton was breached that it means all the user encrypted data would somehow be available to the malicious party which is also extremely unlikely.

    • flatbield@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      8 months ago

      Security audits do not guarantee security. They are just the best we have. Just as code reviews do not guarantee good and trustworthy code. In the end, we do not know what we do not know. In the end, every system has its weaknesses.

      Sure I believe Proton is a reasonable supplier. Even with that Proton for example is on the record of giving out user info to governments. I am sure they did not meet the expectations of that activist.

      • Imprint9816@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        My point is Proton did something every legit business would do.

        If your threat model is such that governments are going after you, you should be aware enough to not create an email with an IP that identifies you. That email issue was bad opsec not some specific problem with Proton.

        • flatbield@beehaw.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          8 months ago

          Well that is the point isn’t it. Companies are not very reliable. The only thing they can be relied on to do is whatever butters their bread and that can change at any time. There is also a PR component and a fact component and they do not always agree.

          Proton is really no different. I seem to remember they changed what they said on their website after outing that activist. Presumably to be a little less misleading. Again, I am impressed with Proton but not infinitely impressed.

          • Imprint9816@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            8 months ago

            You seem to be avoiding the fact component, which is they have proven through audits, yearly, their security is what you would want in a service that holds your data and have decided to instead rely on one instance (in 10 years of that service being around), that has nothing to do with the issue and your own feeling of how companies operate (FUD).