You’re still confusing two completely different things: privacy and anonymity. Encryption protects the content of messages, not every piece of metadata around an account. Proton has always been clear about that. In the 404 Media case, the identification came from payment information, not from Proton breaking encryption. If someone pays with a credit card, their identity is already tied to the account. That would happen with any provider under legal jurisdiction. Honestly, the way you’re framing this suggests you don’t really understand how encryption, metadata, and OPSEC work. Encryption ≠ anonymity. Anyone who actually works in security knows that.

I was never confused about the issue. Honestly you are just shilling for Proton.

I’m not shilling for Proton. I’m pointing out a basic distinction you keep ignoring: encryption protects message content, not identity. Calling Proton’s encryption a “lie” just shows you’re arguing emotionally rather than technically. Anyone who actually understands the space knows encrypted email was never meant to guarantee anonymity.

I said their marketing was a lie. Hey I get it, reading is hard.

I read it just fine. What you’re doing is calling it a “lie” because you expected anonymity from a tool that advertises encrypted email. Those aren’t the same thing. Anyone who actually understands the basics of privacy tools knows that. Your argument sounds more like frustration than a technical point.

Please, they changed their marketing and had to make several clarifications. They were deceptive to begin with. It was always dumb considering they only ever followed the law. It was never like they went above and beyond. Hey we are company that follows the law pick us just doesn’t have the vibe that got them their business. I criticizing the company for their practices you are playing shill pretending to “inform” me.

I’m not pretending anything. You’re criticizing their marketing, I’m pointing out the technical reality behind the claims. Those are two different discussions. Proton’s core claim has always been encrypted email content, not immunity from legal orders. No company operating in a country can ignore the law. If your argument is that their marketing created unrealistic expectations, that’s a fair criticism. But calling it a “lie” and ignoring how the technology actually works doesn’t make the argument stronger.

I am here saying Proton sucks for X and Y reason. The fact that all Proton can do is blame their users rather than develop more robust practices speaks to the opposite of what got people to buy into their ecosystem to begin with So this is much more than their marketing. Like any corporation they suck just because they exist. As their ecosystem grows they will increase in price and enshitification will quickly set in. It is inevitable. Finally their leadership has made so many statements that are frankly so out of touch with reality it isn’t funny. I feel sorry for people that are getting taken advantage of. Proton is just another predatory lying corporation. This story is yet another example of the damage this company has caused because of their carelessness. Instead of figuring out how not to store this information on their servers they choose to put their users at risk. There is so much wrong with this company it isn’t funny. I called Telsa and Musk several years ago as garbage and I fully believe Proton is in the same vein.