It’s also worth clarifying that ProtonMail doesn’t collect IP addresses by default. Instead, the monitoring/ logging starts after ProtonMail gets a legal request.
Under Swiss law, ProtonMail should notify the user if a third party makes a request for their private data and if the data is for a criminal proceeding. However, there’s a big catch/ loophole here. On its law enforcement page, ProtonMail highlights that the notification can be delayed in the following cases:
Where providing notice is temporarily prohibited by the Swiss legal process itself, by Swiss court order, or applicable Swiss law;
Where, based on information supplied by law enforcement, we, in our absolute discretion, believe that providing notice could create a risk of injury, death, or irreparable damage to an identifiable individual or group of individuals;
As a general rule though, targeted users will eventually be informed and afforded the opportunity to object to the data request, either by ProtonMail or by Swiss authorities.
This incident seems to fall under the first case, and that’s why ProtonMail didn’t notify the user. “Some orders are final and cannot be appealed, that’s just how the legal system works, not everything can be appealed. The user wasn’t notified for the same reason that you don’t notify a suspect before arresting them,” says ProtonMail founder Andy Yen.
should be a right, absolutely if you’ve done nothing wrong.
The loss of privacy happens before the determination whether that person has done anything wrong. If the person’s criminal case goes well, do you have a time machine to go back and not invade privacy?
No, because that’s the part where someone should’ve learned a lesson or two. What do you mean if a criminal case goes well? If someone is suspected of something and may be involved in a crime, what entitlement do you have? It is part of a criminal investigation process. You either comply or worsen your odds by raising suspicions if you continually refuse to cooperate because you’re too busy debating police officers about “MUH PRIVACY”. Duuuuuhhhhhhh!
Did you think you stepped on some checkmate kind of discovery here? No, you didn’t.
They still have to adhere to legal requests.
they should inform the victim about it
Proooobably part of the request that they are not allowed to do that.
Yes, exactly.
Privacy is and should be a right, absolutely if you’ve done nothing wrong.
But it doesn’t absolve anyone from the right to shroud from any crime committed, period.
The loss of privacy happens before the determination whether that person has done anything wrong. If the person’s criminal case goes well, do you have a time machine to go back and not invade privacy?
No, because that’s the part where someone should’ve learned a lesson or two. What do you mean if a criminal case goes well? If someone is suspected of something and may be involved in a crime, what entitlement do you have? It is part of a criminal investigation process. You either comply or worsen your odds by raising suspicions if you continually refuse to cooperate because you’re too busy debating police officers about “MUH PRIVACY”. Duuuuuhhhhhhh!
Did you think you stepped on some checkmate kind of discovery here? No, you didn’t.