31–40 of 53 posts
Please be aware that we don't log email content (and we are also not vulnerable to Log4j). Our anti-spam systems do check for malicious links from third party email services so we can proactively warn users about phishing attempts.
Please be aware that we don't log email content (and we are also not vulnerable to Log4j). Our anti-spam systems do check for malicious links from third party email services so we can proactively warn users about phishing attempts.
If you are not vunerable to log4j, how did the screenshots come about?
Please be aware that we don't log email content (and we are also not vulnerable to Log4j). Our anti-spam systems do check for malicious links from third party email services so we can proactively warn users about phishing attempts.
If you are not vunerable to log4j, how did the screenshots come about?
This seems to me very worth looking into
Protonmail doesn't have to "log" messages; they have them already. If I were Protonmail and I had to comply with lawful intercept requirements, I'd just:
a) make sure that message content isn't deleted from the mailbox when the user thinks it is
b) make sure I retain access to server-managed PGP keys (by logging key material and user-supplied passphrases)
But I sure as hell would not call some Java logger.trace() on every goddamn email! That's totally nonscalable and just silly.
https://careers.protonmail.com/o/devops-engineer-remote-euro...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is always posted like some 'gotcha', despite it being right there in the transparency report. In case you trust any company blindly: any company that wants to keep playing the money game will follow the laws forced upon them by the government they are beholden to.
Isn't this what seasteading, and other jurisdiction avoidance schemes attempt to address? I wonder if anything like that has ever worked out.