Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Infomaniak transitions to a foundation model to protect user data privacy

news.infomaniak.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 52 posts

Re: Infomaniak transitions to a foundation model to protect user data privacy

#41

Post by UnnoTed »

Sadly when you get to use their products they may ask you for Passport/ID and a selfie through kCheck[0] like they're a bank, as you can see at the app page[0].

In their website[1] you can read about their true "privacy" behavior:

> identity verification procedure may be triggered in the following cases (non-exhaustive list):

> - forgetting an Infomaniak account password (user account)

> - forgetting a login email address

> - deactivation of double authentication (2FA)

> - unlocking an Infomaniak account

> - during the first transfer of revenue for the product Ticketing

> - when ordering a product (suspicion of spam or fraud, brand name, etc.)

The same page also says the process may require mandatory geolocation, choosing ID card or passport, photographing the document, and taking a selfie with it.

[0]: https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.infomaniak...

[1]: https://www.infomaniak.com/en/support/faq/2418/getting-start...

Re: Infomaniak transitions to a foundation model to protect user data privacy

#42

Post by dgellow »

UnnoTed wrote: post #41

Sadly when you get to use their products they may ask you for Passport/ID and a selfie through kCheck[0] like they're a bank, as you can see at the app page[0]. In their website[1] you can read about their true "privacy" behavior: > identity verification procedure may be triggered in the following cases (non-exhaustive list): > - forgetting an Infomaniak account password (user account) > - forgetting a login email ad…

Which is ok, the point of privacy protection is to control who you're sharing personal information with. Such as accepting to sharing KYC with infomaniak shouldn't imply your personal information and user information is shared with 3rd parties. It's not an anonymous hosting company

Re: Infomaniak transitions to a foundation model to protect user data privacy

#43

Post by dgellow »

ma2kx wrote: post #32
roenxi wrote: post #17

> Concretely, this means that no takeover of the company is possible without the Foundation’s approval. Even if Boris were to pass away, even if an irresistible investor came knocking, control of Infomaniak remains in the hands of a structure dedicated to its mission. This reads quite naive; if you want a legal entity to be ideologically driven then it needs to be controlled by a small number of ideologues. Committee…

You are right but the ideology of a company is also driven by the society in which it exist. Switzerland is far more "conservative" (in the meaning to change slowly) than the US. Like our biggest retailer is "Migros" which still refuses to sell alcohol according to its statutes which where formalized somewhere in the 50s/60s of the last century: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Migros

Migros has Denner and "Migros Partenaire"[0] that both sell alcohol

0: https://filialen.migros.ch/fr/migros-partenaire-mp-ouchy

Re: Infomaniak transitions to a foundation model to protect user data privacy

#44

Post by dgellow »

wolvoleo wrote: post #39
ma2kx wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are right but the ideology of a company is also driven by the society in which it exist. Switzerland is far more "conservative" (in the meaning to change slowly) than the US. Like our biggest retailer is "Migros" which still refuses to sell alcohol according to its statutes which where formalized somewhere in the 50s/60s of the last century: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Migros

The relationship with Alcohol in many European countries is a bit different anyway. In some nordic countries you can only buy it in official state-owned stores (and it is incredibly expensive due to taxes).

Switzerland doesn't have a special relationship with alcohol like that, you can buy everything you want from stores. The fact that Migros doesn't directly sell alcohol is just a historical oddity. Their other brands and other companies sell alcohol everywhere without concerns

Re: Infomaniak transitions to a foundation model to protect user data privacy

#45

Post by port11 »

dgellow wrote: post #42
UnnoTed wrote: post #41

Sadly when you get to use their products they may ask you for Passport/ID and a selfie through kCheck[0] like they're a bank, as you can see at the app page[0]. In their website[1] you can read about their true "privacy" behavior: > identity verification procedure may be triggered in the following cases (non-exhaustive list): > - forgetting an Infomaniak account password (user account) > - forgetting a login email ad…

Which is ok, the point of privacy protection is to control who you're sharing personal information with. Such as accepting to sharing KYC with infomaniak shouldn't imply your personal information and user information is shared with 3rd parties. It's not an anonymous hosting company

In their defence, tons of abuse happens and forces providers to check identity. I’m not saying there’s no other way, but any hosting company I’ve worked it has strict limits until you verify your identity.

Re: Infomaniak transitions to a foundation model to protect user data privacy

#47

Post by fakedang »

UnnoTed wrote: post #41

Sadly when you get to use their products they may ask you for Passport/ID and a selfie through kCheck[0] like they're a bank, as you can see at the app page[0]. In their website[1] you can read about their true "privacy" behavior: > identity verification procedure may be triggered in the following cases (non-exhaustive list): > - forgetting an Infomaniak account password (user account) > - forgetting a login email ad…

I was blocked from using their services because they required a phone OTP-based check and for some reason their OTPs did not reach past my provider. I only got it to work after opening an account with another internet provider.

Re: Infomaniak transitions to a foundation model to protect user data privacy

#48

Post by roenxi »

adev_ wrote: post #22
roenxi wrote: post #17

> Concretely, this means that no takeover of the company is possible without the Foundation’s approval. Even if Boris were to pass away, even if an irresistible investor came knocking, control of Infomaniak remains in the hands of a structure dedicated to its mission. This reads quite naive; if you want a legal entity to be ideologically driven then it needs to be controlled by a small number of ideologues. Committee…

> Any institution quickly becomes a corrupt shadow of what it was originally envisioned as once the original people involved move on. The debian project here acts as a counter-example: The institution governing the project far outlived its original creator and the "debian social contract" clearly helped to that. Additionally, Infomaniak seems to have registered here as a Swiss "public interest" foundation. This has s…

I decided against quoting from https://www.debian.org/vote/2026/platforms/srud - current Debian project lead - because it looked like a short out of context quote would misrepresent him and also maybe a fast way to get flagged.

I like Debian, they still make a great OS, and I want to be clear I have no complaints against Chandran who as far as I know is doing a great job in a tough position.

But if you look at the platform he's outlining the current DPL ran with the clear understanding that Free Software is one of a couple of priorities. Something that, in this context, really stands out is he thinks the Debian project culture needs an infusion of new blood and ideas. In fact, this page has a number of absolute classics for how ideological organisations go soft. He wants new people involved, he thinks that the community is too conservative about change and he doesn't say much on the topic but it looks quite possible that he wants to start legitimising Debian as a serious organisation (getting it formally registered and branching out to find more funding). Take all that in context of the idea that they can't find someone who wants to be project lead in order to promote free software.

So again, I personally would love it if Debian kept to their rabid pro-freedom stance, but I would not rely on it as the Debian Devs slowly rotate to a new generation; there is always a high risk that they quietly transition to "Open Source" then go the Mozilla route. The people matter far more than the paperwork.

Re: Infomaniak transitions to a foundation model to protect user data privacy

#49

Post by culi »

ku1ik wrote: post #9

This is a good news. I moved my domains from DNSimple to Infomaniak last year, as part of my rely-less-on-US-infra-and-services strategy. I chose them for their dedication to privacy, ethics and transparency. This change reassures me this was a good choice. For those who are/were considering Infomaniak and are wondering about the quality of service: I use it for DNS only. Their UI is less than ideal but not bad once…

I've had more or less the same experience using it to host a blog for a friend. Mid UI but I don't have to interact with it much. Their service has been great and their ethical commitments were the main draw. They did ask for a lot of personal info related to my identity though

Re: Infomaniak transitions to a foundation model to protect user data privacy

#50

Post by cromka »

Lukas_Skywalker wrote: post #20
dmacvicar wrote: post #19

After I moved away from Google services as much as I could ( https://www.mac-vicar.eu//posts/2020-10-20-migrating-away-go... ), and after some years on mailbox.org, which I did not enjoy, I ended moving to Infomaniak. The experience has been nothing but awesome. I love the Android clients (mail, calendar sync) and I am also using their AI services for light tasks. Management UI is a bit confusing but not the worst I…

I did the same and am a big fan of their services. Still, a word of caution: their policy states that they delete emails in folders named „Trash“ and similar after 30 days. It is documented, but I realized it too late. And the list of folder names in the docs is „non-exhaustive“. https://www.infomaniak.com/en/support/faq/2351/understanding...

I thought this was a standard procedure? Especially for someone who is used to GMail. In fact, I was surprised when I found out that Proton doesn't do that, and also doesn't empty the Spam folder.
Post reply on HN