https://protonmail.com/support/knowledge-base/protonmail-isr...
An accusation has been made, they've refuted the claims with a response, response is dismissed as a PR shield.
What are they going to do?
Or any Chinese company (ties to PLA). Quickly becoming more true in the US as well.
Heck, even if somehow radware (the BGP-based DDoS proxy they use) had access to protonmails private key or had minted their own SSL cert for protonmail, you'd still be protected by PGP.
For outgoing mail, they don't use radware so even if you were to send plaintext emails to a mailserver that doesn't support SSL encryption, radware still wouldn't be able to read that.
Unless the linked statement is just a lie, their DDoS protection service is not able to MitM them. Your proposed scheme seems a lot more convoluted than protonmail just giving access to the Israeli government. Similarly, it seems a lot more conspicuous.
If you don't want to use them because it indirectly supports an Israeli company, that makes sense, but their DDoS prevention scheme as outlined does not harm privacy in any way.
You wouldn't, PGP is verified by code that can be MITM'd if the traffic is spoofed.
I'd be very interested to hear the problems with protonmail, considering all they claim to see is email metadata.
Edit: ok some quick googling says its related to ddos protection, which is still in effect currently, the malicious intent here seems overstated.
The official statement - https://protonmail.com/support/knowledge-base/protonmail-isr...
posteo implements multiple encryption schemes: encrypt incoming mails with GPG (making them inaccessible by any end device not having the corresponding secret key). Or encrypt via the login passphrase with transparent decryption on authorized access.
The only issue is "German" quality customer support. So be patient and expect to receive terse "no." ;)
If posteo wants, they can read all incoming email. Their security scheme depends solely on their good intentions. Still great that their data at rest is encrypted in a way even they cannot read.
The scheme does defend against third parties outside of posteo being able to access data, or coerce posteo to decrypt data. Posteo could probably still be coerced to push out a fraudulent client update that still breaks their encrpytion, but that is a very hard problem to deal with.
They are based in Germany and would need to be coerced in accordance to german law. I don't think that there is something like National Security Letters in Germany, so doing such a thing without (eventual?) public disclosure seems unlikely.
Also posteo regularly releases as much information as they are allowed to regarding their interaction with law enforcement, e.g.:
In any case, the fraudulent client update is a very hard hole to patch. The only solution for this I know of is local hosting. At the moment, defending against this in web-apps is simply not possible.
Ipfs. Its immutable, for a given key. And its easy to see what an IPNS link points to.
It may not be a way to verify, but others could do that hard work.
But it strictly shows proof that codebase for a web app hasn't changed.
That's why this was switched to doing it in a webapp, to streamline the process and remove user error out of the equation. There's one problem, and that the owner of the script can change it to a bad one that does X.
With an immutable data structure, like what IPFS uses, can provide that chain of custody with a script they make that simplifies PGP usage, while still maintaining "We didn't change anything" - and you can prove that.
Some mail servers are set up or can be configured to not trannsmit or receive mails unless TLS protocol can be negotiated (I think mailbox.org allows users to enforce SMTP via TLS by using the domain secure.mailbox.org, not sure about Posteo).
(See also https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7258
https://support-en.mailbox.org/knowledge-base/article/before...)
[edit] replaced SSL with TLS
So you can only read them in your mail client with GPG support.
Yes, mailbox could create copy of your email before encryption. But assuming that they don't/didn't so far, in case they change their mind the historical emails will not be accessible.
The other solution where they keep private key (pass protected), well sure, that pretty much open for abuse but at some level you have to start trusting the law, otherwise everything false apart.
[1] https://www.hrw.org/news/2013/12/26/french-contradictions-da... [2] https://www.opendemocracy.net/digitaliberties/sara-bundtzen/...