Surveillance: Proton relocates parts of its infrastructure from Switzerland
www.heise.de
According to a Swiss monitoring ordinance, services with more than 5000 users must identify customers.
  • Señor Mono@feddit.orgOPEnglish
    153·
    12 days ago

    Yea, we had some discussions about that, but that isn’t the point.

    A known player moving its IT due to changes in law is the point.

    • CubitOom@infosec.pubEnglish
      914·
      12 days ago

      This is more or less an ad for a company with a CEO that has a pro-fascist agenda.

      If the point was to illustrate something about laws in Switzerland then that should have been the subject of the article.

      • Saleh@feddit.orgEnglish
        61·
        12 days ago

        The planned amendments to the Swiss Ordinance on the Surveillance of Postal and Telecommunications Traffic (VÜPF) and the associated implementing provisions continue to make waves. Proton has now confirmed that the provider of encrypted communication services has begun withdrawing IT infrastructures from Switzerland due to the legal uncertainty associated with the project.

        In a blog post on the launch of Lumo, Eamonn Maguire, Head of Anti-Abuse and Account Security at Proton, explained that the company had decided to invest outside Switzerland for fear of the impending legislative changes. In light of the Swiss government’s plans “to introduce mass surveillance”, which is prohibited in the EU, the provider is moving “the majority of its physical infrastructure” out of the Alpine republic. The start was made with the chatbot.

        …

        According to the controversial initiative of the Swiss Federal Council and the Federal Department of Justice and Police, online services with at least 5,000 users would also have to store metadata such as IP addresses and port numbers for six months and help the police and intelligence services to decrypt content. According to the plan, there will also be a new requirement for such operators to identify users. They would have to present a copy of their ID or driving license or at least provide a telephone number.

        The article both explains the concerns of the effect of the law to move large parts of its infrastructure outside of Switzerland as well as it explains the law and its consequences.

        How is that an ad for the company? Should there be no articles about the economic consequences of Switzerland’s planned mass surveillance, to avoid risking that companies could be presented positively for reacting to such laws?