I think it is important to understand that email never will be very secure because the standard wasn’t made with modern threat models in mind, if you want to communicate privately and anonymously, you need modern protocols like signal, i also use proton but only because I hate Google, i don’t expect my emails are any more private than they have ever been. I use email only when it is required, I use signal for private communication, overlap is impossible
Your emails are.more private in the same sense that if you have a letter with something on it, turning it over means someone can’t read it over your shoulder, but they could have read it before it got to you.
Google has access to the contents of your inbox, Proton mail does not. But the protocols are unchanged and unencrypted email is accessible in transit.
So moving to Proton is a definite improvement, particularly as email remains a basic means of communication. But as you say if you wand secure communication then it is very flawed.
But you can get secure email if you’re the sender (you can choose to encrypt) or it’s coming from someone else at Proton.
But yeah, there should be a secure alternative, perhaps an amendment to SMTP where only the “to” address is available. If I have the public key of the receiver (negotiation of that could be part of the protocol), I can encrypt everything else and my email could still be routed properly.
I think it is important to understand that email never will be very secure because the standard wasn’t made with modern threat models in mind, if you want to communicate privately and anonymously, you need modern protocols like signal, i also use proton but only because I hate Google, i don’t expect my emails are any more private than they have ever been. I use email only when it is required, I use signal for private communication, overlap is impossible
Your emails are.more private in the same sense that if you have a letter with something on it, turning it over means someone can’t read it over your shoulder, but they could have read it before it got to you.
Google has access to the contents of your inbox, Proton mail does not. But the protocols are unchanged and unencrypted email is accessible in transit.
So moving to Proton is a definite improvement, particularly as email remains a basic means of communication. But as you say if you wand secure communication then it is very flawed.
But you can get secure email if you’re the sender (you can choose to encrypt) or it’s coming from someone else at Proton.
But yeah, there should be a secure alternative, perhaps an amendment to SMTP where only the “to” address is available. If I have the public key of the receiver (negotiation of that could be part of the protocol), I can encrypt everything else and my email could still be routed properly.
It’s useful to minimize data leaks too, since (especially when combined with simple login etc) you can avoid giving out your real address ever.