• John Richard@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      92
      ·
      7 months ago

      No they’re not. They can’t even finish a single solution, let alone actually make anything functional when you’re not using their proprietary servers. They’re becoming Microsoft.

      • micka190@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        48
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        7 months ago

        They can’t finish a single solution

        Gee, it’s almost as if that’s the whole point of an ever-evolving SaaS platform.

        • John Richard@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          18
          ·
          7 months ago

          A SaaS solution that claims to be private but won’t provide the backend code to prove it. You don’t find it at all suspicious that they claim releasing backend code would make it less secure? What kind of security product is not open for inspection? The same kind of “security” you get from Microsoft.

          • Gestrid@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            7 months ago

            I imagine it probably is inspected, just not by the public. They probably do it themselves.

            And they may have contracts with certain companies specializing in this sort of security that also inspect it.

            And there’s also the cybersecurity companies that test it whether they’re contracted or not. At some companies, their entire job revolves around finding bugs (especially security bugs) in other companies’ software.

            Just because it’s not on GitHub doesn’t mean it’s not a good product that hasn’t been thoroughly tested.

            • Excrubulent@slrpnk.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              7 months ago

              Surely we’re not gullible enough to accept “we inspected ourselves and determined we are secure and you should use our services”?

            • John Richard@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              7 months ago

              You realize that Microsoft code is inspected as well, even more heavily and regulated… and yet they still end up with major breaches. Security evolves through open source collaboration and inspection by experts that aren’t being paid to say you’re doing a good job.

          • deezbutts@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            7 months ago

            Yeah because enterprises primarily use a ton of open source security tools…

            ಠ_ಠ

            • John Richard@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              7 months ago

              Enterprises are using a plethora of open source tools at this point. They may still utilize closed source solutions, but they definitely have quite a bit of open source solutions tied in.

        • slooopy_potatoe@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          34
          ·
          7 months ago

          Releasing unfinished products and expect users to just make do while they launch the next product can’t be the solution either.

          • micka190@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            33
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            7 months ago

            Then it’s a good thing all of their products are fully functional and working as advertised, I guess.

              • naught101@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                10
                ·
                7 months ago

                Which bits are not functional? I’m using their email and calendar… they aren’t completely polished, but they’re very usable.

                • slooopy_potatoe@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  8
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  7 months ago

                  Drive has no Linux client, Photos is extremely barebones and locks you basically in, as there is no export function.

                  Pass still has no proper SimpleLogin integration, no credit card support and UX wise is the browser extension pretty bad. Funny enough, years after launch you still can’t auto fill on Reddit.

                  The only thing I don’t like about Mail is that you still have to create reverse aliases through SimpleLogin. Better integration would be great.

                  Contacts still don’t sync to you local mobile contacts. Which means you either do it manually or you have to keep two sets updated.

                  Calendar is good too, I’ve heard it has no offline support though. Although I haven’t verified that.

                  Last thing I would like to see is notification support without Play Services.

                  Some of those things might be super unimportant to some, but for me it makes the use of their stuff unnecessary cumbersome. Especially if you consider that those are all Proton products and should work together well.

                  My by far biggest problem is their communication and general development speed though. Stuff like contact sync has been requested for 5(?) years now but there hasn’t been so much as a “we’re working on it”.

                  It feels to me they come out with new products all the time, like the document editor now, without addressing the little things that would make their ecosystem great.

                  Anyway, long ramble. But I appreciate that you asked for more details without insulting me.

                  • matt1126@feddit.uk
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    3
                    ·
                    7 months ago

                    These are some excellent points, thank you for sharing rather than just giving a blanket “they bad” statement.

                    I believe Pass has integrated SimpleMail now, you can create aliases which forward to your email without setting up reverse aliases.

                    You can also add credit cards to Pass now, this was actually one of the things keeping me on Bitwarden for ages.

                    Can’t say that their communication has improved though, all I can find on contact sync is that “Soon you’ll be able to sync the contacts in your proton mail app to the default contact app on your mobile device” so if poor communication is your biggest problem then I can’t fault you for avoiding them.

              • Muscar@discuss.online
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                5
                ·
                7 months ago

                Congratulations, you put the final nail in the coffin of proof that you’re an idiot with that comment.

                Believe*

      • Jin@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        7 months ago

        All Their services are online based right? I don’t understand why using their proprietary servers is an argument here.

        • claudiop@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          7 months ago

          So, if you want to have any sense of a service respecting you, it should be hosted on a server you can control?

          No difference at all between the server of the world’s biggest advertiser and a server by a company that opens itself for audits and is in a country whole laws require no bullshit? Are you sure those two are the same? All or nothing?

        • John Richard@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          9
          ·
          7 months ago

          Because their primary audience is those gullible enough to believe they somehow can’t read your messages, yet they can easily capture your private password.

          • Excrubulent@slrpnk.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            7 months ago

            It is entirely possible to keep secure data on a server that only someone else with the password can access. They don’t store your password in plaintext, they don’t test whether what you typed is the same thing they keep on their servers. If the password works to decrypt your data then your client can read the emails. If not, your client gets gibberish and knows your password was wrong. With a secure system your password should never be sent to the server at all.

            Now, that doesn’t mean it’s trustworthy. There could be holes in the security, and I certainly would feel better controlling my own server, but it’s not automatically insecure just because it’s hosted by them.