- ProtonVPN UAB lists Tesonet's CEO as a director [after: the company's name was changed multiple times in 2 months, and the director's name was hidden from the public view]
- ProtonVPN UAB is operated from Tesonet's HQ in Vilnius, Lithuania [after: the company's address was changed to a co-working space's located a few streets away, which doesn't require to relocate to use it]
- ProtonVPN UAB uses previous Tesonet's technical employees [after: still true]
- ProtonVPN uses IP address blocks that belong to Tesonet [after: these IP address blocks were assigned to ProtonVPN]
- ProtonVPN Android mobile app was signed by Tesonet [after: still true]
The ProtonMail's response on reddit was modified multiple times and locked, to prevent people from picking the holes in the narrative.
[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17258203 ["showdead" must be enabled in settings to see the entire thread]
There are even photos from Mozilla's visit to Proton HQ in Geneva: https://www.instagram.com/p/BpR7ungAi6Y/
Proton does have an office in Vilnius (one of 6 offices globally), but the bulk of our staff works in our two Swiss offices.
Is Tesonet's CEO still the director of ProtonVPN UAB, more than 2 years after the incorporation in July 2016? I can no longer check it myself, because the public record is now hidden. But it was still true in June 2018.
And how do you feel about partnering on a free VPN service with a company, which has been sued for multiple patent infringements in "Large-scale web data extraction products and services with residential proxy network" by the founders of another free VPN service, HolaVPN, who have publicly admitted to using it for exactly that?
3 and 4 are the only things I can see with any weight to them, yet they were brought up by a competitor (red flag), and vague enough not to be considered "evidence".
5 and 6 prove absolutely nothing. Both of these products use OpenVPN, which is what the vulnerability was in.
The vulnerability has nothing to do with Tesonet and I have not seen proof otherwise. Presumably other VPN services that also use OpenVPN could have encountered the same vulnerabilities. What makes you think that both having the same bug, because they use the same open-source system, is any kind of "proof"?
It's interesting how one can seem to provide a huge body of quotes and evidence for something- yet the majority of it easily deflates when viewed directly. We're gonna need more than this, much more. I'm not willing to 100% disbelieve you or dismiss your concerns outright- but if you're trying to convince people, this is a pretty weak effort.
You've made these claims before, you say ProtonMail's response is inadequate- could you elaborate on why? I thought it was relatively thorough and convincing, but am willing to see any holes poked in it