From 2019, but still [this fullstop signals not only the end of that sentence, but also the end of this statement]. And here [those two words indicate that new information/context is being added; it is being indicated that we now no longer talk about the article, which the uneditorialized post title references and the post link leads to] something a bit more recent about the glorious “swiss privacy” [this makes it further clear that the following is about swiss privacy in general and not about Proton] https://www.republik.ch/2024/01/09/der-bund-ueberwacht-uns-alle
key points
[they were added because the main article is about Proton and written in english and because OP assumed that most in here are unable to read german and care less about general swiss privacy than they do care about Proton]
-
New reporting based on documents and court records shows that since 2017, the internet traffic of Swiss citizens has been massively monitored and read when it crosses borders, which happens routinely even for communication within Switzerland.
-
The intelligence service’s claims that purely domestic Swiss internet traffic is collected are false, given how internet routing actually works. Traffic flows across borders dynamically, not through static “cables” as claimed.
-
All data is stored and searched, including retrospectively, meaning the intelligence service builds an ever growing haystack of private communication to dig through. This includes communication from journalists and lawyers that should be protected.
-
In 2023, steps were taken to expand monitoring further by requiring more Swiss internet providers to enable access to their infrastructure, including providers that don’t directly deal with cross-border traffic. This contradicts previous claims about how the monitoring would work.
-
Critics argue this invalidates assurances given earlier by the government and intelligence officials and constitutes mass surveillance that violates civil liberties. There are plans in 2024 to revise the intelligence law again, possibly to retroactively legalize monitoring practices already occurring.
read the article, the keypoints have nothing to do with proton or the posted article. i just tried to add more context and illustrste that “swiss privacy” is an empty marketing phrase, like “military grade security” etc.
If your key points aren’t about Proton, why is it in the title?.
😒 if people comment, why do they not read the post or the linked article?
If the title and the key points don’t match each other, why would I then go and read an archive of a translation of the 5-year-old article they are supposed to represent
And if they don’t represent the article, why would you bother writing them without making that abundantly clear
Thanks for your feedback, I tried to clarify it a bit, the post title, however, cannot be changed because of rule 7.