undefined | Better HN

0 pointsjorvi7y ago0 comments

I take it you mean https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17258203?

I fully agree that ProtonVPN seems like a poor choice, considering all the controversy around them, especially when its backed up by that much evidence. Mullvad, Private Internet Access, TorGuard etc. would have been a better choice, but perhaps Mozilla didn't want to look like it was picking sides among 'established' VPNs..

0 comments

protonmail7y ago

These are actually false allegations which were originally spread by none other than Private Internet Access as part of a smear campaign. We have previously responded here: https://www.reddit.com/r/ProtonVPN/comments/8ww4h2/protonvpn...

As mentioned in Mozilla's blogpost, they did their homework and thoroughly checked ProtonVPN, including visiting us in Geneva at our main office, which also refutes these allegations.

mackrevinack7y ago

Stay away from PIA. One of their employees was caught red handed spreading false information about other VPNs a few months back. The guy's google profile picture was in one of the screenshots. It was half covered by another window but it was enough to figure out who he was

dsissitka7y ago

My Google-fu is failing me. Source?

detaro7y ago

Why should I trust those comments over Mozilla when they say they looked into the details of the service they promote?

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse