Are you claiming ProtonMail hands over message content to law enforcement? That contradicts this quote from the post:
>Furthermore, ProtonMail’s end-to-end encryption means we cannot be forced by a court to provide unencrypted message contents.
>Furthermore, ProtonMail’s end-to-end encryption means we cannot be forced by a court to provide unencrypted message contents.
I stand by the claim that the only truly secure mail is to do your own encryption and decryption client-side with open source tools. Anything done by a 3rd party service should be assumed to be compromised.
This is in no way related to the issue at hand.
A company that operates in a country where the government is legally forbidden from doing such things would be more resilient to attack through the judicial or law enforcement system. Granted, there's always the suspicion that surveillance maybe be conducted extra-judicially, but it's still better. I don't know of any such countries. I think the Apple v. FBI case was going to set precedence in this matter, but that never went to trial.