Are you confusing security and privacy?

Companies have to comply with law enforcement. If anything, the little amount of data they were able to give after being forced is a good proof of their overall claim. If there is someone to blame here are courts using antiterrorism laws to catch environmental activists.

I mean, if you want secure/private communication, email should not be your go-to. It's a horrible platform by today's standards. It was never designed to have any serious level of security. Once they have an unencrypted email on the target with timestamps and mail headers, all they need to do is see who was communicating with Proton at that point. I don't know if anything has changed since the PRISM days, but back in the 2000s, they definitely had that level of insight into the web.

That's why I put "security and privacy" between quotes. I have absolutely Jo way to confirm if they are secure and private or if they're not, other than all the contradicting mentions all over the internet. Also, while security and privacy may not be mutually dependent in the physical world, it stands to reason that something insecure cannot be private, and something not private is inherently insecure, as @pixelscript@lemmy.ml clearly pointed out. As for controlling my own email infrastructure, I'd love to, as everything else I do self-host, and only with FOSS software. However, email hosting is a seriously complicated animal that requires too much effort and maintenance, and most of us dont have the knowledge and time to invest in that, so compromises need to be made. I am well aware that there's always risk on using something I have no real control over, but the alternative meets the reason for the phrase "the treatment is worse than the decease".