That counterpart, according to Ortis, briefed him about a “storefront” that was being created to attract criminal targets to an online encryption service. A storefront, said Ortis, is a fake business or entity, either online or bricks-and-mortar, set up by police or intelligence agencies.
The plan was to have criminals use the storefront — an online end-to-end encryption service called Tutanota — to allow authorities to collect intelligence about them.
It’s also a good thing to note that Canada doesn’t have the same concept of freedom of speech as the US has. Here you can be liable for damages caused by what you say.
Technically he didn’t say anything in a public forum tho. The article states he was briefed on the storefront by someone else, and seeing as it seems to fall under classified info it’s unlikely we will ever find out who that someone is.
Wait, WHAT?
I’m also intrigue but I feel like if this was real this would have blown out way more than this.
Tutanota itself responded on reddit
They will need to respond much stronger than that, this claim is going to haunt their business forever.
based on the comments some say that they can’t sue but I would disagree
If Tutanota is an unwilling participant than this violates the principles of consent, copyright, and penetration testing
Tutanota lawyers might want to take a look as they might have a case.
btw I AM NOT A LAWYER, please ask a real lawyer for legal advice
again I AM NOT A LAWYER
It’s also a good thing to note that Canada doesn’t have the same concept of freedom of speech as the US has. Here you can be liable for damages caused by what you say.
Technically he didn’t say anything in a public forum tho. The article states he was briefed on the storefront by someone else, and seeing as it seems to fall under classified info it’s unlikely we will ever find out who that someone is.