And still no drive client for Linux..Fuck those guys :)
post
I’m annoyed because I had to go find a tree that actually had the cursor files. If there’s a smoking gun, you gotta fucking link it when you call someone out.
The irony of Proton attempting to remove it this way is that GitHub trees are permanently available. The only way to remove something once a link has been created is to delete the repo. I’d expect a security-minded company to understand that. To me that’s much more egg-on-face than vibe-coding secure applications. Neither is good; only one very explicitly highlights you don’t know shit about security.
AFAIK, unless that tree has signed commits in the history after the commit introducing the cursor files (or it's otherwise verifiable, like having been linked by a member of their team), that's not a smoking gun.
I remember a meme that was shared a while ago, where somebody forked the Linux kernel on GitHub, made a joke commit under Linus's details (which are NOT verified by design), and posted them around. I can't find an instance of that right now, but here's a somewhat similar example, where somebody put a fake backdoor in their fork and changed the url to the original repo, which lets them pretend the commit came from the original repo.
I'd love to see a smoking gun to confirm those claims, but commiting as somebody else, with a fake time, and editing history aren't that difficult - if they could remove the file from history, somebody else could add it to history.
Absolutely fair! The other commits in that tree for the .cursor folder match existing contributors. This unchanged PR and this unchanged PR both contain the same structure. This tree comes from this unmerged, closed PR which also matches. This closed issue, commented on by maintainers, references this tree which corroborates the other unlinked commit tree. (Edit: I stopped because I got bored; see the other unchanged issues and PRs that show a rewrite of history)
Attribution is never 100% especially when APTs are concerned. I am confident when I say there is way more evidence here showing the files officially exist and were officially part of the tree than many of the very confident yet unconfirmed APT attributions we actively rely on.
I don't know what APT stands for in this context, but just one PR/comment from a trusted contributor seems like plenty of proof, you really went and did your homework, and then mine too ;D
Advanced Persistent Threat. For example, we assume the Lazarus Group is responsible for several high profile attacks. We don’t have anything close to the evidence here for direct attribution; using that as a bar I’d say the Proton attribution is pretty strong. Since my callout was security-focused, I wanted to ground it in other security terms. Your point was completely spot on and it was a great reminder to me because sometimes I forget the basics.
For folks that don’t know, there are a few bad things with the Proton response. First and foremost, you don’t rewrite main ever just from a development perspective. It usually causes more trouble than it’s worth unless you’re a team of one and no one else has ever touched your repo. From a security perspective, it’s very misleading to assume rewriting history can clear history from GitHub as I hope I’ve shown here. Additionally, anyone with a local copy of the repo from before the rewrite can use the reflog to access that history. While it won’t work for any new pulls post-rewrite, it’s still a risk for a large repo like this.
The correct way to handle this or other sensitive information being added to a repo is to use remove the file in a merge and rotate any secrets exposed. Take the hit on the chin; security is just about reducing risk not removing it. I have cleaned up plenty of repos before. Tools like gitleaks can search your active tree as well as your history for exposed secrets. Delete, commit, own the failure. Proper ignore files, meticulous review, and automated checks also help reduce risk.
Overall that’s why I think this is dumb. To me it would be a non-issue if a security-minded company had used security best practices to handle this.
I’d bet they just added it to their global .gitignore where it should be, then removed it because they didn’t want their private dot files committed to a public repo.
I don’t think this user knows much about git works. I don’t think this is nefarious or “vibe coding” as it’s colloquially known to be. It’s a bit much to describe all LLM use blindly as vibe coding, when vibe coding usually means just blanket accepting AI content.
Pretty on point, the .gitignore in the repo has a CLAUDE.md
https://github.com/ProtonMail/WebClients/blob/main/.gitignore
Is the privacy of their code that much of an issue in this case given its a public repo? Its going to get scraped by the bots regardless.
Yeah, this logic would encompass all open source projects. Hell, my comment right now will be read by an AI. Why? I'm posting it in a public place.
Privacy for a codebase is not the same as privacy for me. Security through obscurity would be more at odds with privacy for the end user.
Are we really shitting on companies because they have a config file for the wrong editor? Sorry, a config file for the wrong editor (excluding emacs because be as prejudiced as possible against those folk)?
Do I like "AI First" editors? Hell no. But VSCode is rapidly making that pivot and I don't know the lineage of Cursor well enough to know if it also used to be "just any other editor". And, from a quick google, it supports local LLMs (e.g. ollama), so the "Big AI is going to have all your code" problem is mitigated...
Also, the repo is on Github. Big AI (Microsoft) already HAS all their code. And before we have "Well you should selfhost a gitea!": If your website is public facing, it has been scraped by "AI". And if your open source project is hidden behind ten paywalls? I am not gonna finish that joke because people get really pedantic and pissy when you try to define "Open Source".
At the end of the day: At a project level? If active code review by qualified developers is going on, I really don't care how the code was written. I DO care about those individual developers and their abilities as they continue to use "AI" based tools but... that is a different discussion.
I WOULD be interested in a link to the actual offending file. I've been part of enough projects where it was easier to just have dotfiles for every major editor because you have a wide range of contributors and no true scotsman doesn't have one of the local vimrc style plugins running. Whereas if it is massive instructions on how to generate code, I would get a lot more worried.
But an unsourced screenshot of a discussion thread ain't it.
How is this proof of vibecoding?
Cursor is an AI-powered code editor that understands your codebase and helps you code faster through natural language. Just describe what you want to build or change and Cursor will generate the code for you.
Sure, but even VS code has been pushing Copilot pretty hard and from the screenshots the setups look fairly similar. It's a recently released code editor with their own personal AI built in vs. VS Code which has the AI as an extension (or built in, I don't know what the default install is like these days).
If they're using it to auto complete lines of code or fill out boilerplate then I don't see the problem. If they're typing "make me a password manager" into the prompt window, hitting enter, and accepting it blindly, that's a problem. Also the code is (at least in this case) open source, so there should be better evidence of bad vibe coded code than the presence of a config file
I think there are better things to criticise Proton for, and unless there is more to the vibe coding than using the Cursor, citing this as a reason will get those other criticisms ignored in the noise.
Using cursor doesn't mean you're vibe coding.
I use ai all day at work for development, none of it is vibe coding.
Yeah there’s a big difference in code quality between using cursor as an aid to write code and vibe coding which would be asking it to write and debug large swathes of code with little human input. AI is very good at correctly writing a couple lines at a time. It quickly loses the plot when trying to write hundreds of lines or more and the human user has no idea what it’s doing anymore.
It doesn't matter Proton is the whipping boy of the fediverse
Unfortunately, so is Visual Studio and VS Code.
The presence of an AI assistant isn't evidence of vibe coding. Even using that AI assistant to auto-complete lines or small sections of boilerplate isn't vibe coding. To do that you need to ask the AI for whole swaths of code and then just accept what it gives you.
Proton's repo here is open source. What portion of it presents issues? Any?
Why would you use Cursor instead of VS (the standard for decades) if you're not going to use the AI features Cursor was specifically created for?
but cursor is different since it’s marketed as an Ai editor. VScode is just a general one.
See, that is just the thing: VS Code is marketed as an AI editor. The homepage is literally an autoplaying video of an AI writing code with this title, big and bold, right at the top of the screen:

This really depends on what their code review process looks like. When I review code, I honestly don't care how it was generated, I look at the requirements and the code, and determine whether the code meets the requirements. How the code was generated doesn't impact that at all.
Dude, you're flaming a company because one of the tools they use is marketed as using AI? You gotta be kidding me. If your bar for privacy requires you to dive down this deep into a company's asshole, you might as well just become Amish
Your opinion is based on your ideology of what’s wrong and good, but it is not factual
so if nobody likes proton what do you guys do? i am getting tired of the email shuffle.
I feel like every email post is a "don't use platform x" and there are very few (if any?) universally well received services out there. In which case the community will probably just give up and go back to Google.
We probably need a tier chart or something to add perspective. Proton have made dumb decisions recently but they're still better than Google/Microsoft
I dont hope to find a secure email platform anymore. If i have some info i want to protect i can encrypt it myself before sending, or send it via some secure instant messaging like signal. Email is too hard to make secure, and in he end of the day, the other person youre talking to probably has a gmail or something. Its not worth the hassle imo. There are other ways to have secure communication, outside emails.
it's good to keep secure communications separate anyways, so you don't accidentally send the secret message to the wrong place or without the security measures.
i don't get why people want it in the same place as their fucking gaming chats, imagine sending state secrets to #fursuit-showoff because you didn't notice which specific channel you're in
This is a great point. We spend so much time naval gazing on the best platform for our side, but what about the other side? Might as well use any old service and encrypt your private comms specifically. Yes it's effort to encrypt but I think it's the best compromise of privacy without housing your own mailserver
I use GPG in Thunderbird with ForwardEmail (because I use a custom domain)
self host. you can get great deals on domains and have whatever you want. Hell in many cases you can get free domains with hosting. my domain is a .ca (i'm Canadian) and I got it free for 2 years with a hosting plan that costs me $50 a year. So I'm already saving over Proton, It's local to me, and I can have unlimited accounts and bandwidth. I also use it to host my portfolio site.
Then I also have my own home server which I use for VPN, Backups, Bitwarden, Git Repos, torrents/media, even have my own searx search engine on it.
Um, it’s a public repository. You can view the code that’s been added. Even if it IS AI generated, you can review it yourself.
I’m as anti-AI as anyone but this is misplaced AI-alarmism.
can review it yourself.
You're a supervisor and you have 2 employees: Bill and Jim. As a supervisor your job is to ensure the work is being done correctly.
Bill is competent and rarely makes major mistakes. Jim does a decent job most of the time ... but he's also a savant at screwing up -- he regularly fucks up in ways that aren't immediately obvious but are guaranteed to cause serious problems days to weeks from the screw up.
You can glance over Bill's work and be fairly certain it's fine. You need to go over every single piece Jim's work to check for problems, and even then some are probably going to slip through.
AI is currently Jim, and Jim has no business writing code for anything privacy or security focused.
This is a great example since AI isn't taking on the role of an independent software engineer here, so there is no "Jim" and this is much less of an issue than y'all are making it out to be. You know that auto-correct is also a form of ML right? Have you considered that tools can be used responsibly and that standards for software developers still apply even when they use new tools?
You know that auto-correct is also a form of ML right?
Yeah, and I don't fuckin use it.
Also, my auto-correct is saying that sentence is missing a comma, so I guess you don't either.
Cool that's great. Can you tell me that none of the software you use has been developed by software engineers making use of machine learning methods?
Does anyone here actually review code?
Only my own code and so far most of it has been unacceptable.
Yes, and it's one of the most important things I do. Given the AI codegen boom we're seeing, it's also the skill I have that is increasing the fastest in value.
yes as a consultant/freelancer THIS is where the majority of my work is coming from now. if you're good at this SERIOUSLY consider consulting and freelancing for various companies that are now desperately trying to fix their AI tech debt. It's the ONE thing that is completely in demand right now due to the sheer incompetence of all these places that decided vibe coding and AI was the way to go.
you have no idea how much money you can potentially be making right now doing this. I'm booked solid for the rest of the year purely because of this.
Not gonna really be thing long-term. Up front savings vs customer long term retention. The up front savings are what business cares about. So yeah you'll get some companies who fucked up. Most just double down on the a. I.
What you're doing is entering the bargain-phase
I'm guessing OP means code you use rather than code you write, in other words auditing. Likely very few of us do that with any thoroughness. IIRC proton does have some independent auditing.
That obviously not what they meant. They mean, do you review the code for every open source application you use? Do you review every library you utilize? I'm willing to be it's a no for both of these, because no one has time for that.
No, like proton mail app. Have you reviewed it? Or Signal or Veracrypt or TheNewHotness.
Does anyone here realize that one person using Cursor doesnt mean "tHeY'rE vIbE cOdInG aCrOsS tHe wHoLe pLaCe!"
Then why didn’t they just say that instead of being shady and rewriting history?
Because it's also not a great idea to expose your rules files, and tell people first "oh shit, we mentioned rules files. Please don't look!" before
I'll be honest here, I've had less dogmatic conversations with conspiracy theorists about COVID. If you just need to make this a huge problem that later turns out to be a nothingburger and you'll never look back and grow as a human, then hey, you do you. But know that you'll look like a fool to anyone that isn't a goldfish and remembers more than 3 months at a time. Because you clearly don't know what's a big deal and what's not, and this is a Grade A waste of all our time to pitch a fit about.
Because thier bosses aren't accounta le to you and I? That don't have to say a dn thing
that would make sense if it wasn't a fucking business selling the promise of security lol
Again. They don't answer to us. They don't have to say anything
Now. I agree that they SHOULD. It would be not only be better buisness, BUT its the right thing yo do
But no, they don't. The should.
That is pretty immaterial to the issue. The issue is that when it comes to security, it's extremely poor form to rely on unintelligent mimicry.
Probably anti-Proton. I'm no conspiracy theorist, but the amount of pro BlueSky, anti Proton, anti Signal people I see on Lemmy make me wonder sometimes.
Signal is the sad compromise for the people I hold dearest because I refuse to use Messenger anymore and SMS is a joke with how glaringly unencrypted/de-facto wiretapped it is.
I’d love to get everyone on SimpleX but they already look at me like a wacko over Signal. The convenience tax is just non-negotiable for them and I have no idea how to bypass it.
I used to be a big proponent of simplex even if I dont use it with anyone, but I was told that the main developer supports tr*mp and m*sk... If you go to their github, they only link twitter as their social media and if you check their account...
https://github.com/epoberezkin (dunno if were allowed to share twitter links)
Talks about "far-left radicals", says that nazis were socialist etc. etc. .... Really yikes
Yuck. Well then again we sit in Lemmy, and the lead dev is a proud tankiest tankie. Open source do be like that.
TBH I feel like so many project leaders are wackos that I don't even judge the products by those, just by things they do. I still have hope in Simplex, but there were a couple of red flags, such as content scanning proposals, including clientside. Sure, it can probably be relatively easily forked to remove that specific thing, or you can choose the servers that don't do that, but it's still alarming that they try.
The question is not is Proton perfect in every conceivable way, the question is: is it more private than Google and the answer to that is yes.
When you opine on social media that Proton is somehow just as bad as Google you are helping doing the work of Google and that's the part that (again I don't truly believe this) makes me wonder if Google/Meta/Twitter is sowing the social web with seeds of doubt about more private alternatives.
I didn't say defending, I said helping. Which you are.
For private communication Signal is the gold standard LOL
Not everyone needs shitty xmpp extensions, Matrix that lacks PFS and is enshitiffying as we speak (I say as an avid user) or overkill like SimpleX or Briar.
You seem to be misinformed. Signals architecture is explicitly designed in a way to minimise metadata as much as possible. You can look up the data they had to hand over due to lawsuits, it was absolutely minimal
First - I'm not sure Sealed Sender would help against the server being changed to be actively malicious and trying to build social graphs. Second - even metadata concerns aside, a centralized system is just not resilient. Proposals like Chat Control are A LOT more easily enforceable with them than with tiny selfhosted servers.
I know that Signal runs on US cloud infrastructure (like AWS IRRC)
Doesn't change a thing about it's security or what they hand to disclose to authorities
I know that Signal runs on US cloud infrastructure
And only that one.
Signal dev is quite adamant on not letting people have their own servers, select a EU provider (yeah, EU is nazifying, but at least it's a large enough second-hand basket) or host the (suppossedly zero-knowledge) messages on one's own infrastructure. I'd say that's curious.
It really reminds me of the Mastodon mob mentality that caused so much trouble for fosstodon :/
top 100 comments