I'm not sure how I feel about this news story.

On the one side, it's good to make sure people are aware of the limitations of secure email providers. However on the other the article almost reads as of this should be a surprise to people?

I use Proton mail and pay for my account. I don't pay for anonyminity - I pay for privacy. They are two very different things.

The article talks about Opsec (operational security) and they're right - if you need anonyminity then don't use your personal apple email as a recovery address. That is a flaw in the user approach and expectations that unencrypted data held by Proton is also "secure". Your basic details and your IP address are going to be recorded and available to law enforcement. Use a VPN or Tor to access the service and use another untraceable email for recovery, and pay via crypto if you want true anonymity. And even then there are other methods of anonymous or untraceable secure email that may be better than Proton mail (such as self hosted).

But for most users like myself, if you're not looking for anonyminity then Proton is fine as is. My email address is my name and I use it to keep my emails secure and not snooped on by Google etc.

Proton advertises itself as private, secure and encrypted. It does not claim to offer anonymity.