Not a lawyer but in the scenario where proton closed the source but kept offering the build, even if gpl3 still applies since they’re the only copyright holder (no contributions) it’d only give them grounds to sue themselves?
From gnu.org:
The GNU licenses are copyright licenses; free licenses in general are based on copyright. In most countries only the copyright holders are legally empowered to act against violations.
Honestly, even if you don’t terminate SSL right until your very own app server, it’s still based on the assumption that whoever holds the root cert for your certificate is trustworthy.
The thing that has actually scared me with CF is the way their rules work. I am not even sure what’s the verification step to get to this, but if there is a configured page rule in a different CF account for your domain that points at cloudflare (I.e. the orange cloud), you essentially can’t control your domain as long as it’s pointing at CF (I think this sentence is a bit confusing so an alternative explanation: your domain is pointing DNS at your own CF account, in your CF account you have enabled proxying for your domain, some other CF account has a page rule for your domain, that rule is now in control). The rule in some other account will control it.
It has happened to us at work and I had to escalate with their support to get them to remove the rule from the other cloudflare account so we can get back control of our domain while using CF. Their standard response is for you to find and ask the other CF account to remove the rule for your domain.
This is a pretty common issue with gitbook, even the gitbook CEO was surprised CF does this.
An app named “Bring!”. It’s pretty barebones, the only few features in it are
It’s pretty much all we need.