Wouldn't self destructing emails only work if both sides use Gmail?
The recipient receives a link instead to the content.
41–50 of 250 posts
Wouldn't self destructing emails only work if both sides use Gmail?
The recipient receives a link instead to the content.
Uhmm... screenshot the mail; self-destruction circumvented.
It wouldn't prevent humans from remembering the mails, too. But screenshots are easily faked, and IMHO might (and should) not hold up in court. This is the equivalent of hearsay.
"On the recipient’s side, the person was using the existing version of Gmail and received a link to view the confidential email. The recipient had to log into their Google account once again to view the content." IMO this is an open invitation to phishers.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why do people keep bringing up screenshots as some kind of evidence of something that was said? I can easily go into an email, bring up the source code, edit the email body to have some racist tirade, then screenshot the edited email and use that as “evidence” against a person.
Nobody is actually doing that. You are confusing evidence against someone versus "I better make a copy of this for myself before it stops working".
Assuming gmail and g-suite share technology, I doubt any enterprise customers would be comfortable with the content of the email actually being purged. I'd guess there is some backdoor for corporate compliance and auditing reasons. I also don't see any reason you couldn't build a bot that grabs these for you to keep via the gmail add on api.
they'd have a standard, non-selective, purely time-based expiration policy which would be defensible in the face of a government investigation.
"Your honor, we made no attempt to hide specific details about this matter. Our policy has always been to destroy all messages that are greater than 90 days old."
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Nobody is actually doing that. You are confusing evidence against someone versus "I better make a copy of this for myself before it stops working".
Then why not just copy and paste the text....
But taking a photo is always doable. This is a standard argument. If you can't trust the recipient to preserve privacy then there isn't a technological way to defeat this kind of information leak.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I feel like client-side email encryption is a missed opportunity for Apple. Easy encrypted email would fit nicely into their narrative of “we can offer privacy features that Google can’t, because we sell you stuff”
Encryption doesn't work unless both sides use it. Apple supporting it won't help apple users one bit, because nobody else uses an actual application to check mails anymore. It's mostly web mail clients everywhere, and they obviously can't use encryption.
Google, please don't mess with email standards.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It wouldn't prevent humans from remembering the mails, too. But screenshots are easily faked, and IMHO might (and should) not hold up in court. This is the equivalent of hearsay.
If it was a high-profile case and the screenshot was evidence of a crime, I’m assuming they have people that could weigh in as an expert on doctoring images?
No. No. No. Google, please don't mess with email standards.