81–90 of 250 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, the article covers this. The recipient receives a link instead to the content.
But the link requires you to have a google account, and every google account is also a gmail account...
https://accounts.google.com/SignUpWithoutGmail
Disclosure: Googler, but not on GMail.
I wonder how "destroyed" an email is is when the NSA/FBI wants to read it a year later. Google has no incentive to actually protect the content of "self-destructing" or any other type of emails, so it's dishonest for them to pretend to provide a private email service.
Pretty sure Gmail isn't being used for ad targeting anymore https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/06/23/technology/gmail-ads.h...
What a bunch of hype garbage this is. If you send something in plaintext to a server it's already game over. If Google was serious about privacy it would pgp-encrypt everything so only the client, client-side can decrypt it, just like what protonmail does. pfff, 'self destructing emails', what a heaping pile of razzle dazzle no-ops that is -- this is more likely subliminal advertisement for the new mission impossible…
You should checkout https://privnote.com/# Basically if I send you a message using it, I have deniability. Screen shot all you want, I can simply say I never sent it. If we do go to court over something sent -- you will end up showing a screen shot or a copy and pasted text file. Those will be tough to support in court. Have fun going after an Uruguay tech company for deleted data. This is different with standard ema…
I'm not so sure about that. If you leave enough incriminating evidence in the note itself, it wouldn't take too much to convince the jury or judge. For example, if you write something that only you had knowledge of in the note, then it can be used as evidence to convince the jury that you wrote it.
This site is a good idea but should be viewed as part of an overall strategy.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Then why not just copy and paste the text....
You'd have to go to some special measure to copy and paste the text because they disable the standard, easy copy/paste functionality. 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.
If they can add features like the temporary "confidential" mail as what Google is implementaing in Gmail, that would be a nice extra. But if we can't even do the basics right, why implement such features that can only be used between your own users?
Because when you try to use PGP these days using different implementation like Thunderbird/Enigmail to Outlook/GPGOL or vice versa, half of the times the e-mail are unreadable, not able to be decrypted or some other mysterious problem.
What a bunch of hype garbage this is. If you send something in plaintext to a server it's already game over. If Google was serious about privacy it would pgp-encrypt everything so only the client, client-side can decrypt it, just like what protonmail does. pfff, 'self destructing emails', what a heaping pile of razzle dazzle no-ops that is -- this is more likely subliminal advertisement for the new mission impossible…
You should checkout https://privnote.com/# Basically if I send you a message using it, I have deniability. Screen shot all you want, I can simply say I never sent it. If we do go to court over something sent -- you will end up showing a screen shot or a copy and pasted text file. Those will be tough to support in court. Have fun going after an Uruguay tech company for deleted data. This is different with standard ema…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You should checkout https://privnote.com/# Basically if I send you a message using it, I have deniability. Screen shot all you want, I can simply say I never sent it. If we do go to court over something sent -- you will end up showing a screen shot or a copy and pasted text file. Those will be tough to support in court. Have fun going after an Uruguay tech company for deleted data. This is different with standard ema…
You're really overestimating what happens in actual jury trials. When I served on a jury, a lawyer presented photographs of evidence as evidence. Like, I'm talking paper printouts of photos that were taken on a cell phone. Juries aren't full of engineers, as a general rule. If the average person on Reddit will see a screen shot of a text message and assume the conversation happened, why wouldn't an average juror? The…