101–110 of 250 posts
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...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
iOS? Plus, I know folks who use mail.app. I also bet they could figure out how to instrument Safari with browser-side encryption for their cloud users. A few more privacy scandals break, and if Apple had an end-to-end encryption story that sounds roughly like: “If you’re using Apple products and services, you probably don’t need to think too much about the techy parts.” I could easily see Apple cementing their positi…
Where do you keep the keys? * On the device? Oops--device broke, guess my emails are gone forever * In the "cloud"? -- Oops, can't guarantee encryption Who generated the keys and how do you build trust? For both of these, you can trust Apple do do the right thing, but that's putting all your eggs into that basket, similar to iMessage.
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…
It's not being hyped, you are just over-reacting because it doesn't meet the use case you'd prefer. It's not a security feature and it's not about privacy. Clearly, like PGP of yore which had view-only messages, one can simply copy (perhaps screencap in this case) the message and then do whatever. This is an augmentation to what postini had, and now in core G Suite, of defined retention periods for email. Now, users…
Wickr, but while it guarantees protection from discovery, it doesn't guarantee freedom from implication. It is not legal to use such services to hide illegal activity, which is what Judge Alsup clearly laid out in the case. How would you know if illegal information was being traded? Because Uber management implied that employees should use Wickr if they were going to talk about anything illegal, which, uh, isn't something you want to do.
This is only possible if one believes in the capacity to control client security on the other side. There’s also the problem that something viewable by the recipient’s eyeballs is also photographable by the recipient’s camera. Moreover, I worry about the new Gmail feature that undermine the open platform of email. Email is just about the last unwalled comms platform we have, and I really worry for its safety if gmail…
Email is doomed either way. The standard is indefinitely stuck in "IE6" mode, where there's few if any improvements, updates, or fixes. Everyone time anyone suggests significant improvements one of the big players (Google, Microsoft, Yahoo!, etc) says no and it stalls. If email gets a "HTML5"-like major refresh at some point then I'd be proven wrong but that hasn't happened yet in my lifetime. Microsoft in particular…
https://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/chat_systems.png
All the chat programs are making all the communication pain in the neck and the only way of communicating that you can rely to are old school phone calls, sms and email.
There is also other side, with email you actually think what you are writting as you don't want to flood someone, with chatting it is all about smileys or everybody would be still using irc, I still need to see chat program catching the amount of irc features (actually I would bet Telegram is just front end for irc servers in backend).
And just to mention this gmail feature, it is just nonsense, it will work in their cough spy.. cough ..ing... email system, immediately when it leaves it, it is probably just a mime header which I will gladely ignore. And self respecting techie shouldn't use the gmail (and should be proud not to use it ;) ) anyway.
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…
I have to wonder if the same concept would / could be applied to such emails? The email might be gone from my account and yours, but it's still in a digital landfill somewhere. Free to be reviewed, sans warrants, etc. Perhaps?
Not possible with POP3 I guess.
You can save the message contents with effort, that's not really the threat model this is feature is addressing. But neither POP nor OfflineIMAP will help you by default.
