Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Google is testing expiring emails in the new Gmail

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 250 posts

Re: Google is testing expiring emails in the new Gmail

#141

Post by prophesi »

ransom1538 wrote: post #80
matthewaveryusa wrote: post #7

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…

Not going to comment on the legal side of things, but I'd recommend PrivateBin over PrivNote. The former is open-source, and can easily be self-hosted, which should obviously be of interest to the privacy-minded folks here.

Re: Google is testing expiring emails in the new Gmail

#142

Post by carussell »

stingrae wrote: post #91

I feel like people are missing what I think the core reason for this feature, to limit what is available to opposing attorneys during discovery.

For anyone in the Northern District of California at least, that's a pretty awful use case, for the reasons I mention above. You open yourself up to being culpable for the strongest hypothetical against you (versus just dealing with the magnitude of the worst thing that you actually did).

Re: Google is testing expiring emails in the new Gmail

#144

Post by twotwotwo »

mywittyname wrote: post #134
twotwotwo wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Not many people are paying attention, but this is just another move from Google to make email = Gmail. Agree with that. And sad and weird. There are plenty of ways to do well in business without eroding the open nature of email!

A counter argument is that email wasn't really designed with the security considerations that we have today. So while I agree with both of you, this is an eventual and necessary evolution of email. Self-destructive and encrypted messaging is something many, many email users have wanted for years. And people who absolutely require these features (such as hospitals) have long-ago come up with similar solutions.

I mean, lots of security improvements that make promises that they can keep. I'm not saying they have to do my pet idea; I'd have zero complaints if they announced they were pushing 2FA to more people, or a dozen other things.

But "your message will self-destruct in a week" is a flawed promise because a bad actor can snap a photo of your email, apply a zany photo filter, get it printed on 11x13" photo paper, buy a colorful frame for it, and hang it on the wall of their home for visitors to artistically enjoy for years. It's not meaningfully gone unless all copies of it are gone, and this feature won't ensure that.

"Request expiration," like I alluded to in my earlier message, makes a promise that's closer to reality. A feature like that that's honored by default will help when both sides want messages gone, without overpromising. Importantly, it doesn't involve trying to take away the recipient's power over data they possess, or fiddling with the open email ecosystem too much. Trying to take away users' control over their data is a tendency that has more bad potential outcomes than good, and so is breaking the remaining openness of email.

(There're also some potential practical issues. It's more of a pain to keep documentation you were harassed over this kind of email, for instance, though since the feature is badly broken it's still possible. It breaks recipients' very-long-standing expectations about how things work, too. Folks mentioned all that when Facebook talked about support for unsending messages recently.)

The less-bad possibility is that Google just said, "well, folks enjoy Snapchat and such" and sort of didn't go that deep into the weeds. The bad-bad case is what mtgx said, that they're conscious of the bugs but consider them features.

Re: Google is testing expiring emails in the new Gmail

#147

Post by partiallypro »

matthewaveryusa wrote: post #7

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…

Not only that but Google scans your mail to serve ads, would it now say it doesn't scan your "burn after reading" emails? I wouldn't trust them to.

Re: Google is testing expiring emails in the new Gmail

#148

Post by twhb »

partiallypro wrote: post #147
matthewaveryusa wrote: post #7

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…

Not only that but Google scans your mail to serve ads, would it now say it doesn't scan your "burn after reading" emails? I wouldn't trust them to.

They stopped doing that in 2017.

https://blog.google/products/gmail/g-suite-gains-traction-in...

Re: Google is testing expiring emails in the new Gmail

#150

Post by e12e »

cat199 wrote: post #99
e12e wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's a big difference between "self-destructing g mail" and "self-destructing e mail". Even with the first, Google supports forwarding all mail to an arbitrary email address, which means the "Gmail" becomes a text-file stored on a dovecot server (or other regular mail server) somewhere. So unless they break delivery (you can forward only some subset of emails) - there's no way for the sender to have any better gua…

> So unless they break delivery Why break delivery when you can break sending? just store the contents locally, and replace the body with some URL that the user has to click.. then, when non-gmail users have been desensitized to clicking links in emails 'because gmail', and get viruses constantly, sell them gmail as a way to have email without risk of viruses. win win!

Not sending the content is breaking delivery (of email). I mean, sure, replace the headers and mail body with a link to your gopher site or something. But at that point, you're not really delivering email anymore.
Post reply on HN