421–430 of 531 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not just track you, some ISPs will simply redirect all UDP port 53 DNS packets to their own DNS anyway.
Which ISP? People arguing against DNS over HTTPS claim stuff the doesn't happen so it'd be good to have definite examples.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think that's a good recommendation. Spammers are going to find your domain name and spam it at obvious usernames anyway (eg contact@). Besides what use-case do people have for throwaway addresses? In my experience in most cases the addresses you use aren't throwaway at all. Fastmail does subdomain aliasing and I've been using that for years with my own domain without issues. Every subscription I have has its…
I guess "throwaway" is the wrong word. In my case, I created a few emails under Fastmail's domains and then used them to sign up for things like reddit, newsletters etc, where I don't need to tie it to my identity. I don't think it's a given that spammers will find your domain, if you only provide your email to real people, and give generated emails to online services.
Email addresses that I use now look like this: reddit@subdomain.domain.com
If this leaks, I can track the source and I can bounce messages for this address.
While what you're saying is possible, a spammer needs to target you personally and that's not cost effective. It's not easy for them to try every possible English name at that address, because then they quickly get blacklisted.
Spammers collect addresses via scripts that crawl the web or via data leaks. It's more cost effective for them to get addresses that have been validated. All the spam I get are on these aliased addresses, biggest problem being the one I publish on my website, which I change periodically.
---
I like using my own domain even for aliased addresses because I can change service providers on a whim. I love Fastmail, but if they ever piss me off, I can change to Google Suite or whatever over night, the only thing required is some flexibility in setting up aliases.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Happy Fastmail user here. I love it for the snappy web client. It's only after I switched that I realized how slow Gmail felt.
I'd like to echo similar feedback. After I dropped gmail and went to fastmail i noticed it to be MUCH faster. gmail is my primary personal account. I really appreciated taking control of e-mail again. i'm happily paying for e-mail and tend to think putting money down ensures I keep myself honest and maintain a workflow. Now I only save e-mails that are important to me, instead of archiving everything.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What, exactly, do you feel is deficient about IMAP vs. JMAP, other than the latter being a protocol that doesn't require a bespoke parser? The only thing even remotely semi-annoying about IMAP that I can think of is the way message identifiers are per-connection (but in some very important way that actually makes sense).
I’ve never been able to search my entire mail archive quickly over IMAP, using Gmail or Fastmail. Mobile IMAP clients seem especially slow and inconsistent.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The point of these discussions is that the standard (IMAP specifically) is inadequate to a lot of modern use. One good thing that Fastmail is doing is promoting a REST-like IMAP alternative ( https://jmap.io/ ) that makes it easier[1] to go back to the distinction application/protocol. [1] by this I mean that implementing an app like gmail over IMAP would be a terrible idea, while JMAP would be at least a bit better…
What, exactly, do you feel is deficient about IMAP vs. JMAP, other than the latter being a protocol that doesn't require a bespoke parser? The only thing even remotely semi-annoying about IMAP that I can think of is the way message identifiers are per-connection (but in some very important way that actually makes sense).
As far as I know a couple things that are pain points for me when using thunderbird/other IMAP clients (weird search limitations, strict folder hierarchy organization) are due to how IMAP was designed, but these are mostly minor issues that I imagine would not require a new protocol.
What I hope the advantage of JMAP will be is that it will provide a more flexible foundation for gmail-like interfaces on an open protocol.
At least all IMAP clients I have used have always felt... clunky and counter intuitive (I started using email with gmail, so maybe I just never learned the skills) even if IMAP already had all the good things JMAP claim, I think that the different focus on message and less historical baggage have a good change of producing designs that will feel more natural to me.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not if you run your own DoH endpoint on a VPS!
I have my own unbound running on a VPS. My network intercepts all port 53 traffic, filters out ad servers, and then forwards over wireguard to my VPS. I should probably enable DoH as well. I'm feeling kind of lazy about it though.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How about FastMail? They have a stellar email service. They also offer contacts and calendars, though I don't personally use those (I use iCloud for that).
I’ve used Fastmail for years now on a work account. It’s best feature is that it’s not Google. First, no phone support. Hardly acceptable when even Google has this. Second, no collaboration suite like Drive/Docs. Third, no addons I’m accustomed to having in my daily driver email suite. Things I miss include schedule to send later, default reply all, and no priority inbox. Im stuck using Google for email and maps. I h…
Let's be realistic: it's an email service. Complaining it doesn't do everything Google does seems a little unfair.
Come on Mozilla, hurry up! I want to give you money for goods and services (I also donate monthly [1]), but I'm not that interested in a VPN (I can and do also pay Mullvad). Give me that real internet stuff - email, calendar, file sync, chat(?) - give me Firefox Premium. Bundle in the Lockwise password manager. I'd pay good money to see a company fill the void of paid, privacy first essential internet services and I…
It was fairly popular in some corporates for a while, until Lotus/IBM and MS stepped up their collaboration game.
---
Every time the VPN service industry is discussed on HN there is a barrage of comments that use keywords like “honeypot”, “snake oil”, and “shady”. I’m not denying that the industry has problems, but in this thread I’d like to focus on how we can improve it. Please tell me - What makes a VPN provider trustworthy, and how do you _know_? Personally I believe a trustworthy provider is _characterized_ by consistent action…
Block all plaintext traffic. Only allow TLS. Be transparent about what you log and what you don't. Publish results of third party audits.
Perhaps the users should pay for an audit as in "Check this one for us!"
Question is, how that could be organized. I guess the user community would have to unite for it andthe VPN provider would need to declare ahead of time, that they are fine with being audited by an independent party, paid by the customers.
Come on Mozilla, hurry up! I want to give you money for goods and services (I also donate monthly [1]), but I'm not that interested in a VPN (I can and do also pay Mullvad). Give me that real internet stuff - email, calendar, file sync, chat(?) - give me Firefox Premium. Bundle in the Lockwise password manager. I'd pay good money to see a company fill the void of paid, privacy first essential internet services and I…