131–136 of 136 posts
Is gmail removing IMAP too? Why support OAUTH at all when you can use the normal method of logging in with IMAP and an app password?
They are likely removing IMAP. IMAP support is already disabled by default in Gmail
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why not run the tool clientside? You don’t need an audit unless you’re doing something with the data on your end.
Are you sure about this?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> you will be paying that invoice whether or not you needed that assessment They don't just send you a bill for $10k. You can opt-out of the yearly audit by removing your use of restricted scopes. But yes, it is a yearly required audit, and they're serious about it. This limits the kind of apps that can be built on Gmail (basically – no free apps), but it is undoubtedly better for end users. Having gone through the p…
The context here is Free and Open Source Software that accesses email. Software that, for now, under Google's current interpretation of the rules, is allowed to use their OAuth without paying these fees. The question I'm asking is, what happens next year when Google decides to silently change their interpretation of the rules? Do you, as a FOSS email client writer working on JohnnyMail, risk a massive yearly bill of…
I suppose Google could charge for future access. Any platform could. But not retroactively. That would need to be in a contract and it’s not.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Legacy. For example, my email is in Google. There are things related to e.g. evidence for litigation from many years back. I have documents shared with me in Google Docs. Google used to be pretty good about "don't do evil." I've degooglified what I can, but I can't degooglify 100%.
It's never too late to switch.
I guess what I should do is stop putting new stuff in Google.
I believe many comments here will criticize Google. But objectively, Google is at its best here: - in terms of privacy, applications that have access to your Gmail inbox now require a security audit. - the audit is not required for MVP ( Of course, you have to pay for the audit. But: - it’s only required when you ask for restricted user data (i.e. reading my emails). - Google doesn’t take 30% of your revenue to use i…
Is it my inbox or Google's inbox?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The USG ostensibly requires due process (a warrant, whatever) to obtain information from US servers. This is no longer true, as Ed Snowden showed us. This is literally the point of their secret interpretation of FAA702. Pretending otherwise is nonsensical. The USG, just like the CCP, gets whatever data they want, about anyone, from servers in their own country, without due process. Anyway, my comment was not about…
I don't think you're totally following the logic. Stipulate that whatever legal process there is in the US for NSA (or any other intelligence agency) to get data is performative and easily bypassed. There is no legal process whatsoever for NSA to obtain that data from foreign targets. If you're worried about the Five Eyes SIGINT agencies, "foreign" servers are strictly less safe.
There's also the issue where Google itself is mass surveillance.