Live data from Hacker News

Gmail confidential mode

gsuiteupdates.googleblog.com

181–190 of 206 posts

Re: Gmail confidential mode

#182
post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I were implementing something like this, it would just be a link to an auto-expiring viewer page, if you opened the email in a third-party email client. And according to Google, that's exactly how it's implemented: https://support.google.com/mail/answer/7674059 "Malicious programs" here most likely refers to things like keyloggers.

You aren't really sending email any more, just a link to a website.

This is unfortunately how lots of people and companies think "secure" email needs to work. Any message from my bank or doctor works this way even it is something as simple as an appointment reminder. It is massive waste of user's time and programing effort, but I'm afraid that is where the world is moving.

Re: Gmail confidential mode

#184

I feel that many of these pseudo-secure, proprietary enhancements to email create a false sense of security for non-tech-savvy users. Given the smoke-and-mirrors presentation of this as a way to "secure your email^tm" and the plethora of recent info leaks, i am sure some poor c-level exec will get caught inadvertently sharing something with an external recipient thinking that it will disappear in a few days, but then…

There are two schools of thought: 1) Security has to be enforced by code 2) Your employees are reasonable, and won't try to maliciously bypass security controls I'm firmly in camp #2. In a normal corporate setting, a locked door or a locked cabinet is security, even with a cheap, easily pickable lock. That's all this is. And for 95% of corporate applications, that's good enough. If you have high-level executive crime…

2) Your employees are reasonable, and won't try to maliciously bypass security controls

Corollary: unless those controls impede their ability to do their jobs. This goes into a bit of UX design thinking, where you have structure your security controls to be minimally invasive or invisible, if not complementary to the business' operations.

>That's all this is. And for 95% of corporate applications, that's good enough. If you have high-level executive crime, or a scandal where you killed a few people, this won't help, of course. But if you'd like to keep an upcoming merger confidential, or maintain a trade secret, or anything vaguely normal, this is more than good enough.

Kind of. Partly you only get there by having a company culture where people value this sort of thing. Company cultures where everyone is out for themselves are likely to see worse compliance. But a company like Apple, which is famously secretive, are likely to do better. On the other hand, even Apple employees screw up in some pretty boneheaded ways, like that time a dude left a prototype iPhone in a bar that would up getting sold to Gizmodo.

Re: Gmail confidential mode

#185

This has the potential to create a huge legal headache. We can no longer rely on email to be there in our archive and presented as evidence in court, but now have to worry about expiry. In many countries an exchange of emails which represents a series of terms, restrictions, an offer, and finally acceptance can be considered a legally binding contract between parties and can be presented in court. With expiry and ema…

Don't use expiring emails for that purpose. Seems simple enough.

Seems simple to you and me. But there are plenty of non-technical bosses who will direct everyone in the company to only use expiring e-mails because they don't really understand the consequences.

Re: Gmail confidential mode

#186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No. It does, definitely, work with external recipients. Source: am googler, have used.

How? If you send an email with this on to me@protonmail.com and I download the message to my IMAP client how does google magically reach out and delete it from my hard drive? Is the email HTML only that only displays the text when the user is online and that text is fetched from the Google server? Let us say it is and I view the email, how does Google stop me from cutting and pasting that email using my thunderbird,…

You view the message on a Google server through a browser. The message body is never actually sent to the recipient's address.

"When someone sends a confidential mode message, Gmail removes the message body and any attachments from the recipient's copy of the message. These are replaced with a link to the content. Gmail clients make the linked content appear as if it's part of the message. Third-party mail clients display a link in place of the content."

From https://support.google.com/a/answer/7684332

Re: Gmail confidential mode

#187
post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You also need to defeat HDCP for HD content, which is possible but not as easy as a simple HDMI capture.

You just need HDMI splitter that doesn't use HDCP on output.

Right. And that means getting a cheap Chinese splitter that may or may not strip HDCP, buying one on the grey market, or making one yourself.

Re: Gmail confidential mode

#188

If anyone is curious how it works with external accounts, I just tested it: 1) Mail arrives (subject intact) with text like "John Doe has sent you an email via Gmail confidential mode" and a "View Email" link 2) The link takes you to a "To view this email, you must first confirm your identity. A one-time passcode will be sent to (your email)" page. 3) Entering the separately-emailed passcode lets you see the email bo…

That seems like a perfect way to spear-fish people for their google password.

Re: Gmail confidential mode

#189
post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Define "read" - you obviously don't mean "process" because that wouldn't make any sense. So you must be talking about something more specific?

The email should be received, filtered, and put into a database with an index. If any information escapes this database, outside of going to the user's email client, then we have a privacy problem with google "reading" the mail. This definition isn't perfect but it should be enough for to you understand the intent.

You agreed to their use of all data when signing up for your free account with gigabytes of free storage.
Post reply on HN