4 ms·

If the data is opaque to the provider, then there are many services they won't be able to provide on it (without some major advances in homomorphic encryption).

If the data is opaque to the provider, then there are many services they won't be able to provide on it (without some major advances in homomorphic encryption). For example, spam detection or search. Sharing is also made much more difficult.

rayiner 11y ago
There is no reason that stuff can't be done on the client side. Outlook works just peachy searching my GB's of emails and attachments from its local replica, using the internet only to sync.
- dogma1138 11y ago
  Outlook also downloads and stores the emails locally, if the emails isn't in the PST the search takes ages and if you don't use recent versions of Exchange with all their bells and whistles and full indexing then finding anything is near impossible (e.g. searching within attachments). No one will use Gmail if they need to download GB's of Junk they haven't cleared in 10 years to find an email for 2 months ago, not to mention that any type of sharing will force major duplication as well as require you to download and generate new copies with each person you want to share it with.
- ddlatham 11y ago
  Not true - there are reasons not to do it on the client instead. Consider a web email client instead. It's not feasible to login to the site, download a full archive of your email, decrypt it, and index it before being able to do a search.
  - xj9 11y ago
    IndexedDB[1] sort of makes that a non-issue, doesn't it? [1]: https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/IndexedDB_API https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/IndexedDB_A...
    - Klathmon 11y ago
      I don't want GBs of emails on my phone, desktop, laptop, wife's laptop, work PC, and anywhere else that I want to use email. And I don't want to waste power and time syncing all that data between those devices just so i can do the same things i can now but less efficient (and with still more drawbacks)
    - ddlatham 11y ago
      No, it doesn't. This issue is not technology to store and search data from the client. The point is not wanting to download everything to every client in the first place.
      - xj9 11y ago
        Personally, I am a fan of p2p applications and doing things locally. Unfortunately, there are a lot of unsolved issues, especially when it comes to data storage, like you mentioned.
  - amalcon 11y ago
    This is one of the reasons that web email clients (as your primary means of access, rather than a backup) were a bad idea.
- Crito 11y ago
  I'm not saying you're wrong, but how would you go about implementing client-side search for Amazon? (inb4 "server-side amazon search doesn't work anyway" ;)
harryh 11y ago
Also displaying advertising based on keywords in your email.
kgilpin 11y ago
When I submit a search, I can also submit the key. Spam filtering can be done as the email streams in. Email databases which power the spam filter can be de-anonymize do and reduced to statistics. I guess sharing is harder but it can still be done. If I share content with you, I'm giving you permission to have a copy so it can be encrypted with your key as well as mine.

rayiner 11y ago

There is no reason that stuff can't be done on the client side. Outlook works just peachy searching my GB's of emails and attachments from its local replica, using the internet only to sync.

dogma1138 11y ago
Outlook also downloads and stores the emails locally, if the emails isn't in the PST the search takes ages and if you don't use recent versions of Exchange with all their bells and whistles and full indexing then finding anything is near impossible (e.g. searching within attachments). No one will use Gmail if they need to download GB's of Junk they haven't cleared in 10 years to find an email for 2 months ago, not to mention that any type of sharing will force major duplication as well as require you to download and generate new copies with each person you want to share it with.
ddlatham 11y ago
Not true - there are reasons not to do it on the client instead. Consider a web email client instead. It's not feasible to login to the site, download a full archive of your email, decrypt it, and index it before being able to do a search.
- xj9 11y ago
  IndexedDB[1] sort of makes that a non-issue, doesn't it? [1]: https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/IndexedDB_API https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/IndexedDB_A...
  - Klathmon 11y ago
    I don't want GBs of emails on my phone, desktop, laptop, wife's laptop, work PC, and anywhere else that I want to use email. And I don't want to waste power and time syncing all that data between those devices just so i can do the same things i can now but less efficient (and with still more drawbacks)
  - ddlatham 11y ago
    No, it doesn't. This issue is not technology to store and search data from the client. The point is not wanting to download everything to every client in the first place.
    - xj9 11y ago
      Personally, I am a fan of p2p applications and doing things locally. Unfortunately, there are a lot of unsolved issues, especially when it comes to data storage, like you mentioned.
- amalcon 11y ago
  This is one of the reasons that web email clients (as your primary means of access, rather than a backup) were a bad idea.
Crito 11y ago
I'm not saying you're wrong, but how would you go about implementing client-side search for Amazon? (inb4 "server-side amazon search doesn't work anyway" ;)

harryh 11y ago

Also displaying advertising based on keywords in your email.

kgilpin 11y ago

When I submit a search, I can also submit the key. Spam filtering can be done as the email streams in. Email databases which power the spam filter can be de-anonymize do and reduced to statistics. I guess sharing is harder but it can still be done. If I share content with you, I'm giving you permission to have a copy so it can be encrypted with your key as well as mine.