12 ms·

ProtonMail's encrypted email is now available to all

163 points by rdl 11y ago

runn1ng 11y ago
I remember when people used to flick to HushMail as the preferred encrypted e-mail provider. Where are they now?
- zokier 11y ago
  HushMail... wow, that's some history right there. Anyways, they got in bed with feds, and that was pretty much the end of that.. http://www.wired.com/2007/11/encrypted-e-mai http://www.wired.com/2007/11/encrypted-e-mai
  - runn1ng 11y ago
    "Even we cannot read your e-mails!" Exactly what those guys said 10 years ago, and exactly what Proton is saying now. What is different?
    - LeoPanthera 11y ago
      The difference is that they are lying. Hushmail encryption is not end-to-end. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hushmail https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hushmail
      - Flimm 11y ago
        You're correct. It can't possibly be end-to-end, since they have the keys, and they can provide webmail. They use OpenPGP but they give themselves the private key! This is dishonest, in my view.
SonicSoul 11y ago
The strong encryption makes it impossible for the company to comply with government demands for data. And since ProtonMail and its servers are located in Switzerland, there's nothing that US authorities can do to shut it down. The company gained a lot of publicity, much of it bad, when a leaked document revealed the app was a preferred choice for ISIS terrorists. Couldn't any company host their servers outside of jurisdiction and bypass US laws? I wonder how US gov't plans to work around this.
- programLyrique 11y ago
  I think the US government would make it very difficult for this company to operate in the US and sell their services there (maybe blocking transactions?). But with bitcoins...
- Natanael_L 11y ago
  Except... They can demand injection of backdoored code.
- junto 11y ago
  They'll do what they did to Wikileaks. The USG phone Visa and MasterCard CEOs and threaten the shit out of them personally. Suddenly you lose the ability to take credit card payments. You can turn to Bitcoin, but that's like trying to quench the hunger of a million people with one faucet. Plus if you are an American then it doesn't matter where your servers are hosted. The men in black suits are going to be knocking on your door.
  - mtgx 11y ago
    > The USG phone Visa and MasterCard CEOs Don't forget Amazon. Never forget Amazon: http://www.theguardian.com/media/2010/dec/01/wikileaks-website-cables-servers-amazon http://www.theguardian.com/media/2010/dec/01/wikileaks-websi...
    - rdl 11y ago
      I wonder if they'd ever go after corporate principals in ways calculated to annoy. I'd be fine with losing AWS access, but if they made it so I couldn't buy books/toilet paper from Amazon because I worked for/etc a company they hated, it'd be really annoying.
    - MichaelGG 11y ago
      Amazon's pretty corrupt. Apart from Wikileaks they've also decided to abuse their position and not compete by refusing to sell Apple TV or Chromecasts. Just get a 404. Their service reps deny everything and say it's just a temporary stock issue or that they "lack the contracts to sell such products". Scummy, and I'm very reluctantly cancelling prime over it, and I'm a customer of 13 years.
swordswinger12 11y ago
Can you search your emails? If so, how is the search index stored? Is it local or stored at ProtonMail?
- msh 11y ago
  It's webmail. Everything is stored on their servers.
  - mchahn 11y ago
    It can't be searched on the server. The article says "The app is encrypted end-to-end and, like Apple's iPhone, can't even be accessed by the company itself."
    - msh 11y ago
      Everything available OB the app is available in the webinterface (I am a protonmail user)
- konart 11y ago
  Yes you can, but only by Subject (at least that's how it seems to me after some tests)
- cornholio 11y ago
  In theory, there's nothing stopping you from creating a javascript indexer, and update the index whenever the user logs in and reads (thus decrypting) an email. The updated index is compressed, encrypted and sent back to the server. You could have multiple megabyte sized indexes, for example each covering a certain timespan. The default search action would be to search, say, the preloaded index for the last month, and the user will expect an "All time" search to take a bit more as more indexes are downloaded. (Patent pending)
DavideNL 11y ago
It's really nice to have this kind of privacy, but I don't understand how people can use a service like this while they don't provide the ability to make local (encrypted) backups. If their servers disappear for whatever reason (legal issues or hardware problems), you end up with 0 e-mails. Nothing. Tutanota.de has the same problem, no backup feature.
zokier 11y ago
> The app is a good example that even if they government forces US companies like Apple to create backdoors, users will still have communication options that the government can't crack. If you're interested, it's now available for Android, iOS or the web. That is immensely misleading. If some adversary has a backdoor in the OS/platform, then in many cases no amount of encryption will save you.
- bisby 11y ago
  If you input your encryption passphrase on a keylogged device, your entire encryption userspace falls apart.
  - TheDong 11y ago
    not if you do your crypto on a dongle (such as a yubikey), at which point they also need physical access to get the private key. It's perfectly viable for services like protonmail to allow 2FA via a dongle which would not be compromised permanently by a totally pwned userspace.
    - e12e 11y ago
      If you input your emails on a keylogging device, your emails are compromised.
dil8 11y ago
Is this service open source? How can we know it does what it says it does?
- novium 11y ago
  A few clicks and found this https://protonmail.com/blog/protonmail-open-source/ https://protonmail.com/blog/protonmail-open-source/
- zokier 11y ago
  > How can we know it does what it says it does? How does being open source help with that?
  - infodroid 11y ago
    Open source makes it is easier for security experts to review the code and determine whether it meets its security claims. If it is closed source, then there is no guarantee that the code the experts review is the same code that is used by the service. And also it is at the company's discretion whether to allow a security audit or not, and then which auditors to allow or exclude. But if the whole of the client software is open source, then it also eliminates the need to trust binaries provided by the vendor (which can be MITM) because you can build the software yourself or use a version audited by an entity that you do trust.
    - mtgx 11y ago
      That, also the fact that if they have it in their privacy policy and website, then we can call them out on it when they insert a backdoor or remove the encryption. We can't say the same about Whatsapp and its end-to-end encryption, because they never even publicly admitted to using it. How can we ever hold Whatsapp responsible for not using end-to-end encryption then? We can do that with Protonmail.
- davidkellis 11y ago
  Open source really is irrelevant. We don't know what code they deployed - it could be an open source project (we hope so), it might be an open source project with some minor changes - an NSA-approved backdoor for example, etc. We don't have any guarantee, so far as I'm aware, of what they're running, much less that it does what it claims to do.
rdl 11y ago
There are lots of drawbacks to an SMTP based service vs. something built on a newer protocol with client-side crypto everywhere, but email has a huge installed base. This becomes a question of "good" vs. "perfect", but it might also be a question of "too dangerous to use" vs. "replacement" -- depends on threats, alternatives, and quality of implementation. I know one of the people at Proton Mail pretty well, and have met the others. Of all the companies doing secure email right now, they seem like the best.
- drakenot 11y ago
  I was curious to read about any proposed successor protocols there are for SMTP that offer end-to-end encryption. It looks like Dark Mail might be one of the forerunners in this regard?
moxie 11y ago
Some bad signs: 1. Hosted in Switzerland is advertised as a security feature. The point of e2e is that the servers are untrusted. If you need a "good jurisdiction" for your servers, it means they must be trusted. That's a problem, because sadly there are no good jurisdictions in today's world, and your jurisdiction doesn't help you if your servers are hacked. 2. It's webmail. That means the security of whatever e2e they're doing is based on the security of SSL. If you break SSL, you can break whatever e2e they're doing, and that means your e2e security is only as secure as the CA system. 3. Their 'threat model' documentation leads with: "From a high level, our premise is that a service like the now-defunct Lavabit does add value, despite some inherent weaknesses. We designed ProtonMail around many of the same principles..." Given what happened with Lavabit (the eventual compromise of everyone's email despite shutting down the service), considering it to have been "valuable" should really be off the table at this point: http://www.thoughtcrime.org/blog/lavabit-critique/ http://www.thoughtcrime.org/blog/lavabit-critique/ I can't find much in the way of technical documentation for ProtonMail, but from what little is available, it does seem that (much like Lavabit), the service is built on the premise of "won't" read your mail rather than "can't" read your mail.
- rdl 11y ago
  Even with e2e you have availability concerns, so picking a "good" jurisdiction makes sense. The rest of your criticisms are completely valid -- webmail is never going to approach the security of true e2e client crypto. The best possible system for webmail would be a browser extension or in the far future world, some kind of browser security extensions. Failing that, there's probably value in "best effort" secure webmail if users are explicitly aware of the limitations. The problem is even developers aren't really aware of the limitations (since they vary with threats and per user), so this is probably not a realistic goal.
  - farfromright 11y ago
    Would you care to comment on Cyph [1]? They claim that they are able to approximate client side programs that provide e2e but in a non-plugin browser environment [2]. I know tptacek doesn't like it but he wasn't willing to go into a detailed account of why. [1] https://cyph.com https://cyph.com [2] https://docs.google.com/document/d/1XVh4ALXhbfxi70QSUY-xHclauob8O635bSySy6f1Ysk/edit?pref=2&pli=1 https://docs.google.com/document/d/1XVh4ALXhbfxi70QSUY-xHcla...
hackuser 11y ago
A few critical questions: 1) How are spam filters implemented if they can't access the content? 2) How is metadata protected? 3) Also, can I use POP/IMAP and store my mail locally, or must I trust them with my data?
- brightball 11y ago
  1) Seems to be that its stores encrypted but on arrival would still be scannable just as on send it would. Without the people sending to you or receiving from you having a key there's not much that can be done about it.
- jboynyc 11y ago
  Regarding 3, no, there is no protocol to store mail locally. You have to use webmail or one of their applications. https://protonmail.com/support/knowledge-base/imap-smtp-and-pop3-setup/ https://protonmail.com/support/knowledge-base/imap-smtp-and-...
  - e12e 11y ago
    It's odd. Seems like a no-brainer to allow power users access over IMAPS; just put the encrypted private gpg key in an IMAP folder, and let the users mirror their encrypted mail.
m0xy 11y ago
These guys got attacked recently by a DD4BC outfit and paid the ransom. I wouldn't trust them with a shopping list, let alone my email.
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
- saganus 11y ago
  Do you have any sources for this? I haven't heard about this before and would like to know more if possible.
  - wsha 11y ago
    It's mentioned in the article linked here.
denova 11y ago
If you care enough about privacy to sign up for protonmail, why not just learn how to use pgp? It's not perfect, but it works. And... oh goodness, I'm looking at this [support page][1]; If you send encrypted mail to non-protonmail addresses, the recipients have to open the message in a web browser and enter in a password to read it. So instead of exchanging public keys, you have to send them a password, probably over an unencrypted channel. I guess it's easier than asking them to generate a keypair. But if your recipient is too lazy to set up pgp, they're probably going to be just as annoyed at having to open your message in a browser and enter in a password, right? It seems like an awkward compromise. [1]: https://protonmail.com/support/knowledge-base/encrypt-for-outside-users/ https://protonmail.com/support/knowledge-base/encrypt-for-ou...
- modernerd 11y ago
  Even Phil Zimmermann, PGP's creator, says it's too hard to use: “I hardly ever run PGP. When people send me PGP encrypted mail I have to go through a lot of trouble to decrypt it. If it’s coming from a stranger, I’ll say please re-send this in plain text, which probably raises their eyebrows.“ http://www.forbes.com/sites/parmyolson/2013/08/09/e-mails-big-privacy-problem-qa-with-silent-circle-co-founder-phil-zimmermann/ http://www.forbes.com/sites/parmyolson/2013/08/09/e-mails-bi... I tried the ProtonMail password protection feature today (which is optional; you can just send plain text email to non ProtonMail accounts if you wish – this is the default, but you can click a lock to password-protect any outgoing message). The feature is well done, and I can see people using it to exchange secure mail, particularly if the recipient does not have a ProtonMail account. It has a built-in 'send secure reply' feature once you've entered the password as the recipient. This allows you to read the message and reply in-browser without returning to your email client, and without having a ProtonMail account, so both the outgoing message and the reply stay more secure than regular email throughout your conversation. This could be helpful for a wide range of uses, including support email that involves transferring login info and logs. The read and reply flow looks like this to the logged-out recipient: - Email with “view secure message” prompt: http://d.pr/i/1cwZ8 http://d.pr/i/1cwZ8 - Click “View secure message”: http://d.pr/i/13GlI http://d.pr/i/13GlI - Enter password to view message: http://d.pr/i/11Gg9 http://d.pr/i/11Gg9 - Click to reply in same tab: http://d.pr/i/WWWB http://d.pr/i/WWWB You still have to communicate the password securely somehow, but it's a much more user-friendly approach than PGP. I'm not saying it's a replacement for https://securedrop.org/ https://securedrop.org/, but it still has value.
jaguar86 11y ago
> Our primary datacenter is located under 1000 meters of granite rock in a heavily guarded bunker which can survive a nuclear attack. Would they seriously have done this on intent?
- nickik 11y ago
  Switzerland has a lot of bunker, it probebly cheap to get one and its a cool, but gimiky feature.
chatmasta 11y ago
The fundamental problem with e2e encrypted email, outside of the many technical limitations, is that the encryption is only as strong as the weakest link. Every member of an email chain must support the e2e encryption in order for it to work. One unencrypted sender/receiver is sufficient to break the whole model. So if you want encrypted email, you can only communicate with other people using the same encrypted email stack. What's the point of that? If you're paranoid enough to the point that you're using encrypted email and you can convince all your correspondents to use it as well, then you have far better options available to you than email. It really makes no sense to me... It's 2016, there are thousands of ways to communicate online, many of them encrypted. Why force the use of email? We would all be far better off if we just assumed that all email is public. If you need private communication, don't use email.
- ohthehugemanate 11y ago
  The way Protonmail and co try to solve this problem is by sending the non-protonmail recipient a notification email, with "click here to read". From https://protonmail.com/security-details https://protonmail.com/security-details : "We support sending encrypted communication to non-ProtonMail users via symmetric encryption. When you send an encrypted message to a non-ProtonMail user, they receive a link which loads the encrypted message onto their browser, which they can decrypt using a passphrase that you have shared with them. You can also send unencrypted messages to Gmail, Yahoo, Outlook and others, just like regular email."
  - Flimm 11y ago
    At that point, you might as well send people invites over email to switch to using a completely different messaging system that is more secure.
jakeogh 11y ago
Folks interested in rolling their own, checkout http://github.com/jakeogh/gpgmda http://github.com/jakeogh/gpgmda It's rough around the edges (and elsewhere) but works for me.
waffl 11y ago
Apart from the discussion surrounding the crypto side of all this, one thing that ProtonMail has really succeeded in doing is making encrypted mail finally an accessible thing to a non-technically inclined user. I've spent well over a year trying to get my team to properly gpg encrypt sensitive files only to constantly find them sending plain unencrypted files over slack, dropbox and even simply gmail. At least now, finally, they've found ProtonMail easy to use and are choosing to send files this way. I think the key, unfortunate reality is that until the end user doesn't have to think about encryption, they aren't going to bother using it. Bringing usability to encryption is another huge part of the problem that needs to be considered as it is basically a guarantee that the typical user will take the path of least resistance.
- e12e 11y ago
  I'll say this, a service like this is great from the network effect alone. While I might not think it's secure, it'll allow me to set up a traditional email-client+gpg and send encrypted email to people. And it'll provide a way for people to migrate to secure email, at a later point. Much like I could for a brief moment actually talk to people over XMPP until Facebook and Google cut off the limited support they had for it. Most of those I talked to used the horrible web interface of Facebook/Google talk -- but I could use something that made sense. And I could even talk securely to some people on Facebook, as OTR worked fine over Facebook XMPP chat (while obviously breaking the web interface).
yaelwrites 11y ago
Here's a deep dive into ProtonMail's claims on Wired (disclosure: I wrote it) www.wired.com/2015/10/mr-robot-uses-protonmail-still-isnt-fully-secure/

163 points by rdl 11y ago

runn1ng 11y ago

I remember when people used to flick to HushMail as the preferred encrypted e-mail provider. Where are they now?

zokier 11y ago
HushMail... wow, that's some history right there. Anyways, they got in bed with feds, and that was pretty much the end of that.. http://www.wired.com/2007/11/encrypted-e-mai http://www.wired.com/2007/11/encrypted-e-mai
- runn1ng 11y ago
  "Even we cannot read your e-mails!" Exactly what those guys said 10 years ago, and exactly what Proton is saying now. What is different?
  - LeoPanthera 11y ago
    The difference is that they are lying. Hushmail encryption is not end-to-end. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hushmail https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hushmail
    - Flimm 11y ago
      You're correct. It can't possibly be end-to-end, since they have the keys, and they can provide webmail. They use OpenPGP but they give themselves the private key! This is dishonest, in my view.

SonicSoul 11y ago

The strong encryption makes it impossible for the company to comply with government demands for data. And since ProtonMail and its servers are located in Switzerland, there's nothing that US authorities can do to shut it down. The company gained a lot of publicity, much of it bad, when a leaked document revealed the app was a preferred choice for ISIS terrorists. Couldn't any company host their servers outside of jurisdiction and bypass US laws? I wonder how US gov't plans to work around this.

programLyrique 11y ago
I think the US government would make it very difficult for this company to operate in the US and sell their services there (maybe blocking transactions?). But with bitcoins...
Natanael_L 11y ago
Except... They can demand injection of backdoored code.
junto 11y ago
They'll do what they did to Wikileaks. The USG phone Visa and MasterCard CEOs and threaten the shit out of them personally. Suddenly you lose the ability to take credit card payments. You can turn to Bitcoin, but that's like trying to quench the hunger of a million people with one faucet. Plus if you are an American then it doesn't matter where your servers are hosted. The men in black suits are going to be knocking on your door.
- mtgx 11y ago
  > The USG phone Visa and MasterCard CEOs Don't forget Amazon. Never forget Amazon: http://www.theguardian.com/media/2010/dec/01/wikileaks-website-cables-servers-amazon http://www.theguardian.com/media/2010/dec/01/wikileaks-websi...
  - rdl 11y ago
    I wonder if they'd ever go after corporate principals in ways calculated to annoy. I'd be fine with losing AWS access, but if they made it so I couldn't buy books/toilet paper from Amazon because I worked for/etc a company they hated, it'd be really annoying.
  - MichaelGG 11y ago
    Amazon's pretty corrupt. Apart from Wikileaks they've also decided to abuse their position and not compete by refusing to sell Apple TV or Chromecasts. Just get a 404. Their service reps deny everything and say it's just a temporary stock issue or that they "lack the contracts to sell such products". Scummy, and I'm very reluctantly cancelling prime over it, and I'm a customer of 13 years.

swordswinger12 11y ago

Can you search your emails? If so, how is the search index stored? Is it local or stored at ProtonMail?

msh 11y ago
It's webmail. Everything is stored on their servers.
- mchahn 11y ago
  It can't be searched on the server. The article says "The app is encrypted end-to-end and, like Apple's iPhone, can't even be accessed by the company itself."
  - msh 11y ago
    Everything available OB the app is available in the webinterface (I am a protonmail user)
konart 11y ago
Yes you can, but only by Subject (at least that's how it seems to me after some tests)
cornholio 11y ago
In theory, there's nothing stopping you from creating a javascript indexer, and update the index whenever the user logs in and reads (thus decrypting) an email. The updated index is compressed, encrypted and sent back to the server. You could have multiple megabyte sized indexes, for example each covering a certain timespan. The default search action would be to search, say, the preloaded index for the last month, and the user will expect an "All time" search to take a bit more as more indexes are downloaded. (Patent pending)

DavideNL 11y ago

It's really nice to have this kind of privacy, but I don't understand how people can use a service like this while they don't provide the ability to make local (encrypted) backups. If their servers disappear for whatever reason (legal issues or hardware problems), you end up with 0 e-mails. Nothing. Tutanota.de has the same problem, no backup feature.

zokier 11y ago

> The app is a good example that even if they government forces US companies like Apple to create backdoors, users will still have communication options that the government can't crack. If you're interested, it's now available for Android, iOS or the web. That is immensely misleading. If some adversary has a backdoor in the OS/platform, then in many cases no amount of encryption will save you.

bisby 11y ago
If you input your encryption passphrase on a keylogged device, your entire encryption userspace falls apart.
- TheDong 11y ago
  not if you do your crypto on a dongle (such as a yubikey), at which point they also need physical access to get the private key. It's perfectly viable for services like protonmail to allow 2FA via a dongle which would not be compromised permanently by a totally pwned userspace.
  - e12e 11y ago
    If you input your emails on a keylogging device, your emails are compromised.

dil8 11y ago

Is this service open source? How can we know it does what it says it does?

novium 11y ago
A few clicks and found this https://protonmail.com/blog/protonmail-open-source/ https://protonmail.com/blog/protonmail-open-source/
zokier 11y ago
> How can we know it does what it says it does? How does being open source help with that?
- infodroid 11y ago
  Open source makes it is easier for security experts to review the code and determine whether it meets its security claims. If it is closed source, then there is no guarantee that the code the experts review is the same code that is used by the service. And also it is at the company's discretion whether to allow a security audit or not, and then which auditors to allow or exclude. But if the whole of the client software is open source, then it also eliminates the need to trust binaries provided by the vendor (which can be MITM) because you can build the software yourself or use a version audited by an entity that you do trust.
  - mtgx 11y ago
    That, also the fact that if they have it in their privacy policy and website, then we can call them out on it when they insert a backdoor or remove the encryption. We can't say the same about Whatsapp and its end-to-end encryption, because they never even publicly admitted to using it. How can we ever hold Whatsapp responsible for not using end-to-end encryption then? We can do that with Protonmail.
davidkellis 11y ago
Open source really is irrelevant. We don't know what code they deployed - it could be an open source project (we hope so), it might be an open source project with some minor changes - an NSA-approved backdoor for example, etc. We don't have any guarantee, so far as I'm aware, of what they're running, much less that it does what it claims to do.

rdl 11y ago

There are lots of drawbacks to an SMTP based service vs. something built on a newer protocol with client-side crypto everywhere, but email has a huge installed base. This becomes a question of "good" vs. "perfect", but it might also be a question of "too dangerous to use" vs. "replacement" -- depends on threats, alternatives, and quality of implementation. I know one of the people at Proton Mail pretty well, and have met the others. Of all the companies doing secure email right now, they seem like the best.

drakenot 11y ago
I was curious to read about any proposed successor protocols there are for SMTP that offer end-to-end encryption. It looks like Dark Mail might be one of the forerunners in this regard?

moxie 11y ago

Some bad signs: 1. Hosted in Switzerland is advertised as a security feature. The point of e2e is that the servers are untrusted. If you need a "good jurisdiction" for your servers, it means they must be trusted. That's a problem, because sadly there are no good jurisdictions in today's world, and your jurisdiction doesn't help you if your servers are hacked. 2. It's webmail. That means the security of whatever e2e they're doing is based on the security of SSL. If you break SSL, you can break whatever e2e they're doing, and that means your e2e security is only as secure as the CA system. 3. Their 'threat model' documentation leads with: "From a high level, our premise is that a service like the now-defunct Lavabit does add value, despite some inherent weaknesses. We designed ProtonMail around many of the same principles..." Given what happened with Lavabit (the eventual compromise of everyone's email despite shutting down the service), considering it to have been "valuable" should really be off the table at this point: http://www.thoughtcrime.org/blog/lavabit-critique/ http://www.thoughtcrime.org/blog/lavabit-critique/ I can't find much in the way of technical documentation for ProtonMail, but from what little is available, it does seem that (much like Lavabit), the service is built on the premise of "won't" read your mail rather than "can't" read your mail.

rdl 11y ago
Even with e2e you have availability concerns, so picking a "good" jurisdiction makes sense. The rest of your criticisms are completely valid -- webmail is never going to approach the security of true e2e client crypto. The best possible system for webmail would be a browser extension or in the far future world, some kind of browser security extensions. Failing that, there's probably value in "best effort" secure webmail if users are explicitly aware of the limitations. The problem is even developers aren't really aware of the limitations (since they vary with threats and per user), so this is probably not a realistic goal.
- farfromright 11y ago
  Would you care to comment on Cyph [1]? They claim that they are able to approximate client side programs that provide e2e but in a non-plugin browser environment [2]. I know tptacek doesn't like it but he wasn't willing to go into a detailed account of why. [1] https://cyph.com https://cyph.com [2] https://docs.google.com/document/d/1XVh4ALXhbfxi70QSUY-xHclauob8O635bSySy6f1Ysk/edit?pref=2&pli=1 https://docs.google.com/document/d/1XVh4ALXhbfxi70QSUY-xHcla...

hackuser 11y ago

A few critical questions: 1) How are spam filters implemented if they can't access the content? 2) How is metadata protected? 3) Also, can I use POP/IMAP and store my mail locally, or must I trust them with my data?

brightball 11y ago
1) Seems to be that its stores encrypted but on arrival would still be scannable just as on send it would. Without the people sending to you or receiving from you having a key there's not much that can be done about it.
jboynyc 11y ago
Regarding 3, no, there is no protocol to store mail locally. You have to use webmail or one of their applications. https://protonmail.com/support/knowledge-base/imap-smtp-and-pop3-setup/ https://protonmail.com/support/knowledge-base/imap-smtp-and-...
- e12e 11y ago
  It's odd. Seems like a no-brainer to allow power users access over IMAPS; just put the encrypted private gpg key in an IMAP folder, and let the users mirror their encrypted mail.

m0xy 11y ago

These guys got attacked recently by a DD4BC outfit and paid the ransom. I wouldn't trust them with a shopping list, let alone my email.

deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
saganus 11y ago
Do you have any sources for this? I haven't heard about this before and would like to know more if possible.
- wsha 11y ago
  It's mentioned in the article linked here.

denova 11y ago

If you care enough about privacy to sign up for protonmail, why not just learn how to use pgp? It's not perfect, but it works. And... oh goodness, I'm looking at this [support page][1]; If you send encrypted mail to non-protonmail addresses, the recipients have to open the message in a web browser and enter in a password to read it. So instead of exchanging public keys, you have to send them a password, probably over an unencrypted channel. I guess it's easier than asking them to generate a keypair. But if your recipient is too lazy to set up pgp, they're probably going to be just as annoyed at having to open your message in a browser and enter in a password, right? It seems like an awkward compromise. [1]: https://protonmail.com/support/knowledge-base/encrypt-for-outside-users/ https://protonmail.com/support/knowledge-base/encrypt-for-ou...

modernerd 11y ago
Even Phil Zimmermann, PGP's creator, says it's too hard to use: “I hardly ever run PGP. When people send me PGP encrypted mail I have to go through a lot of trouble to decrypt it. If it’s coming from a stranger, I’ll say please re-send this in plain text, which probably raises their eyebrows.“ http://www.forbes.com/sites/parmyolson/2013/08/09/e-mails-big-privacy-problem-qa-with-silent-circle-co-founder-phil-zimmermann/ http://www.forbes.com/sites/parmyolson/2013/08/09/e-mails-bi... I tried the ProtonMail password protection feature today (which is optional; you can just send plain text email to non ProtonMail accounts if you wish – this is the default, but you can click a lock to password-protect any outgoing message). The feature is well done, and I can see people using it to exchange secure mail, particularly if the recipient does not have a ProtonMail account. It has a built-in 'send secure reply' feature once you've entered the password as the recipient. This allows you to read the message and reply in-browser without returning to your email client, and without having a ProtonMail account, so both the outgoing message and the reply stay more secure than regular email throughout your conversation. This could be helpful for a wide range of uses, including support email that involves transferring login info and logs. The read and reply flow looks like this to the logged-out recipient: - Email with “view secure message” prompt: http://d.pr/i/1cwZ8 http://d.pr/i/1cwZ8 - Click “View secure message”: http://d.pr/i/13GlI http://d.pr/i/13GlI - Enter password to view message: http://d.pr/i/11Gg9 http://d.pr/i/11Gg9 - Click to reply in same tab: http://d.pr/i/WWWB http://d.pr/i/WWWB You still have to communicate the password securely somehow, but it's a much more user-friendly approach than PGP. I'm not saying it's a replacement for https://securedrop.org/ https://securedrop.org/, but it still has value.

jaguar86 11y ago

> Our primary datacenter is located under 1000 meters of granite rock in a heavily guarded bunker which can survive a nuclear attack. Would they seriously have done this on intent?

nickik 11y ago
Switzerland has a lot of bunker, it probebly cheap to get one and its a cool, but gimiky feature.

chatmasta 11y ago

The fundamental problem with e2e encrypted email, outside of the many technical limitations, is that the encryption is only as strong as the weakest link. Every member of an email chain must support the e2e encryption in order for it to work. One unencrypted sender/receiver is sufficient to break the whole model. So if you want encrypted email, you can only communicate with other people using the same encrypted email stack. What's the point of that? If you're paranoid enough to the point that you're using encrypted email and you can convince all your correspondents to use it as well, then you have far better options available to you than email. It really makes no sense to me... It's 2016, there are thousands of ways to communicate online, many of them encrypted. Why force the use of email? We would all be far better off if we just assumed that all email is public. If you need private communication, don't use email.

ohthehugemanate 11y ago
The way Protonmail and co try to solve this problem is by sending the non-protonmail recipient a notification email, with "click here to read". From https://protonmail.com/security-details https://protonmail.com/security-details : "We support sending encrypted communication to non-ProtonMail users via symmetric encryption. When you send an encrypted message to a non-ProtonMail user, they receive a link which loads the encrypted message onto their browser, which they can decrypt using a passphrase that you have shared with them. You can also send unencrypted messages to Gmail, Yahoo, Outlook and others, just like regular email."
- Flimm 11y ago
  At that point, you might as well send people invites over email to switch to using a completely different messaging system that is more secure.

jakeogh 11y ago

Folks interested in rolling their own, checkout http://github.com/jakeogh/gpgmda http://github.com/jakeogh/gpgmda It's rough around the edges (and elsewhere) but works for me.

waffl 11y ago

Apart from the discussion surrounding the crypto side of all this, one thing that ProtonMail has really succeeded in doing is making encrypted mail finally an accessible thing to a non-technically inclined user. I've spent well over a year trying to get my team to properly gpg encrypt sensitive files only to constantly find them sending plain unencrypted files over slack, dropbox and even simply gmail. At least now, finally, they've found ProtonMail easy to use and are choosing to send files this way. I think the key, unfortunate reality is that until the end user doesn't have to think about encryption, they aren't going to bother using it. Bringing usability to encryption is another huge part of the problem that needs to be considered as it is basically a guarantee that the typical user will take the path of least resistance.

e12e 11y ago
I'll say this, a service like this is great from the network effect alone. While I might not think it's secure, it'll allow me to set up a traditional email-client+gpg and send encrypted email to people. And it'll provide a way for people to migrate to secure email, at a later point. Much like I could for a brief moment actually talk to people over XMPP until Facebook and Google cut off the limited support they had for it. Most of those I talked to used the horrible web interface of Facebook/Google talk -- but I could use something that made sense. And I could even talk securely to some people on Facebook, as OTR worked fine over Facebook XMPP chat (while obviously breaking the web interface).

yaelwrites 11y ago

Here's a deep dive into ProtonMail's claims on Wired (disclosure: I wrote it) www.wired.com/2015/10/mr-robot-uses-protonmail-still-isnt-fully-secure/