3 ms·
"A good alternative present today is ... (blah blah I don't run a mail server)". No, that's not a good alternative. None of them are. The "good alternative"
by rsync 10y ago
"A good alternative present today is ... (blah blah I don't run a mail server)".
No, that's not a good alternative. None of them are. The "good alternative" is to run your own mailserver on a physical piece of hardware, under a business name, not at your house.
Technically speaking, it's childs play, so that's not a barrier. It does cost something to rent 1U of space somewhere but if you shop around and pay annually, etc., it's bearable.
What you gain is huge:
1. Subpoenas/letters/writs go to you and you get to decide how to respond to them. You're the operator.
2. By you I mean your business entity which is a PO BOX somewhere. Not your house.
3. You get to control retention and encryption and certificates and security features.
4. Finally, instead of being a consumer/viewer of "the web" you get to be a peer on the network. For some people this will be truly using the Internet for the very first time.
- voxic11 10y agoThe advantage to not running it yourself is if you trust a different government more then you're own. Maybe there isn't an advantage to using protonmail in the US because you trust the government won't simply come and take your server away. But if you were in a place like Thailand you may not have that same trust.
- sfifs 10y ago> 1. Subpoenas/letters/writs go to you and you get to decide how to respond to them. You're the operator. You're assuming here that the executive will actually follow the full.due process of law vs. "we raided X address on suspicion and grabbed a few servers". Not true in many parts of the world and having email encrypted and stored in a different jurisdiction may be safer.