6 ms·

You might use GMail, but I can communicate with you perfectly fine even if I don't use GMail.

by jstanley 9y ago

cpach 9y ago
And that’s why end-to-end encrypted e-mail is so very hard
- lettergram 9y ago
  I actually wrote a prototype to manage that: http://lettergram.github.io/AnyCrypt/ http://lettergram.github.io/AnyCrypt/ The problem is we need to stop worrying about end-to-end encrypted <insert name here>. We need something that blocks javascript, and encrypts our messages before they even enter the pipeline (there will still be meta data though). The extension I built was a POC just showing how it could be done easily with Keybase.
  - carussell 9y ago
    You have a "Portfolio" link in the sidebar that doesn't seem to be for anything, and a broken #contact anchor.
yoavm 9y ago
If by "perfectly fine" you mean highly likely to get into your recipient's spam folder - you're probably right. Having tried to self host my own mail server I can tell you it's never an easy task to actually get your message across.
- Spivak 9y ago
  This comes up a lot but the reality is that its really only nerds and spammers that self-host. It's hard to fault spam filters of being suspicious of random domains. This doesn't mean there aren't many alternatives -- just about any personal email provider will make sure they're off the blacklists.
  - e12e 9y ago
    With Gmail it appears to be a question of getting on a (secret, opaque) white list.
    - Spivak 9y ago
      I mean that's the nature of these kinds of lists. We don't tell anyone about how we set up our firewall, do spam filtering, or flag accounts for suspicious activity because then it would be easier to circumvent.
      - e12e 9y ago
        There are plenty efficient rbl lists that are transparent. There's grey listing. It's not like "today, you feel white-ish enough to not be silently dropped at gw, black-ish enough to go in the spam folder without warning" is the only valid policy to fight spam. Even simply rejecting with an error (spam suspected) would be better than the silent treatment. And I don't see anything wrong with telling people how you set up a firewall. We even write books about that.
- Tepix 9y ago
  That doesn't match my experience of running a mail sever for decades.
  - e12e 9y ago
    How long since you set up mail for a newly registered (possibly with previous owner) domain hosted on a VPN or rented dedicated server in an ip block that might have had previous owners?
    - figgis 9y ago
      Two years ago? Still no issues.
    - bostik 9y ago
      Not sure if this is recent enough, but I moved my self-hosted email to a new address a little over 4 years ago. The only systems that have had even tiny problems with were Gmail and Microsoft. With Gmail it took a while to build reputation as a non-offender. With Microsoft the first time I sent mail to their way, I got an automated bounce with instructions to forward to a certain address for human verification. That check round took maybe 12 hours and I haven't had any problems since. I find that pretty reasonable.
      - e12e 9y ago
        Sounds like Microsoft (outlook.com and friends?) have improved since I sat things up - I never got a bounce. It'd be nice if Gmail was so considerate. But how do you know that when you send mail to a new Gmail contact it won't be silently flagged as spam? And how many times will the recipient have to "un-flag" before the behaviour changeges? > The only systems that have had even tiny problems with were Gmail and Microsoft The "only" big provider missing from that list is apple (in the West anyway). I've never meant to claim that smaller providers that know what they're doing aren't capable of sending proper bounces, setting proper smtp error codes on reception or of handling email to postmaster@. It's just that with Gmail and outlook not being God net citizens - it becomes unreasonably hard to send legitimate email to a large percentage of Internet users. One possible "fix" is to send mail to Gmail users via a Gmail account and Gmail authenticated smtp servers - and so on for outlook.com - but as the number of "silos" one needs to send data to grows, that solution becomes cumbersome. Not to mention if you publish an mx record for your domain, you should be accepting email... That's the whole point...

You might use GMail, but I can communicate with you perfectly fine even if I don't use GMail.

cpach 9y ago

And that’s why end-to-end encrypted e-mail is so very hard

lettergram 9y ago
I actually wrote a prototype to manage that: http://lettergram.github.io/AnyCrypt/ http://lettergram.github.io/AnyCrypt/ The problem is we need to stop worrying about end-to-end encrypted <insert name here>. We need something that blocks javascript, and encrypts our messages before they even enter the pipeline (there will still be meta data though). The extension I built was a POC just showing how it could be done easily with Keybase.
- carussell 9y ago
  You have a "Portfolio" link in the sidebar that doesn't seem to be for anything, and a broken #contact anchor.

yoavm 9y ago

If by "perfectly fine" you mean highly likely to get into your recipient's spam folder - you're probably right. Having tried to self host my own mail server I can tell you it's never an easy task to actually get your message across.

Spivak 9y ago
This comes up a lot but the reality is that its really only nerds and spammers that self-host. It's hard to fault spam filters of being suspicious of random domains. This doesn't mean there aren't many alternatives -- just about any personal email provider will make sure they're off the blacklists.
- e12e 9y ago
  With Gmail it appears to be a question of getting on a (secret, opaque) white list.
  - Spivak 9y ago
    I mean that's the nature of these kinds of lists. We don't tell anyone about how we set up our firewall, do spam filtering, or flag accounts for suspicious activity because then it would be easier to circumvent.
    - e12e 9y ago
      There are plenty efficient rbl lists that are transparent. There's grey listing. It's not like "today, you feel white-ish enough to not be silently dropped at gw, black-ish enough to go in the spam folder without warning" is the only valid policy to fight spam. Even simply rejecting with an error (spam suspected) would be better than the silent treatment. And I don't see anything wrong with telling people how you set up a firewall. We even write books about that.
Tepix 9y ago
That doesn't match my experience of running a mail sever for decades.
- e12e 9y ago
  How long since you set up mail for a newly registered (possibly with previous owner) domain hosted on a VPN or rented dedicated server in an ip block that might have had previous owners?
  - figgis 9y ago
    Two years ago? Still no issues.
  - bostik 9y ago
    Not sure if this is recent enough, but I moved my self-hosted email to a new address a little over 4 years ago. The only systems that have had even tiny problems with were Gmail and Microsoft. With Gmail it took a while to build reputation as a non-offender. With Microsoft the first time I sent mail to their way, I got an automated bounce with instructions to forward to a certain address for human verification. That check round took maybe 12 hours and I haven't had any problems since. I find that pretty reasonable.
    - e12e 9y ago
      Sounds like Microsoft (outlook.com and friends?) have improved since I sat things up - I never got a bounce. It'd be nice if Gmail was so considerate. But how do you know that when you send mail to a new Gmail contact it won't be silently flagged as spam? And how many times will the recipient have to "un-flag" before the behaviour changeges? > The only systems that have had even tiny problems with were Gmail and Microsoft The "only" big provider missing from that list is apple (in the West anyway). I've never meant to claim that smaller providers that know what they're doing aren't capable of sending proper bounces, setting proper smtp error codes on reception or of handling email to postmaster@. It's just that with Gmail and outlook not being God net citizens - it becomes unreasonably hard to send legitimate email to a large percentage of Internet users. One possible "fix" is to send mail to Gmail users via a Gmail account and Gmail authenticated smtp servers - and so on for outlook.com - but as the number of "silos" one needs to send data to grows, that solution becomes cumbersome. Not to mention if you publish an mx record for your domain, you should be accepting email... That's the whole point...