4 ms·

I was about ready to move all my email over to Fastmail before this happened. But not now.

doorbellguy 8y ago
There was a thread I made about ProtonMail v FastMail and this one point came up at the top. However ProtonMail’s inability to support standard clients without an awkward bridge app seems to take edge off it. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19372882 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19372882
- C14L 8y ago
  > ProtonMail’s inability to support standard clients without an awkward bridge app Isn't that one of the pros of Protonmail? All the data is encrypted and decrypted on the client. There is no way to have mail apps access the data without a piece of software that handles the encryption.
  - kdtsh 8y ago
    I guess it’s just the way you look at it, and maybe even what your priorities are in choosing an email service. To me at least, I’m thoroughly disinterested in an email service which doesn’t implement IMAPS.
    - kevinSuttle 8y ago
      Which ones do?
      - kdtsh 8y ago
        Many I’m sure. Mailbox.org does, and that’s the service I use.
  - ams6110 8y ago
    Unless you only send email to yourself, the hole in that idea is that all the recipients have a copy of your email.
    - jeremyjh 8y ago
      So I should store all my bank statements in clear text because my bank has a copy of them too?
  - bad_user 8y ago
    No, most of the email you’ll send and receive will be seen unencrypted by ProtonMail’s servers because that’s just how the email protocol works, which means an intelligence agency like the NSA can still see most if not all of your communication. In other words ProtonMail is not actually end-to-end encrypted which makes it snake oil. It’s interesting that this point has to be explained on HN time and time again, as HN’s audience should understand end to end encryption.
- mi100hael 8y ago
  I run the bridge and it's really a non-issue. It runs in the background without a peep and auto-configures my mail client. Easy.
- neilv 8y ago
  ProtonMail's bridge program is a bit of a kludge, and their proprietary protocol (rather than seeking IETF standardization) prevents implementing the protocol in the MUA. I'd love to have a privacy-respecting mail hoster, but the ProtonMail bridge program is too unattractive to make the switch. (Which is not to say that IMAP itself isn't a mess, but MUAs have gotten it to work, and we'd like for whatever other protocol we move to instead to also be an open standard.)
kdtsh 8y ago
For what it’s worth, email is not a private protocol/platform - some degree of encryption-at-rest and privacy-respecting SOPs can give services like Fastmail a fairly good screen against private malicious actors, but you should never count on email as a means of communication to have any decent way of protecting you from state surveillance, especially when you live under the jurisdiction of the state surveilling you. Though that’s not to say that we should accept these laws as they apply to email services lying down. Any reason to refuse to use the services of Australian companies when foreign services of similar quality exist gives those Australian companies all the more reason to press the government to reform these laws on the grounds that they’re losing valuable business for negligible gain to national interest. If the government doesn’t listen to individual constituents, it might listen to companies which are hurting in their back pockets.
- dreamcompiler 8y ago
  I'm aware. It's the principle of the thing that bothers me. I'd love to do business with Fastmail but I don't want my communications flowing through a surveillance state that has no due process.
austhrow743 8y ago
Unless this is just a boycott of Australian tech services altogether based purely on principle, then it looks like the encryption laws might have actually helped you out on this one. They don't impact fastmail because fastmail already has access to your emails. So if you want an email provider that doesn't (protonmail?) then you almost made quite the mistake!
WD-42 8y ago
I recently moved to Fastmail and couldn't be happier. Like others have said, you really should never count on email being a private medium. I switched mainly to remove my email from Google's sources of data collection on me: this is the level of privacy that is important to me. If I wanted to hide from state sponsored actors I wouldn't be using email at all. A nice side effect of moving to Fastmail is being able to use their amazing Web UI, which is so much faster and more responsive than Gmail's super bloated interface.
- ddavis 8y ago
  I feel the same way! Definitely couldn't be happier. And I agree about the web UI. I usually read and compose my email inside Emacs, but their web interface is very nice when necessary.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
F147H34D 8y ago
if you are using your own domain, consider self hosting on AWS. A reserved instance will be about the same price. Check out: https://mailinabox.email/ https://mailinabox.email/

There was a thread I made about ProtonMail v FastMail and this one point came up at the top. However ProtonMail’s inability to support standard clients without an awkward bridge app seems to take edge off it. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19372882 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19372882

C14L 8y ago
> ProtonMail’s inability to support standard clients without an awkward bridge app Isn't that one of the pros of Protonmail? All the data is encrypted and decrypted on the client. There is no way to have mail apps access the data without a piece of software that handles the encryption.
- kdtsh 8y ago
  I guess it’s just the way you look at it, and maybe even what your priorities are in choosing an email service. To me at least, I’m thoroughly disinterested in an email service which doesn’t implement IMAPS.
  - kevinSuttle 8y ago
    Which ones do?
    - kdtsh 8y ago
      Many I’m sure. Mailbox.org does, and that’s the service I use.
- ams6110 8y ago
  Unless you only send email to yourself, the hole in that idea is that all the recipients have a copy of your email.
  - jeremyjh 8y ago
    So I should store all my bank statements in clear text because my bank has a copy of them too?
- bad_user 8y ago
  No, most of the email you’ll send and receive will be seen unencrypted by ProtonMail’s servers because that’s just how the email protocol works, which means an intelligence agency like the NSA can still see most if not all of your communication. In other words ProtonMail is not actually end-to-end encrypted which makes it snake oil. It’s interesting that this point has to be explained on HN time and time again, as HN’s audience should understand end to end encryption.
mi100hael 8y ago
I run the bridge and it's really a non-issue. It runs in the background without a peep and auto-configures my mail client. Easy.
neilv 8y ago
ProtonMail's bridge program is a bit of a kludge, and their proprietary protocol (rather than seeking IETF standardization) prevents implementing the protocol in the MUA. I'd love to have a privacy-respecting mail hoster, but the ProtonMail bridge program is too unattractive to make the switch. (Which is not to say that IMAP itself isn't a mess, but MUAs have gotten it to work, and we'd like for whatever other protocol we move to instead to also be an open standard.)

kdtsh 8y ago

For what it’s worth, email is not a private protocol/platform - some degree of encryption-at-rest and privacy-respecting SOPs can give services like Fastmail a fairly good screen against private malicious actors, but you should never count on email as a means of communication to have any decent way of protecting you from state surveillance, especially when you live under the jurisdiction of the state surveilling you. Though that’s not to say that we should accept these laws as they apply to email services lying down. Any reason to refuse to use the services of Australian companies when foreign services of similar quality exist gives those Australian companies all the more reason to press the government to reform these laws on the grounds that they’re losing valuable business for negligible gain to national interest. If the government doesn’t listen to individual constituents, it might listen to companies which are hurting in their back pockets.

dreamcompiler 8y ago
I'm aware. It's the principle of the thing that bothers me. I'd love to do business with Fastmail but I don't want my communications flowing through a surveillance state that has no due process.

austhrow743 8y ago

Unless this is just a boycott of Australian tech services altogether based purely on principle, then it looks like the encryption laws might have actually helped you out on this one. They don't impact fastmail because fastmail already has access to your emails. So if you want an email provider that doesn't (protonmail?) then you almost made quite the mistake!

WD-42 8y ago

I recently moved to Fastmail and couldn't be happier. Like others have said, you really should never count on email being a private medium. I switched mainly to remove my email from Google's sources of data collection on me: this is the level of privacy that is important to me. If I wanted to hide from state sponsored actors I wouldn't be using email at all. A nice side effect of moving to Fastmail is being able to use their amazing Web UI, which is so much faster and more responsive than Gmail's super bloated interface.

ddavis 8y ago
I feel the same way! Definitely couldn't be happier. And I agree about the web UI. I usually read and compose my email inside Emacs, but their web interface is very nice when necessary.
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]

F147H34D 8y ago

if you are using your own domain, consider self hosting on AWS. A reserved instance will be about the same price. Check out: https://mailinabox.email/ https://mailinabox.email/