Shame on you for trying to deliberately mislead the readers here. You are just trying very hard to trivialize and cast aspersions on the very legitimate concer

Shame on you for trying to deliberately mislead the readers here. You are just trying very hard to trivialize and cast aspersions on the very legitimate concerns raised in the article by very selectively quoting from the article. In fact, the actual point of the article is the very real and obvious issues of privacy concerns raised and described in the beginning of the article itself: > Though pretending to offer privacy, Gmail's confidential mode comes with three major problems: > 1. The emails are not end-to-end encrypted. > 2. Google retains full access to the email even when you set a self-destruct timer. > 3. If you password-protect an email, Google can link your recipient's phone number with their email address. Privacy aware and concerned netizens like me avoid GYM (Google, Yahoo and Microsoft) email services precisely because we do NOT want to be profiled by these corporate so that our personal data is not used by them against us. In fact, I have made it a policy to always send password protected emails (from services like Tutanota, Protonmail, Mailfence etc.) to users of GYM email services. I do this to ensure that these services have no access to my emails and hence cannot collect data on me through it. When some users of these services complain to me I explain to them while I have no issues with them using the service or willingly sharing their personal data with them, I refuse to consent to be profiled when I actively AVOID these companies. I highlight this in particular so that more can be aware that "shadow profiling" of users by GYM and Facebook, all for-profit mega multi-national monopolist corporates is a genuine privacy concern and should not be lightly dismissed, and we need to raise more awareness and demand better laws to be protected against it. Till then, unfortunately, we will have to depend on valuable services like these. ----- More on the extent Google (and others) will go to "shadow profile" someone: https://www.forbes.com/sites/joetoscano1/2019/09/03/google-has-my-dead-grandpas-data-and-he-never-used-the-internet/#45652be32b0c https://www.forbes.com/sites/joetoscano1/2019/09/03/google-h... ----- The actual context that the quote you highlighted was said to point out something different: > Information classified as confidential relates by definition to something very personal or top secret. It must be kept from any and every third party by all means. > This form of secrecy can only be achieved with end-to-end encryption. Encryption guarantees that only the people holding the key to decrypt the information can gain access to it. > This is why end-to-end encryption is an absolute necessity when communicating confidentially. > When sending an email with Tutanota, you have the option to send a 'confidential' email - which refers to an end-to-end encrypted email, or a 'not confidential' email - which refers to a standard email. > With this definition in mind, Gmail's confidential emails are just standard emails with some extra features like unprintable, unforwardable, uncopyable, and so on. However, this will not stop anyone from taking a screenshot from the unprintable email, just to print off the screenshot.