> There are, of course, web email services that purport to encrypt messages. But they store encryption keys (or code and data sufficient to derive them). While

> There are, of course, web email services that purport to encrypt messages. But they store encryption keys (or code and data sufficient to derive them). While I assume they are talking about things like Protonmail here, there is a case where PGP is better than nothing here. Mailbox.org allows you to provide a PGP public key which they will encrypt all incoming messages to. I have Mutt configured to auto-encrypt emails saved in my sent folder. Now, obviously this doesn't help if Mailbox.org becomes malicious or gets attacked. But it does protect my personal email archive. If someone managed to access my email account, they couldn't read any old emails (but they could disable it for new emails). Maybe I'm LARPing and I don't know it, but I think it's a neat feature which is worth more than nothing. But I do agree with the rest of the points the article makes -- though I think Matrix is a better secure messaging replacement than Signal because it's federated -- especially now that it has E2EE by default.