3 ms·
It makes the following claims: * encryption of email in transit is good because it does provide some security against things like dragnets. * attempts to bolt
by lliamander 7y ago
It makes the following claims:
* encryption of email in transit is good because it does provide some security against things like dragnets.
* attempts to bolt end-to-end encryption on email, regardless of what tools you use, are insufficient to provide any real security against the kinds of threats you generally use end-to-end encryption against.
* If you need secure messaging, use Signal
* If you need to send documents securely, use Magic Wormhole or age
EDIT: and if you don't need secure messaging, then continue to use email
- tptacek 7y agoNot that I want to perpetuate a discussion about my post on this thread, but "use Signal" isn't the claim we make; "use any modern secure messenger, they are all better than email" is the claim we made.
- lliamander 7y agoFair enough. I was attempting to be succinct, but the correction is appropriate (I believe you did say that Signal was "standard" and "best"). Btw, I did find your essay persuasive. In my search for a paid email provider (as an alternative to Gmail) I've decided not to go for one that uses E2E encrypted email. If I need secure messaging, I'll use Signal (or something similar) but for email I would rather go for features and ease of use than E2E encryption.
- gfxgirl 7y agoSignal is shit because it requires me to identify by phone number. I might not have a phone number. I travel and switch sims. My phone number is a magnet for robocalls. Phone numbers are easy to steal. Asking for my phone number is a non-starter and a sign the Signal devs are idiots.