> If they're rewriting emails that you send out That's not the claim. The claim is that they're rewriting urls you receive. I suppose if the imap claim is true

> If they're rewriting emails that you send out That's not the claim. The claim is that they're rewriting urls you receive. I suppose if the imap claim is true, and you reply, and you quote the redirector url in your reply, and someone clicks that link, they could detect it. That seems a little annoying and presents a slight risk, but it doesn't seem like the type of thing that would be intentionally designed in, even if I model google as completely amoral and short-termist. There just doesn't seem to be much advantage in it. > And not every gmail user uses the webmail interface either That's why i said the vast majority of cases, not "all." :)