4 ms·

> People doing things that they don't want the FBI/IRS/etc to see, but don't care if Russia sees is probably a broader set than that. If you want to avoid eave

by ardy42 6y ago

> People doing things that they don't want the FBI/IRS/etc to see, but don't care if Russia sees is probably a broader set than that. If you want to avoid eavesdropping, it's probably best to avoid email altogether and use something designed for that purpose (like Signal). I don't see how you would get the effect you describe by using Yandex unless you did something like only ever emailing other Yandex accounts.

hollerith 6y ago
Just because someone used Yandex as a hyperbolic analogy doesn't mean we're talking about Yandex.
- ardy42 6y ago
  > Just because someone used Yandex as a hyperbolic analogy doesn't mean we're talking about Yandex. But my point is that email itself is an insecure technology, and not even Phil Zimmerman bothers with PGP [1]. If you want to avoid something like 5 Eyes eavesdropping with a Russian/Chinese/etc. email provider, at a minimum you probably won't be able to email anyone with a 5 Eyes-based email account, and even if you do that some fraction of your mails may still get hoovered up in transit somewhere else. Sticking to only emailing accounts on the same provider seems like the most "secure" implementation of this idea, but even that is suspect. The PRC hacked Gmail ten years ago, and it's not unreasonable to assume the NSA could have an APT in Yandex. IMHO, this equipment really only helps with security concerns unique to the Russian government itself. Regular people in other countries have better options for their use-cases. [1] https://www.vice.com/en/article/vvbw9a/even-the-inventor-of-pgp-doesnt-use-pgp https://www.vice.com/en/article/vvbw9a/even-the-inventor-of-... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Aurora https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Aurora
  - tyingq 6y ago
    Assume you have a shady company that has to use email for some things. Having your email provider being unlikely to comply with a US subpoena could have value.

by ardy42 6y ago

hollerith 6y ago

Just because someone used Yandex as a hyperbolic analogy doesn't mean we're talking about Yandex.

ardy42 6y ago
> Just because someone used Yandex as a hyperbolic analogy doesn't mean we're talking about Yandex. But my point is that email itself is an insecure technology, and not even Phil Zimmerman bothers with PGP [1]. If you want to avoid something like 5 Eyes eavesdropping with a Russian/Chinese/etc. email provider, at a minimum you probably won't be able to email anyone with a 5 Eyes-based email account, and even if you do that some fraction of your mails may still get hoovered up in transit somewhere else. Sticking to only emailing accounts on the same provider seems like the most "secure" implementation of this idea, but even that is suspect. The PRC hacked Gmail ten years ago, and it's not unreasonable to assume the NSA could have an APT in Yandex. IMHO, this equipment really only helps with security concerns unique to the Russian government itself. Regular people in other countries have better options for their use-cases. [1] https://www.vice.com/en/article/vvbw9a/even-the-inventor-of-pgp-doesnt-use-pgp https://www.vice.com/en/article/vvbw9a/even-the-inventor-of-... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Aurora https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Aurora
- tyingq 6y ago
  Assume you have a shady company that has to use email for some things. Having your email provider being unlikely to comply with a US subpoena could have value.