3 ms·
> … general security will not be as good as they have. > Entirely "on premise" email is now an inferior thing for almost everyone. I disagree on this one. Pla
by lixtra 5y ago
> … general security will not be as good as they have.
> Entirely "on premise" email is now an inferior thing for almost everyone.
I disagree on this one. Placing your email with a big player means that by definition, they have access to your mailbox (with sensitive stuff hopefully encrypted). To allow that you have to trust the big player and the countries where they reside.
They can drop you any time for political reasons, for dealing with a country that is considered an enemy of the host country of your provider. They may sell out your data.
You may still choose a big player, but understand how screwed you are.
- foxfluff 5y agoThey may also kick you out any time for arbitrary reasons. "Your account has been suspended for suspicious activity."
- jms703 5y agoOnce you’ve sent or received email containing “sensitive stuff” you no longer control your data. Folks need to come to grips with the fact that email security is dead and hosting it yourself doesn’t fix this. The author of the post should have included that in his post.
- rsync 5y ago"Folks need to come to grips with the fact that email security is dead and hosting it yourself doesn’t fix this." Sort of, but not entirely true ... If you run your own mailserver then users of that mailserver can send and receive mail, to each other, without traversing a network. The mail never goes out on the net. That can be valuable/interesting. This is true in both the webmail use-case (the text goes to the browser, ephemerally, encrypted with SSL) or the terminal/console (alpine) use-case (the text goes to the terminal, ephemerally, encrypted with SSH). There's a certain cloud storage provider I know of whose internal / intra-company emails have never traversed the Internet ...
- sneak 5y agoMost people have no idea that email is not secure.