4 ms·

But the server-side could be a desktop computer at your house instead of Google's servers. Seems harder for the NSA to access

by Fargren 13y ago

navait 13y ago
That sounds like a lot of work. You have to set up the server, get a domain, update it, back it up etc; What do you get out of it? An email server. Google will give you all of that in a few seconds. Google's uptime is way better than what I could hope to get. When my laptop had water spilled on it, there was no need to worry about my thesis. I went to a lab and started working on it again 10 minutes later. No work lost. My own backup solutions would be far worse, and likley involve losing some work. When using these services, I have to ask myself, how much do I value my privacy? I think I get more from google's services than I lose. For me, and a lot of people, it's not worth the time to set up an email server, let alone maintain one.
- gyepi 13y ago
  Yes, for some people, it's too much work. However, there are many for whom it would not be at all. I have always run my own servers both for personal and business use and I don't find it the least bit onerous. Honestly, I think it only seems like too much work until one learns more about it. Just like anything else, I suppose. I'm not trying to change your mind; not everyone is meant to run their own systems. But I certainly want to counter your discouragement against doing so.
cmdkeen 13y ago
For those with the wherewithal to run their own server both in terms of hardware and software along with secure backup policies. The likelihood of be compromised through missing a security patch or poor configuration is almost certainly massively higher than anything like this. But then where do you get the software for said server? Or your mobile client? We're back to the age old question of how do you trust the compiler? How do you trust the source code? There's a reason that Governments that take security seriously have their own, private, WAN infrastructure that has gateway upon gateway before it reaches the internet, if it ever does.
PeterisP 13y ago
It means that my mail archive (which is very useful to me) either (A) is vulnerable to risks such as theft/fire/flood that are orders of magnitude more likely than google losing my data; or (B) will cost me effort to make and maintain proper regular offsite backups, which is a rather significant chore that I'd want to outsource anyway to someone else. Heck. I really could host everything at home but the mere thought of the periodic hassle when some hardware or software inevitably breaks... I'd rather simply send all my email archive to NSA, KGB and Chinese gov't, the hassle is really not worth it (for me).
- bcoates 13y ago
  The home search server would just be a cache, presumably the authoritative mailbox would be on an encrypted cloud service. Disaster recovery would consist of replacing the appliance and reauthenticating it.

But the server-side could be a desktop computer at your house instead of Google's servers. Seems harder for the NSA to access

by Fargren 13y ago

But the server-side could be a desktop computer at your house instead of Google's servers. Seems harder for the NSA to access

navait 13y ago

That sounds like a lot of work. You have to set up the server, get a domain, update it, back it up etc; What do you get out of it? An email server. Google will give you all of that in a few seconds. Google's uptime is way better than what I could hope to get. When my laptop had water spilled on it, there was no need to worry about my thesis. I went to a lab and started working on it again 10 minutes later. No work lost. My own backup solutions would be far worse, and likley involve losing some work. When using these services, I have to ask myself, how much do I value my privacy? I think I get more from google's services than I lose. For me, and a lot of people, it's not worth the time to set up an email server, let alone maintain one.

gyepi 13y ago
Yes, for some people, it's too much work. However, there are many for whom it would not be at all. I have always run my own servers both for personal and business use and I don't find it the least bit onerous. Honestly, I think it only seems like too much work until one learns more about it. Just like anything else, I suppose. I'm not trying to change your mind; not everyone is meant to run their own systems. But I certainly want to counter your discouragement against doing so.

cmdkeen 13y ago

For those with the wherewithal to run their own server both in terms of hardware and software along with secure backup policies. The likelihood of be compromised through missing a security patch or poor configuration is almost certainly massively higher than anything like this. But then where do you get the software for said server? Or your mobile client? We're back to the age old question of how do you trust the compiler? How do you trust the source code? There's a reason that Governments that take security seriously have their own, private, WAN infrastructure that has gateway upon gateway before it reaches the internet, if it ever does.

PeterisP 13y ago

It means that my mail archive (which is very useful to me) either (A) is vulnerable to risks such as theft/fire/flood that are orders of magnitude more likely than google losing my data; or (B) will cost me effort to make and maintain proper regular offsite backups, which is a rather significant chore that I'd want to outsource anyway to someone else. Heck. I really could host everything at home but the mere thought of the periodic hassle when some hardware or software inevitably breaks... I'd rather simply send all my email archive to NSA, KGB and Chinese gov't, the hassle is really not worth it (for me).

bcoates 13y ago
The home search server would just be a cache, presumably the authoritative mailbox would be on an encrypted cloud service. Disaster recovery would consist of replacing the appliance and reauthenticating it.