Originally published at: http://boingboing.net/2017/01/20/after-shutting-down-to-protect.html
…
6 Likes
Welcome back!
8 Likes
this new architecture will also cut down on support costs.
While I believe this is a legitimate effort, the skeptic in me is saying, “That’s exactly what a three-letter-agency would do to entice people into revealing all that.”
9 Likes
Already moved to protonmail, otherwise sounds promising.
5 Likes
Having the server source open-source (like with whisper systems) is an important step.
It’s not a bad thing, but the reassurance it provides is extremely tenuous in a situation like this. You have no way to know if the published source corresponds to what’s running on the server. There could be a string of independent audits praising the security of the published code, while the real source is full of files like forward_plaintext_to_nsa.cpp.
I’m not saying it’s not worth using “secure” mail services, because even if there’s only a 10% chance they’re really resisting surveillance, that’s 10% more than you had otherwise. But it’s important to recognise that without end-to-end encryption, you only have your ISP’s word to go on.
4 Likes
Redundancy doesn’t hurt though.
There’s always
https://unseen.is
3 Likes
Thanks!
Hadn’t seen it…
(Ahahahahahahah!) :joy:
5 Likes
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.
