
Protect Your Privacy, Ditch Mainstream Email - dredmorbius
https://antifederal.com/2017/10/21/protect-your-privacy-ditch-mainstream-email/
======
redthrow
[https://today.law.harvard.edu/internet-privacy-
afraid/](https://today.law.harvard.edu/internet-privacy-afraid/)

SCHNEIER: _I use an encrypted chat application like Signal. By and large,
email security is out of our control_

~~~
dredmorbius
That's pretty much been my conclusion, and whilst Schneier's confirmation is
somewhat reassurring for my sanity, it's deeply troubling for any prospects
for privacy.

I'd _really_ like to see a focused effort put forth on addressing the failures
of email in a novel, _and open_ , standard. After many decades of service, I'm
largely convinced that _no_ level of patching SMTP _or_ the various hacks of
message formats will be successful.

And proprietary efforts are all but certain to be harmful.

~~~
jlgaddis
MTA-STS [0] is the first decent effort (that would actually have some impact)
that I've seen.

[0]: [https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-uta-mta-
sts-10](https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-uta-mta-sts-10)

~~~
dredmorbius
Thanks, though that's at best a very partial step.

I'm looking at a more comprehensive rethinking.

------
zhte415
(Irony that email is a federated implementation of a protocol, yet the website
is called antifederal.)

I've had my own domain name since 2002. Many others here may also do similar.
Many may not.

This federates you, and your mailing address. Freedom to change email
providers, without inconveniencing those you converse with.

There are two sides to a transaction, however. Your mail may be federated, but
the other side likely isn't. I'm incredibly disappointed how stuff like PGP
has not been widely adopted.

~~~
wuch
Maybe it continues the historical tradition of Federalists vs Anti-
Federalists:

"The primary opposition to the Constitution was based on it being a
centralizing document that risked making the states a mere administrative arm
of the central government. States' rights advocates like Thomas Jefferson,
George Mason, Patrick Henry, and Elbridge Gerry were wary of the new document.
The Federalists were aware of these objections and their opponents. Thus, in
trying to head them off at the pass, they adopted the name Federalists to give
people the impression, true or not, that they were for a federal form of
government and not a national one. This forced those who opposed the
constitution to be known as Anti-Federalists, which to the less attentive
audience gave the impression that they were against federalism and thus for a
centralized regime."

------
omnifischer
While I agree it is an apt idea, it is not so useful. See this post
[https://mako.cc/copyrighteous/google-has-most-of-my-email-
be...](https://mako.cc/copyrighteous/google-has-most-of-my-email-because-it-
has-all-of-yours) The graphs may change a bit but the overall trend is
communication involves big 5 SV.

~~~
ocdtrekkie
While this is true, most of my personal correspondence ends up on Google
servers, there is a significant increase of privacy you get from the more
utility based emails. For instance, if you shop on Amazon and switch away from
Gmail, Google loses out on all of your purchasing habits. Consider that the
Unroll.me fiasco involved one ride sharing company buying data about your
receipts from the other.

