I last reviewed email services in 2019. That review focused a lot of attention on privacy. At the time, I selected mailbox.org as my provider, and have been using them for these 5 years since. However, both their service and their support have gone significantly downhill since, so it is time for me to look at other options.
Here I am focusing strongly on email. Some of the providers mentioned here provide other services (IM, video calls, groupware, etc.), and to the extent they do, I am ignoring them.
What Matters in 2024
I want to start off by acknowledging that what you need in email probably depends on your circumstances and the country in which you live. For me, I begin by naming that the largest threat most of us face isn’t from state actors but from criminals: hackers, ransomware gangs, etc. It is important to take as many steps as possible to secure one’s account against that. Privacy and security are both part of the mix. I still value privacy but I am acknowledging, as Migadu does, that “Email as we know it and encryption are incompatible.” Although some of these services strongly protect parts of the conversation, the reality is that most people will be emailing people using plain old email services which don’t. For stronger security, something like Signal would be needed. (I wrote about Signal in 2021 also.)
Interestingly, OpenPGP support seems to be something of a standard feature in the providers I reviewed by this point. All or almost all of them provide integration with browser-based encryption as well as server-side encryption if you prefer that.
Although mailbox.org can automatically PGP-encrypt every message that arrives in plaintext, for general use, this is unwieldy; there isn’t good tooling for searching mailboxes where every message is encrypted, etc. So I never enabled that feature at Mailbox. I still value security and privacy, but a pragmatic approach addresses the most pressing threats first.
My criteria
The basic requirements for an email service include:
- Ability to use my own domains
- Strong privacy policy
- Ability for me to use my own IMAP and SMTP clients on both desktop and mobile
- It must be extremely reliable
- It must not be free
- It must have excellent support for those rare occasions when it is needed
- Support for basic aliases
Why do I say it must not be free? Because if someone is providing a service with the quality I’m talking about here, and not charging for it, it implies something is fishy: either they are unscrupulous, are financially unstable, or the product is something else like ads. I am not aware of any provider that matches the other criteria with a free account anyhow. These providers range from about $30 to $90 per year, so cheaper than a Netflix subscription.
Immediately, this rules out several options:
- Proton doesn’t let me use my own clients on mobile (their bridge is desktop-only)
- Tuta also doesn’t let me use my own clients
- Posteo doesn’t let me use my own domain
- mxroute.com lacks a strong privacy policy, and its policy has numerous causes for concern (for instance, “If you repeatedly send email to invalid/unroutable recipients, they may be published on our GitHub”)
I will have a bit more to say about a couple of these providers below.
There are some additional criteria that are strongly desired but not absolutely required:
- Ability to set individual access passwords for every device/app
- Support for two-factor authentication (2FA/TFA/TOTP) for web-based access
- Support for basics in filtering: ability to filter on envelope recipient (so if I get BCC’d, I can still filter), and ability to execute more than one action on filter match (eg, deliver to two folders, or deliver to a folder and forward to someone else)
IMAP and SMTP don’t really support 2FA, so by setting individual passwords for every device, you can at least limit the blast radius and cut off a specific device if something is (or might be) compromised.
The candidates
I considered these providers: Startmail, Mailfence, Runbox, Fastmail, Kolab, Mailbox.org, and Migadu. I’ll review each, and highlight the pricing of the plan I would most likely use. Each provider offers multiple plans; some may be more expensive and some may be cheaper than the one I reviewed. I included a link to each provider’s full pricing information so you can compare for your needs.
I set up trials with each of these (except Mailbox.org, with which I already had a paid account). It so happend that I had actual questions for support for each one, which gave me an opportunity to see how support responded. I did not fabricate questions, and would not have contacted support if I didn’t have real ones. (This means that I asked different questions of each provider, because they were the REAL questions I had.) I’ll jump to the spoiler right now: I eventually chose Migadu, with Fastmail and Mailfence as close seconds.
I looked for providers myself, and also solicited recommendations in a Mastodon thread.
Mailbox.org
I begin with Mailbox, as it was my top choice in 2019 and the incumbent.
Until this year, I had been quite happy with it. I had cause to reach their support less than once a year on average, and each time they replied the same day or next day. Now, however, they are failing on reliability and on support.
Their spam filter has become overly aggressive. It has blocked quite a bit of legitimate mail. When contacting their support about a prior issue earlier this year, they initially took 4 days to reply, and then 6 days to reply after that. Ouch. They had me disable some spam settings.
It didn’t really help. I continue to lose mail. I don’t know how much, because they block a lot of it before it even hits the spam folder. One of my friends texted to say mail was dropping. I raised a new ticket with mailbox, which took them 5 days to reply to. Their reply was unhelpful. “As the Internet is not a static system, unforeseen events can always occur.” Well yes, that’s true, and I get it, false positives exist with email. But this was from an ISP’s mail system with an address that had been established for years, and it was part of a larger pattern of rejecting quite a bit of legit mail. And every interaction with them recently hasn’t resulted in them actually doing anything to resolve anything. It’s just a paragraph or two of reply that does nothing and helps nothing.
When I complained that it took 5 days to reply, they said “We have not been able to reply sooner as we are currently experiencing a high volume of customer enquiries.” Even though their SLA for my account is a not-great “48 business hour” turnaround, they still missed it and their reason is “we’re busy.” I finally asked what RBL had caught the blocked email, since when I checked, the sender wasn’t on any RBL. Mailbox’s reply: they only keep their logs for 7 days, so next time I should contact them within 7 days. Which, of course, I DID; it was them that kept delaying. Ugh! It’s like they’ve become a cable company.
Even worse is how they have been blocking mail from GrapheneOS’s discussion form. See their thread about it. In short, Graphene’s mail server has a clean reputation and Mailbox has no problem with it. But because one of Graphene’s IPv6 webservers has an IPv6 allocation of a size Mailbox doesn’t like, they drop mail. It’s ridiculous, and Mailbox was dismissive of this well-known and well-regarded Open Source project. So if the likes of GrapheneOS can’t get good faith effort to deliver their mail, what chance does an individual like me have?
I’m sorry, but I’m literally paying you to deliver email for me and provide good support. If you can’t do either of those, you don’t get to push that problem down onto me. Hire appropriate staff.
On the technical side, they support aliases, my own clients, and have a reasonable privacy policy. Their 2FA support exists for the web interface (though weirdly not the support site), though it is somewhat weird. They do not support app passwords.
A somewhat unique feature is the @secure.mailbox.org
domain. If you try to receive mail at that address, mailbox.org will block it unless it uses TLS. Same for sending. This isn’t E2EE, but it does at least require things not be in plaintext for the last hop to Mailbox.
Verdict: not recommended due to poor reliability and support.
Mailbox.Org summary:
- Website: https://mailbox.org/en/
- Reliability: iffy due to over-aggressive spam filtering
- Support: Poor; takes 4-6 days for a reply and replies are unhelpful
- Individual access passwords: No
- 2FA: Yes, but with a PIN instead of a password as the other factor
- Filtering: Full SIEVE feature set and GUI editor
- Spam settings: greylisting on/off, reject some/all spam, etc. But they’re insufficient to address Mailbox’s overzealousness, which support says I cannot workaround within the interface.
- Server storage location: Germany
- Plan as reviewed: standard [pricing link]
- Cost per year: EUR 30 (about $33)
- Mail storage included: 10GB
- Limits on send/receive volume: none
- Aliases: 50 on your domain name, 25 on mailbox.org
- Additional mailboxes: Available; each one at the same fee as the primary mailbox
Startmail
I really wanted to like Startmail. Its “vault” is an interesting idea and should contribute to the security and privacy of an account. They clearly care about privacy.
It falls down in filtering. They have no way to filter on envelope recipient (BCC or similar). Their support confirmed this to me and that’s a showstopper.
Startmail support was also as slow as Mailbox, taking 5 days to respond to me.
Two showstoppers right there.
Verdict: Not recommended due to slow support responsiveness and weak filtering.
Startmail summary:
- Website: https://www.startmail.com/
- Reliability: Seems to be fine
- Support: Mediocre; Took 5 days for a reply, but the reply was helpful
- Individual app access passwords: Yes
- 2FA: Yes
- Filtering: Poor; cannot filter on envelope recipient, and can’t build filters with multiple actions
- Spam settings: None
- Server storage location: The Netherlands
- Plan as reviewed: Custom domain (trial was Personal), [pricing link]
- Cost per year: $70
- Mail storage included: 20GB
- Limits on send/receive volume: none
- Aliases: unlimited, with lots of features: can set expiration, etc.
- Additional mailboxes: not available
Kolab
Kolab Now is mainly positioned as a full groupware service, but they do have a email-only option which I investigated. There isn’t much documentation about it compared to other providers, and also not much in the way of settings. You can turn greylisting on or off. And…. that’s it.
It has a full suite of filtering options. They set an X-Envelope-To header which you can use with the arbitrary header match to do the right thing even for BCC situations. Filters can have multiple conditions and multiple actions. It is SIEVE-based and you can download your SIEVE definitions.
If you enable 2FA, you disable IMAP and SMTP; not great.
Verdict: Not an impressive enough email featureset to justify going with it.
Kolab Now summary:
- Website: https://kolabnow.com/
- Reliability: Seems to be fine
- Support: Fine responsiveness (next day)
- Invidiaul app passwords: no
- 2FA: Yes, but if you enable it, they disable IMAP and SMTP
- Filtering: Excellent
- Spam settings: Only greylisting on/off
- Server storage location: Switzerland; they have lots of details on their setup
- Plan as reviewed: “Just email” [pricing link]
- Cost per year: CHF 60, about $66
- Mail storage included: 5GB
- Limitations on send/receive volume: None
- Aliases: Yes. Not sure if there are limits.
- Additional mailboxes: Yes if you set up a group account. “Flexible pricing based on user count” is not documented anywhere I could find.
Mailfence
Mailfence is another option, somewhat similar to Startmail but without the unique vault. I had some questions about filters, and support was quite responsive, responding in a couple of hours.
Some of their copy on their website is a bit misleading, but support clarified when I asked them. They do not offer encryption at rest (like most of the entries here).
Mailfence’s filtering system is the kind I’d like to see. It allows multiple conditions and multiple actions for each rule, and has some unique actions as well (notify by SMS or XMPP). Support says that “Recipients” matches envelope recipients. However, one ommission is that I can’t match on arbitrary headers; only the canned list of headers they provide.
They have only two spam settings:
- spam filter on/off
- whitelist
Given some recent complaints about their spam filter being overly aggressive, I find this lack of control somewhat concerning. (However, I discount complaints about people begging for more features in free accounts; free won’t provide the kind of service I’m looking for with any provider.) There are generally just very few settings for email as well.
Verdict: Response and helpful support, filtering has the right structure but lacks arbitrary header match. Could be a good option.
Mailfence summary:
- Website: https://mailfence.com/
- Reliability: Seems to be fine
- Support: Excellent responsiveness and helpful replies (after some initial confusion about my question of greylisting)
- Individual app access passwords: No. You can set a per-service password (eg, an IMAP password), but those will be shared with all devices speaking that protocol.
- 2FA: Yes
- Filtering: Good; only misses the ability to filter on arbitrary headers
- Spam settings: Very few
- Server storage location: Belgium
- Plan as reviewed: Entry [pricing link]
- Cost per year: $42
- Mail storage included: 10GB, with a maximum of 50,000 messages
- Limits on send/receive volume: none
- Aliases: 50. Aliases can’t be deleted once created (there may be an exeption to this for aliases on your own domain rather than mailfence.com)
- Additional mailboxes: Their page on this is a bit confusing, and the pricing page lacks the information promised. It looks like you can pay the same $42/year for additional mailboxes, with a limit of up to 2 additional paid mailboxes and 2 additional free mailboxes tied to the account.
Runbox
This one came recommended in a Mastodon thread. I had some questions about it, and support response was fantastic – I heard from two people that were co-founders of the company! Even within hours, on a weekend. Incredible! This kind of response was only surpassed by Migadu.
I initially wrote to Runbox with questions about the incoming and outgoing message limits, which I hadn’t seen elsewhere, as well as the bandwidth limit. They said the bandwidth limit is no longer enforced on paid accounts. The incoming and outgoing limits are enforced, and all email (even spam) counts towards the limit. Notably the outgoing limit is per recipient, so if you send 10 messages to your 50-recipient family group, that’s the limit. However, they also indicated a willingness to reset the limit if something happens. Unfortunately, hitting the limit results in a hard bounce (SMTP 5xx) rather than a temporary failure (SMTP 4xx) so it can result in lost mail. This means I’d be worried about some attack or other weirdness causing me to lose mail.
Their filter is a pain point. Here are the challenges:
- You can’t directly match on a BCC recipient. Support advised to use a “headers” match, which will search for something anywhere in the headers. This works and is probably “good enough” since this data is in the Received: headers, but it is a little more imprecise.
- They only have a “contains”, not an “equals” operator. So, for instance, a pattern searching for “test@example.com” would also match “newtest@example.com”. Support advised to put the email address in angle brackets to avoid this. That will work… mostly. Angle brackets aren’t always required in headers.
- There is no way to have multiple actions on the filter (there is just no way to file an incoming message into two folders). This was the ultimate showstopper for me.
Support advised they are planning to upgrade the filter system in the future, but these are the limitations today.
Verdict: A good option if you don’t need much from the filtering system. Lots of privacy emphasis.
Runbox summary:
- Website: https://runbox.com/
- Reliability: Seems to be fine, except returning 5xx codes if per-day limits are exceeded
- Support: Excellent responsiveness and replies from founders
- Individual app passwords: Yes
- 2FA: Yes
- Filtering: Poor
- Spam settings: Very few
- Server storage location: Norway
- Plan as reviewed: Mini [pricing link]
- Cost per year: $35
- Mail storage included: 10GB
- Limited on send/receive volume: Receive 5000 messages/day, Send 500 recipients/day
- Aliases: 100 on runbox.com; unlimited on your own domain
- Additional mailboxes: $15/yr each, also with 10GB non-shared storage per mailbox
Fastmail
Fastmail came recommended to me by a friend I’ve known for decades.
Here’s the thing about Fastmail, compared to all the services listed above: It all just works. Everything. Filtering, spam prevention, it is all there, all feature-complete, and all just does the right thing as you’d hope. Their filtering system has a canned dropdown for “To/Cc/Bcc”, it supports multiple conditions and multiple actions, and just does the right thing. (Delivering to multiple folders is a little cumbersome but possible.) It has a particularly strong feature set around administering multiple accounts, including things like whether users can prevent admins from reading their mail.
The not-so-great part of the picture is around privacy. Fastmail is based in Australia, where the government has extensive power around spying on data, even to the point of forcing companies to add wiretap capabilities. Fastmail’s privacy policy states user data may be held in Australia, USA, India, and Netherlands. By default, they share data with unidentified “spam companies”, though you can disable this in settings. On the other hand, they do make a good effort towards privacy.
I contacted support with some questions and got back a helpful response in three hours. However, one of the questions was about in which countries my particular data would be stored, and the support response said they would have to get back to me on that. It’s been several days and no word back.
Verdict: A featureful option that “just works”, with a lot of features for managing family accounts and the like, but lacking in the privacy area.
Fastmail summary:
- Website: https://www.fastmail.com/
- Reliability: Seems to be fine
- Support: Good response time on most questions; dropped the ball on one tha trequired research
- Individual app access passwords: Yes
- 2FA: Yes
- Filtering: Excellent
- Spam settings: Can set filter aggressiveness, decide whether to share spam data with “spam-fighting companies”, configure how to handle backscatter spam, and evaluate the personal learning filter.
- Server storage locations: Australia, USA, India, and The Netherlands. Legal jurisdiction is Australia.
- Plan as reviewed: Individual [pricing link]
- Cost per year: $60
- Mail storage included: 50GB
- Limits on send/receive volume: 300/hour
- Aliases: Unlimited from what I can see
- Additional mailboxes: No; requires a different plan for that
Migadu
Migadu was a service I’d never heard of, but came recommended to me on Mastodon.
I listed Migadu last because it is a class of its own compared to all the other options. Every other service is basically a webmail interface with a few extra settings tacked on.
Migadu has a full-featured email admin console in addition. By that I mean you can:
- View usage graphs (incoming, outgoing, storage) over time
- Manage DNS (if you want Migadu to run your nameservers)
- Manage multiple domains, and cross-domain relationships with mailboxes
- View a limited set of logs
- Configure accounts, reset their passwords if needed/authorized, etc.
- Configure email address rewrite rules with wildcards and so forth
Basically, if you were the sort of person that ran your own mail servers back in the day, here is Migadu giving you most of that functionality. Effectively you have a web interface to do all the useful stuff, and they handle the boring and annoying bits. This is a really attractive model.
Migadu support has been fantastic. They are quick to respond, and went above and beyond. I pointed out that their X-Envelope-To header, which is needed for filtering by BCC, wasn’t being added on emails I sent myself. They replied 5 hours later indicating they had added the feature to add X-Envelope-To even for internal mails! Wow! I am impressed.
With Migadu, you buy a pool of resources: storage space and incoming/outgoing traffic. What you do within that pool is up to you. You can set up users (“mailboxes”), aliases, domains, whatever you like. It all just shares the pool. You can restrict users further so that an individual user has access to only a subset of the pool resources.
I was initially concerned about Migadu’s daily send/receive message count limits, but in visiting with support and reading the documentation, what really comes out is that Migadu is a service with a personal touch. Hitting the incoming traffic limit will cause a SMTP temporary fail (4xx) response so you won’t lose legit mail – and support will work with you if it’s a problem for legit uses. In other words, restrictions are “soft” and they are interpreted reasonably.
One interesting thing about Migadu is that they do not offer accounts under their domain. That is, you MUST bring your own domain. That’s pretty easy and cheap, of course. It also puts you in a position of power, because it is easy to migrate email from one provider to another if you own the domain.
Filtering is done via SIEVE. There is a GUI editor which lets you accomplish most things, though it has an odd blind spot where you can’t file a message into multiple folders. However, you can edit a SIEVE ruleset directly and you get the full SIEVE featureset, which is extensive (and does support filing a message into multiple folders). I note that the SIEVE :envelope match doesn’t work, but Migadu adds an X-Envelope-To header which is just as good.
I particularly love a company that tells you all the reasons you might not want to use them. Migadu’s pro/con list is an honest drawbacks list (of course, their homepage highlights all the features!).
Verdict: Fantastically powerful, excellent support, and good privacy. I chose this one.
Migadu summary:
- Website: https://migadu.com/
- Reliability: Excellent
- Support: Fantastic. Good response times and they added a feature (or fixed a bug?) a few hours after I requested it.
- Individual access passwords: Yes. Create “identities” to support them.
- 2FA: Yes, on both the admin interface and the webmail interface
- Filtering: Excellent, based on SIEVE. GUI editor doesn’t support multiple actions when filing into a folder, but full SIEVE functionality is exposed.
- Spam settings:
- On the domain level, filter aggressiveness, Greylisting on/off, black and white lists
- On the mailbox level, filter aggressiveness, black and whitelists, action to take with spam; compatible with filters.
- Server storage location: France; legal jurisdiction Switzerland
- Plan as reviewed: mini [pricing link]
- Cost per year: $90
- Mail storage included: 30GB (“soft” quota)
- Limits on send/receive volume: 1000 messgaes in/day, 100 messages out/day (“soft” quotas)
- Aliases: Unlimited on an unlimited number of domains
- Additional mailboxes: Unlimited and free; uses pooled quotas, but individual quotas can be set
Others
Here are a few others that I didn’t think worthy of getting a trial:
- mxroute was recommended by several. Lots of concerning things in their policy, such as:
- if you repeatedly send mail to unroutable recipients, they may publish the addresses on Github
- they will terminate your account if they think you are “rude” or want to contest a charge
- they reserve the right to cancel your service at any time for any (or no) reason.
- Proton keeps coming up, and I will not consider it so long as I am locked into their client on mobile.
- Skiff comes up sometimes, but they were acquired by Notion.
- Disroot comes up; this discussion highlights a number of reasons why I avoid them. Their Terms of Service (ToS) is inconsistent with a general-purpose email account (I guess for targeting nonprofits and activists, that could make sense). Particularly laughable is that they claim to be friends of Open Source, but then would take down your account if you upload “copyrighted” material. News flash: in order for an Open Source license to be meaningful, the underlying work is copyrighted. It is perfectly legal to upload copyrighted material when you wrote it or have the license to do so!
Conclusions
There are a lot of good options for email hosting today, and in particular I appreciate the excellent personal support from companies like Migadu and Runbox. Support small businesses!
Tools for Communicating Offline and in Difficult Circumstances
Note: this post is also available on my website, where it will be updated periodically.
When things are difficult – maybe there’s been a disaster, or an invasion (this page is being written in 2022 just after Russia invaded Ukraine), or maybe you’re just backpacking off the grid – there are tools that can help you keep in touch, or move your data around. This page aims to survey some of them, roughly in order from easiest to more complex.
Simple radios
Handheld radios shouldn’t be forgotten. They are cheap, small, and easy to operate. Their range isn’t huge – maybe a couple of miles in rural areas, much less in cities – but they can be a useful place to start. They tend to have no actual encryption features (the “privacy” features really aren’t.) In the USA, options are FRS/GMRS and CB.
Syncthing
With Syncthing, you can share files among your devices or with your friends. Syncthing essentially builds a private mesh for file sharing. Devices will auto-discover each other when on the same LAN or Wifi network, and opportunistically sync.
I wrote more about offline uses of Syncthing, and its use with NNCP, in my blog post A simple, delay-tolerant, offline-capable mesh network with Syncthing (+ optional NNCP). Yes, it is a form of a Mesh Network!
Homepage: https://syncthing.net/
Briar
Briar is an instant messaging service based around Android. It’s IM with a twist: it can use a mesh of Bluetooh devices. Or, if Internet is available, Tor. It has even been extended to support the use of SD cards and USB sticks to carry your messages.
Like some others here, it can relay messages for third parties as well.
Homepage: https://briarproject.org/
Manyverse and Scuttlebutt
Manyverse is a client for Scuttlebutt, which is a sort of asynchronous, offline-friendly social network. You can use it to keep in touch with your family and friends, and it supports syncing over Bluetooth and Wifi even in the absence of Internet.
Homepages: https://www.manyver.se/ and https://scuttlebutt.nz/
Yggdrasil
Yggdrasil is a self-healing, fully end-to-end Encrypted Mesh Network. It can work among local devices or on the global Internet. It has network services that can egress onto things like Tor, I2P, and the public Internet. Yggdrasil makes a perfect companion to ad-hoc wifi as it has auto peer discovery on the local network.
I talked about it in more detail in my blog post Make the Internet Yours Again With an Instant Mesh Network.
Homepage: https://yggdrasil-network.github.io/
Ad-Hoc Wifi
Few people know about the ad-hoc wifi mode. Ad-hoc wifi lets devices in range talk to each other without an access point. You just all set your devices to the same network name and password and there you go. However, there often isn’t DHCP, so IP configuration can be a bit of a challenge. Yggdrasil helps here.
NNCP
Moving now to more advanced tools, NNCP lets you assemble a network of peers that can use Asynchronous Communication over sneakernet, USB drives, radios, CD-Rs, Internet, tor, NNCP over Yggdrasil, Syncthing, Dropbox, S3, you name it . NNCP supports multi-hop file transfer and remote execution. It is fully end-to-end encrypted. Think of it as the offline version of ssh.
Homepage: https://nncp.mirrors.quux.org/
Meshtastic
Meshtastic uses long-range, low-power LoRa radios to build a long-distance, encrypted, instant messaging system that is a Mesh Network. It requires specialized hardware, about $30, but will tend to get much better range than simple radios, and with very little power.
Homepages: https://meshtastic.org/ and https://meshtastic.letstalkthis.com/
Portable Satellite Communicators
You can get portable satellite communicators that can send SMS from anywhere on earth with a clear view of the sky. The Garmin InReach mini and Zoleo are two credible options. Subscriptions range from about $10 to $40 per month depending on usage. They also have global SOS features.
Telephone Lines
If you have a phone line and a modem, UUCP can get through just about anything. It’s an older protocol that lacks modern security, but will deal with slow and noisy serial lines well. XBee SX radios also have a serial mode that can work well with UUCP.
Additional Suggestions
It is probably useful to have a Linux live USB stick with whatever software you want to use handy. Debian can be installed from the live environment, or you could use a security-focused distribution such as Tails or Qubes.
References
This page originated in my Mastodon thread and incorporates some suggestions I received there.
It also formed a post on my blog.
The Good, Bad, and Scary of the Banning of Donald Trump, and How Decentralization Makes It All Better
It is undeniable that banning Donald Trump from Facebook, Twitter, and similar sites is a benefit for the moment. It may well save lives, perhaps lots of lives. But it raises quite a few troubling issues.
First, as EFF points out, these platforms have privileged speakers with power, especially politicians, over regular users. For years now, it has been obvious to everyone that Donald Trump has been violating policies on both platforms, and yet they did little or nothing about it. The result we saw last week was entirely forseeable — and indeed, WAS forseen, including by elements in those companies themselves. (ACLU also raises some good points)
Contrast that with how others get treated. Facebook, two days after the coup attempt, banned Benjamin Wittes, apparently because he mentioned an Atlantic article opposed to nutcase conspiracy theories. The EFF has also documented many more egregious examples: taking down documentation of war crimes, childbirth images, black activists showing the racist messages they received, women discussing online harassment, etc. The list goes on; YouTube, for instance, has often been promoting far-right violent videos while removing peaceful LGBTQ ones.
In short, have we simply achieved legal censorship by outsourcing it to dominant corporations?
It is worth pausing at this point to recognize two important princples:
First, that we do not see it as right to compel speech.
Secondly, that there exist communications channels and other services that nobody is calling on to suspend Donald Trump.
Let’s dive into those a little bit.
There have been no prominent calls for AT&T, Verizon, Gmail, or whomever provides Trump and his campaign with cell phones or email to suspend their service to him. Moreover, the gas stations that fuel his vehicles and the airports that service his plane continue to provide those services, and nobody has seriously questioned that, either. Even his Apple phone that he uses to post to Twitter remains, as far as I know, fully active.
Secondly, imagine you were starting up a small web forum focused on raising tomato plants. It is, and should be, well within your rights to keep tomato-haters out, as well as people that have no interest in tomatoes but would rather talk about rutabagas, politics, or Mars. If you are going to host a forum about tomatoes, you have the right to keep it a forum about tomatoes; you cannot be forced to distribute someone else’s speech. Likewise in traditional media, a newspaper cannot be forced to print every letter to the editor in full.
In law, there is a notion of a common carrier, that provides services to the general public without discrimination. Phone companies and ISPs fall under this.
Facebook, Twitter, and tomato sites don’t. But consider what happens if Facebook bans you. You might be using Facebook-owned Whatsapp to communicate with family and friends, and suddenly find yourself unable to ask someone to pick you up. Or your treasured family photos might be in Facebook-owned Instagram, lost forever. It’s not just Facebook; similar things happen with Google, locking people out of their phones and laptops, their emails, even their photos.
Is it right that Facebook and Google aren’t regulated as common carriers? Perhaps, or perhaps we need some line of demarcation between their speech-to-the-public services (Facebook timeline posts, YouTube) and private communication (Whatsapp, Gmail). It’s a thorny issue; should government be regulating speech instead? That’s also fraught. So is corporate control.
Decentralization Helps Dramatically
With email, you get to pick your email provider (yes, there are two or three big ones, but still plenty of others). Each email provider will have its own set of things it considers acceptable, and its own set of other servers and accounts it’s willing to exchange mail with. (It is extremely common for mail providers to choose not to accept mail from various other mail servers based on ISP, IP address, reputation, and so forth.)
What if we could do something like that for Twitter and Facebook?
Let you join whatever instance you like. Maybe one instance is all about art and they don’t talk about politics. Or another is all about Free Software and they don’t have advertising. And then there are plenty of open instances that accept anything that’s respectful. And, like email, people of one server can interact with those using another just as easily as if they were using the same one.
Well, this isn’t hypothetical; it already exists in the Fediverse. The most common option is Mastodon, and it so happens that a month ago I wrote about its benefits for other reasons, and included some links on getting started.
There is no reason that we must all let our online speech be controlled by companies with a profit motive to keep hate speech on their platforms. There is no reason that we must all have a single set of rules, or accept strong corporate or government control, either. The quality of conversation on Mastodon is far higher than either Twitter or Facebook; decentralization works and it’s here today.
This Is How Tyrants Go: Alone
I remember reading an essay a month or so ago — sadly I forget where — talking about how things end for tyrants. If I were to sum it up, it would be with the word “alone.” Their power fading, they find that they had few true friends or believers; just others that were greedy for power or riches and, finding those no longer to be had, depart the sinking ship. The article looked back at examples like Nixon and examples from the 20th century in Europe and around the world.
Today we saw images of a failed coup attempt.
But we also saw hope.
Already senior staff in the White House are resigning. Ones that had been ardent supporters. In the end, just 6 senators supported the objection to the legitimate electors. Six. Lindsay Graham, Mike Pence, and Mitch McConnel all deserted Trump.
CNN reports that there are serious conversations about invoking the 25th amendment and removing him from office, because even Republicans are to the point of believing that America should not have two more weeks of this man.
Whether those efforts are successful or not, I don’t know. What I do know is that these actions have awakened many people, in a way that nothing else could for four years, to the dangers of Trump and, in the end, have bolstered the cause of democracy.
Hard work will remain but today, Donald Trump is in the White House alone, abandoned by allies and blocked by Twitter. And we know that within two weeks, he won’t be there at all.
We will get through this.
Non-Creepy Technology Purchasing & Gifting Guides
This time of year, a lot of people are thinking of buying gadgets and phones as gifts. But there are a lot of tech companies that have unethical practices, from terrible working conditions in their factories to spying on their users. Here are some buying guides to help you find gadgets that are fun – and not creepy.
The Free Software Foundation’s Ethical Tech Giving Guide is a fantastic resource from what’s probably the pickiest organization out there when it comes to tech. Not only do they highlight good devices, they also explain why and why you should, for instance, avoid the iPhone (their history of silencing political activists and spying on users).
The FSF also has a Guide to DRM-Free Living talks about books, video, audio, and software that respects your freedom by letting you make your own backups, move it to other devices, and continue to use your purchases even if you have no Internet or the company you bought them from goes bankrupt. This is a fantastic and HUGE resource; there are hundreds of organizations out there that provide content in a way that respects your rights — and many of them do it for free, legally, as well.
PrivacyTools has a fantastic series of guides on everything from email providers to operating systems, as well as links to a number of other guides.
The DeGoogle wiki on Reddit (as well as the sidebar) has a lot of fantastic alternatives to things like Chromebooks, Chrome, Gmail, etc.
Related resources
Here are some resources for education (what the issues are) and information about what companies and products to avoid.
In addition to the FSF’s other fantastic resources above, they also have a list of proprietary malware. It lists things, practices, and companies to avoid, and talks about the reasons why. Their addictions page is particularly good and relevant to my recent post on the problems of the attention economy.
The Surveillance Self-Defense site from the Electronic Frontier Foundation is a fantastic introduction into how corporate surveillance works and how to defend against it.
Use with a grain of salt:
Mozilla, the people behind Firefox, have a site called Privacy Not Included that rates products by how “creepy” they are. They focus more narrowly on privacy than the more expansive set of freedoms the FSF considers (privacy is one of a number of things the FSF looks at), and in some cases I would say Mozilla is too generous (eg, with the Amazon Kindle, a number of their data points are just incorrect.)
The Rightward, Establishment Bias of Lazy Journalism
Note: I also posted this post on medium.
I remember clearly the moment I’d had enough of NPR for the day. It was early morning January 25 of this year, still pretty dark outside. An NPR anchor was interviewing an NPR reporter — they seem to do that a lot these days — and asked the following simple but important question:
“So if we know that Roger Stone was in communications with WikiLeaks and we know U.S. intelligence agencies have said WikiLeaks was operating at the behest of Russia, does that mean that Roger Stone has been now connected directly to Russia’s efforts to interfere in the U.S. election?”
The factual answer, based on both data and logic, would have been “yes”. NPR, in fact, had spent much airtime covering this; for instance, a June 2018 story goes into detail about Stone’s interactions with WikiLeaks, and less than a week before Stone’s arrest, NPR referred to “internal emails stolen by Russian hackers and posted to Wikileaks.” In November of 2018, The Atlantic wrote, “Russia used WikiLeaks as a conduit — witting or unwitting — and WikiLeaks, in turn, appears to have been in touch with Trump allies.”
Why, then, did the NPR reporter begin her answer with “well,” proceed to hedge, repeat denials from Stone and WikiLeaks, and then wind up saying “authorities seem to have some evidence” without directly answering the question? And what does this mean for bias in the media?
Let us begin with a simple principle: facts do not have a political bias. Telling me that “the sky is blue” no more reflects a Democratic bias than saying “3+3=6” reflects a Republican bias. In an ideal world, politics would shape themselves around facts; ideas most in agreement with the data would win. There are not two equally-legitimate sides to questions of fact. There is no credible argument against “the earth is round”, “climate change is real,” or “Donald Trump is an unindicted co-conspirator in crimes for which jail sentences have been given.” These are factual, not political, statements. If you feel, as I do, a bit of a quickening pulse and escalating tension as you read through these examples, then you too have felt the forces that wish you to be uncomfortable with unarguable reality.
That we perceive some factual questions as political is a sign of a deep dysfunction in our society. It’s a sign that our policies are not always guided by fact, but that a sustained effort exists to cause our facts to be guided by policy.
Facts do not have a political bias. There are not two equally-legitimate sides to questions of fact. “Climate change is real” is a factual, not a political, statement. Our policies are not always guided by fact; a sustained effort exists to cause our facts to be guided by policy.
Why did I say right-wing bias, then? Because at this particular moment in time, it is the political right that is more engaged in the effort to shape facts to policy. Whether it is denying the obvious lies of the President, the clear consensus on climate change, or the contours of various investigations, it is clear that they desire to confuse and mislead in order to shape facts to their whim.
It’s not always so consequential when the media gets it wrong. When CNN breathlessly highlights its developing story — that an airplane “will struggle to maintain altitude once the fuel tanks are empty” —it gives us room to critique the utility of 24/7 media, but not necessarily a political angle.
Hey thanks CNN for making sure we all knew the crucial fact that planes cannot fly on empty fuel tanks pic.twitter.com/P6uXuTCUgI
— Katie Pavlich (@KatiePavlich) March 31, 2014
But ask yourself: who benefits when the media is afraid to report a simple fact about an investigation with political connotations? The obvious answer, in the NPR example I gave, is that Republicans benefit. They want the President to appear innocent, so every hedge on known facts about illegal activities of those in Trump’s orbit is a gift to the right. Every time a reporter gives equal time to climate change deniers is a gift to the right and a blow to informed discussion in a democracy.
Not only is there a rightward bias, but there is also an establishment bias that goes hand-in-hand. Consider this CNN report about Facebook’s “pivot to privacy”, in which CEO Zuckerberg is credited with “changing his tune somewhat”. To the extent to which that article highlights “problems” with this, they take Zuckerberg at face-value and start to wonder if it will be harder to clamp down on fake news in the news feed if there’s more privacy. That is a total misunderstanding of what was being proposed; a more careful reading of the situation was done by numerous outlets, resulting in headlines such as this one in The Intercept: “Mark Zuckerberg Is Trying to Play You — Again.” They correctly point out the only change actually mentioned pertained only to instant messages, not to the news feed that CNN was talking about, and even that had a vague promise to happen “over the next few years.” Who benefited from CNN’s failure to read a press release closely? The established powers — Facebook.
Pay attention to the media and you’ll notice that journalists trip all over themselves to report a new dot in a story, but they run away scared from being the first to connect the dots. Much has been written about the “media narrative,” often critical, with good reason. Back in November of 2018, an excellent article on “The Ubearable Rightness of Seth Abramson” covered one particular case in delightful detail.
Journalists trip all over themselves to report a new dot in a story, but they run away scared from being the first to connect the dots.
Seth Abramson himself wrote, “Trump-Russia is too complex to report. We need a new kind of journalism.” He argues the culprit is not laziness, but rather that “archive of prior relevant reporting that any reporter could review before they publish their own research is now so large and far-flung that more and more articles are frustratingly incomplete or even accidentally erroneous than was the case when there were fewer media outlets, a smaller and more readily navigable archive of past reporting for reporters to sift through, and a less internationalized media landscape.” Whether laziness or not, the effect is the same: a failure to properly contextualize facts leading to misrepresented or outright wrong outcomes that, at present, have a distinct bias towards right-wing and establishment interests.
Yes, the many scandals in Trumpland are extraordinarily complex, and in this age of shrinking newsroom budgets, it’s no wonder that reporters have trouble keeping up. Highly-paid executives like Zuckerberg and politicians in Congress have years of practice with obfuscation, and it takes skill to find the truth (if there even is any) behind a corporate press release or political talking point. One would hope, though, that reporters would be less quick to opine if they lack those skills or the necessary time to dig in.
There’s not just laziness; there’s also, no doubt, a confusion about what it means to be a balanced journalist. It is clear that there are two sides to a debate over, say, whether to give a state’s lottery money to the elementary schools or the universities. When there is the appearance of a political debate over facts, shouldn’t that also receive equal time for each side? I argue no. In fact, politicians making claims that contradict establish fact should be exposed by journalists, not covered by them.
And some of it is, no doubt, fear. Fear that if they come out and say “yes, this implicates Stone with Russian hacking” that the Fox News crowd will attack them as biased. Of course this will happen, but that attack will be wrong. The right has done an excellent job of convincing both reporters and the public that there’s a big left-leaning bias that needs to be corrected, by yelling about it every time a fact is mentioned that they don’t like. The unfortunate result is that the fact-leaning bias in the media is being whittled away.
Politicians making claims that contradict establish fact should be exposed by journalists, not covered by them. The fact-leaning bias in the media is being whittled away.
Regardless of the cause, media organizations and their reporters need to be cognizant of the biases actors of all stripes wish them to display, and refuse to play along. They need to be cognizant of the demands they put on their own reporters, and give them space to understand the context of a story before explaining it. They need to stand up to those that try to diminish facts, to those that would like them to be uninformed.
A world in which reporters know the context of their stories and boldly state facts as facts, come what may, is a world in which reporters strengthen the earth’s democracies. And, by extension, its people.
Review of Secure, Privacy-Respecting Email Services
I’ve been hosting my own email for several decades now. Even before I had access to a dedicated Internet link, I had email via dialup UUCP (and, before that, a FidoNet gateway).
But self-hosting email is becoming increasingly difficult. The time required to maintain spam and virus filters, SPF/DKIM settings, etc. just grows. The importance of email also is increasing. Although my own email has been extremely reliable, it is still running on a single server somewhere and therefore I could stand to have a lot of trouble if it went down while I was unable to fix it
Email with Pretty Good Privacy & Security
(Yes, this heading is a pun.)
There’s a lot of important stuff linked to emails. Family photos. Password resets for banks, social media sites, chat sites, photo storage sites, etc. Shopping histories. In a lot of cases, if your email was compromised, it wouldn’t be all that hard to next compromise your bank account, buy stuff with your Amazon account, hijack your Netflix, etc. There are lots of good resources about why privacy matters; here’s one informative video even if you think you have “nothing to hide”.
There is often a tradeoff between security and usability. A very secure system would be airgapped; you’d always compose your messages and use your secret keys on a system that has no Internet access and never will. Such a system would be quite secure, but not particularly usable.
On the other end of the spectrum are services such as Gmail, which not only make your email available to you, but also to all sorts of other systems within the service that aim to learn about your habits so they can sell this information to advertisers.
This post is about the services in the middle – ones that are usable, can be easily used on mobile devices, and yet make a serious and credible effort to provide better security and privacy than the “big services” run by Google, Yahoo, and Microsoft. Some elements of trust are inherent here; for instance, that the description of the technical nuances of the provider’s services are accurate. (Elements of trust are present in any system; whether your firmware, binaries, etc. are trustworthy.) I used the list at Privacy Tools as a guide to what providers to investigate, supplemented by searches and NoMoreGoogle.
It so happens that most of these services integrate PGP in some way. PGP has long been one of the better ways to have secure communication via email, but it is not always easy for beginners to use. These services make it transparent to a certain degree. None of them are as good as a dedicated client on an airgapped machine, but then again, such a setup isn’t very practical for everyday use. These services give you something better — pretty good, even — but of course not perfect. All of these pay at least lip service to Open Source, some of them actually publishing source for some of their components, but none are fully open.
I pay particular attention to how they handle exchanges with people that do not have PGP, as this kind of communication constitutes the vast majority of my email.
A final comment – if what you really need is an easy and secure way to communicate with one or two people, email itself may not be the right option. Consider Signal.
Protonmail
Protonmail is, in many ways, the gold standard of privacy-respecting email. Every email is stored encrypted in a way that even they can’t see, being decrypted on the client side (using a Javascript PGP implementation or other clients). They definitely seem to be pushing the envelope for security and privacy; they keep no IP logs, don’t require any personal information to set up an account, and go into quite a lot of detail about how your keys are protected.
A side effect of this is that you can’t just access your email with any mail reader. Since the decryption is done on the client side, you pretty much have to use a Protonmail client. They provide clients for iOS and Android, the Web interface, and a “bridge” that exposes IMAP and SMTP ports to localhost and lets you connect a traditional mail client to the system. The bridge, in this case, handles the decryption for you. The bridge works really well and supports Windows, Mac, and Linux, though it is closed source. (The source for the Linux bridge has been “coming soon” for awhile now.) Protonmail provides very good support for bringing your own domain, and in my testing this worked flawlessly. It supports Sieve-based filters, which can also act on envelope recipients (yes!) The web interface is sleek, very well done, tightly integrated, and just generally exceptionally easy to use and just works.
Unfortunately, the mobile clients get the job done for only light use. My opinion: they’re bad. Really bad. For instance:
- There’s no way to change the sort order on a mail folder
- The Android client has an option to automatically download all message bodies. The iOS client lacks this option, but no matter; it doesn’t work on Android anyhow.
- They’re almost completely unusable offline. You can compose a brand new message but that’s it.
There are some other drawbacks. For one, they don’t actually encrypt mail metadata, headers, or subject lines (though this is common to all of the solutions here, Protonmail’s marketing glosses over this). They also seem to have a lot of problems with overly-aggressive systems blocking people’s accounts: here’s a report from 2017, and I’ve seen more recent ones from people that had paid, but then had the account disabled. Apparently protonmail is used by scammers a fair bit and this is a side-effect of offering free, highly secure accounts – some of their deactivations have been legitimate. Nevertheless, it makes me nervous, especially given the high number of reports of this on reddit.
Unfortunately, Proton seems more focused on new products than on fixing these issues. They’ve been long-simmering in the community but what they talk about is more about their upcoming new products.
Protonmail’s terms of service include both a disclaimer that it’s as-is and an SLA, as well as an indemnification clause. Update 2019-03-04: Protonmail’s privacy policy states they use Matomo analytics, that they don’t record your login IP address by default (but IP logs might be kept if you enable it or if they suspect spamming, etc), collect mobile app analytics, IP addresses on incoming messages, etc. Data is retained “indefinitely” for active accounts and for 14 days after account deletion for closed accounts.
Support: email ticket only
Pricing: $4/mo if paid annually; includes 5GB storage, 5 aliases, and 1 custom domain
Location: Switzerland
MFA: TOTP only
Plus address extensions: yes
Transparency report: yes
Mailfence
Mailfence is often mentioned in the same sentence as ProtonMail. They also aim to be a privacy-respecting, secure email solution.
While it is quite possible they use something like LUKS to encrypt data at rest (safeguarding it from a stolen hard drive), unlike ProtonMail, Mailfence does have access to the full content of any plaintext messages sent or received by your account. Mailfence integrates PGP into the Web interface, claiming end-to-end encryption with a “zero-knowledge environment” using, of all things, the same openpgpjs library that is maintained by ProtonMail. While ProtonMail offers a detailed description of key management, I haven’t been able to find this with Mailfence – other than that the private key is stored encrypted on their servers and is protected by a separate passphrase from the login. If we assume the private key is decrypted on the client side, then for PGP-protected communications, the level of security is similar to ProtonMail. With Mailfence, decrypting these messages is a separate operation, while with ProtonMail it happens automatically once logged in. (Update 2019-03-01: Mailfence emailed me, pointing to their document on key storage – it is AES-256 encrypted by the client and stored on the server. They also passed along a link describing their PGP keystore. They also said they plan to work on a feature th encrypt plain text messages.)
While technical measures are part of the story, business policies are another, and Mailfence does seem to have some pretty good policies in place.
In experimenting with it, I found that Mailfence’s filters don’t support filtering based on the envelope recipient, which limits the utility of its aliases since BCC and the like won’t filter properly. A workaround might be possible via the IMAP connection filtering based on Received: headers, but that is somewhat ugly.
Mailfence also supports “secure” documents (word processor, spreadsheet, etc), WebDAV file storage, contacts, and calendars. There is no detail on what makes it “secure” – is it just that it uses TLS or is there something more? I note that the online document editor goes to a URL under writer.zoho.com, so this implies some sort of leakage to me and a possible violation of their “no third-party access to your data” claim. (Update 2019-03-01: Mailfence emailed me to point out that, while it’s not disclosed on the page I liked to, it is disclosed on their blog, and that since I evaluated it, they added a popup warning in the application before sending the documents to Zoho.)
Mailfence supports POP, IMAP, SMTP, and — interestingly — Exchange ActiveSync access to their services. I tested ActiveSync on my Android device, and it appeared to work exactly as planned. This gives a lot of client flexibility and very nice options for calendar and contact sync (*DAV is also supported).
Mailfence’s terms of use is fairly reasonable, though it also includes an indemnification clause. It makes no particular uptime promises. Update 2019-03-04: Per their privacy policy, Mailfence logs IP addresses and use Matomo analytics on the website but not within the application. Deleted messages and documents are retained for 45 days. The policy does not specify retention for logs.
Support: email ticket or business-hours phone support for paying customers
Pricing: EUR 2.50/mo paid annually, includes 5GB storage, 10 aliases, and 1 custom domain
Location: Belgium
MFA: TOTP only
Plus address extensions: Yes
Transparency report: Yes
Mailbox.org
Mailbox.org has been in the hosting business for a long time, and also has a privacy emphasis. Their security is conceptually similar to that of Mailfence. They offer two web-based ways of dealing with PGP: OX Guard and Mailvelope. Mailvelope is a browser extension that does all encryption and decryption on the client side, similar to Mailfence and ProtonMail. OX Guard is part of the Open-Xchange package which mailbox.org uses. It stores the encryption keys on the server, protected by a separate key passphrase, but all encryption and decryption is done server-side. Mailbox’s KB articles on this makes it quite clear and spell out the tradeoffs. The basic upshot is that messages you receive in plaintext will still be theoretically visible to the service itself.
Mailbox.org offers another interesting feature: automatic PGP-encryption of any incoming email that isn’t already encrypted. This encrypts everything inbound. If accessed using Mailvelope or some other external client, it provides equivalent security to ProtonMail. (OX Guard is a little different since the decryption happens server-side.)
They also offer you an @secure.mailbox.org email address that will reject any incoming mail that isn’t properly secured by TLS. You can also send from that address, which will fail to send unless the outgoing connection is properly secured as well. This is one of the more interesting approaches to dealing with the non-PGP-using public. Even if you don’t use that, if you compose in their web interface, you get immediate feedback about the TLS that will be used. It’s not end-to-end, but it’s better than nothing. Mailfence and Protonmail both offer an “secure email” that basically emails a link to a recipient, that links back to their server and requires the recipient to enter a password that was presumably exchanged out of band. Mailbox Guard will automatically go this route when you attempt to send email to someone for whom the PGP keys weren’t known, but goes a step further and invites them to reply there or set up their PGP keys.
Mailbox.org runs Open-Xchange, a semi-Open Source web-based office suite. As such, it also offers calendar, contacts, documents, task lists, IMAP/SMTP/POP, ActiveSync, and so forth. Their KB specifically spells out that things like the calendar are not encrypted with PGP. The filtering does the right thing with envelope recipients.
Mailbox.org has an amazingly comprehensive set of options, a massive knowledge base, even a user forum. Some of the settings I found to be interesting, besides the ones already mentioned, include:
- Spam settings: greylisting on or off, RBL use, executable file attachment blocking, etc.
- Restoring email from a backup
- Disposable addresses (automatically deleted after 30 days)
- A “catch-all” alias, that just counts as one of your regular aliases, and applies to all usernames under a domain not otherwise aliased.
I know Protonmail has frequent third-party security audits; I haven’t seen any mention of this on the mailbox.org site. However, it looks probable that less of their code was written in house, and it may have been audited without a mention.
Overall, I’ve been pretty impressed with them. They give details on EVERYTHING. It’s the geeky sort of comprehensive, professional solution I’d like. I wish it would have full end-to-end transparent encryption like ProtonMail, but honestly what they’re doing is more practical and useful to a lot of folks.
Mailbox has a reasonable T&C (though it does include an indemnity clause as many others do) and a thorough data protection and privacy policy. Some providers don’t log IP addresses at all; mailbox.org does, but destroys them after 4 days. (Update 2019-03-04: Discovered that all of the providers reviewed may do this at times; updated the other reviews and removed incorrect text; mailbox.org’s is actually one of the better policies) mailbox.org goes into a lot more detail than others, and also explicitly supports things such as Tor for greater anonymity.
Support: email ticket (phone for business-level customers)
Pricing: EUR 1/mo for 2GB storage and 3 aliases; EUR 2.50/mo for 5GB storage and 25 aliases. Expansions possible (for instance, 25GB storage costs a total of EUR 3.50/mo)
Location: Germany
MFA: Yubikey, OATH, TOTP, HOTP, MOTP (web interface only)
Plus address extensions: Yes
Transparency Report: Yes
Startmail
Startmail is a service from the people behind the privacy-respecting search engine Startpage. There is not a lot of information about the technical implementation of Startmail, with the exception of a technical white paper from 2016. It is unclear if this white paper remains accurate, but this review will assume it is. There are also some articles in the knowledge base.
I was unable to fully review Startmail, because the free trial is quite limited (doesn’t even support IMAP) and anything past that level requires an up-front payment of $60. While I paid a few dollars for a month’s real account elsewhere, this was rather too much for a few paragraphs’ review.
However, from the trial, it appears to have a feature set roughly akin to Mailfence. Its mail filters are actually more limited, and it’s mail only: no documents, calendars, etc.
Startmail a somewhat unique setup, in which a person’s mail, PGP keys, etc. are stored in a “vault” which turns out to be a LUKS-encrypted volume. This vault is opened when a person logs in and closed when they log out, and controlled by a derivative of their password. On the one hand, this provides an even stronger level of security than Protonmail (since headers are also encrypted). On the other hand, when the vault is “open” – when one must presume it is quite frequently for an account being polled by IMAP – it is no better than anything else.
They explicitly state that they have not had a third-party audit.
Support: ticket only
Pricing: $60/yr ($5/mo), must be paid as an entire year up-front
Location: Netherlands
MFA: TOTP only
Plus address extensions: unknown
Transparency report: no
Not Reviewed
Some other frequently-used providers I didn’t review carefully:
- posteo.de: encrypts your mail using a dovecot extension that decrypts it using a derivation of your password when you connect. Something better than nothing but less than Protonmail. Didn’t evaluate because it didn’t support my own domain.
- Tutanota: Seems to have a security posture similar to ProtonMail, but has no IMAP support at all. If I can’t use emacs to read my mail, I’m not going to bother.
Conclusions
The level of security represented by Protonmail was quite appealing to me. I wish that the service itself was more usable. It looks like an excellent special-needs service, but just isn’t quite there yet as a main mail account for people that have a lot of mail.
I am likely to pursue mailbox.org some more, as although it isn’t as strong as Protonmail when it comes to privacy, it is still pretty good and is amazing on usability and flexibility.
A Final Word on Trust
Trust is a big part of everything going on here. For instance, if you use ProtonMail, where does trust come into play? Well, you trust that they aren’t serving you malicious JavaScript that captures your password and sends it to them out of band. You trust that your browser provides a secure environment for JavaScript and doesn’t have leakage. Or if you use mailbox.org, you trust that the server is providing a secure environment and that when you supply your password for the PGP key, it’s used only for that. ProtonMail will tell you how great it is to have this code client-side. Startmail will tell you how bad Javascript in a browser is for doing things related to security. Both make good, valid points.
To be absolutely sure, it is not possible or practical for any person to verify every component in their stack on every use. Different approaches have different trust models. The very best is still standalone applications.
The providers reviewed here raise the average level of privacy and security on the Internet, and do it by making it easier for the average user. That alone is a good thing and worthy of support. None of them can solve every problem, but all of them are a step up from the standard, which is almost no security at all.
Making a difference
Every day, ask yourself this question: What one thing can I do today that will make this democracy stronger and honor and support its institutions? It doesn’t have to be a big thing. And it probably won’t shake the Earth. The aggregation of them will shake the Earth.
– Benjamin Wittes
I have written some over the past year or two about the dangers facing the country. I have become increasingly alarmed about the state of it. And that Benjamin Wittes quote, along with the terrible tragedy, spurred me to action. Among other things, I did two things I never have done before:
I registered to protest on June 30.
I volunteered to do phone banking with SwingLeft.
And I changed my voter registration from independent to Republican.
No, I have not gone insane. The reason for the latter is that here in Kansas, the Democrats rarely field candidates for most offices. The real action happens in the Republican primary. So if I can vote in that primary, I can have a voice in keeping the crazy out of office. It’s not much, but it’s something.
Today we witnessed, hopefully, the first victory in our battle against the abusive practices happening to children at the southern border. Donald Trump caved, and in so doing, implicitly admitted the lies he and his administration have been telling about the situation. This only happened because enough people thought like Wittes: “I am small, but I can do SOMETHING.” When I called the three Washington offices of my senators and representatives — far-right Republicans all — it was apparent that I was by no means the first to give them an earful about this, and that they were changing their tone because of what they heard. Mind you, they hadn’t taken any ACTION yet, but the calls mattered. The reporting mattered. The attention mattered.
I am going to keep doing what little bit I can. I hope everyone else will too. Let us shake the Earth.
The downfall of… Trump or Democracy?
The future of the United States as a democracy is at risk. That’s plenty scary. More scary is that many Americans know this, but don’t care. And even more astonishing is that this same thing happened 45 years ago.
I remember it clearly. January 30, just a couple weeks ago. On that day, we had the news that FBI deputy director McCabe — a frequent target of apparently-baseless Trump criticism — had been pushed out. The Trump administration refused to enforce the bipartisan set of additional sanctions on Russia. And the House Intelligence Committee voted on party lines to release what we all knew then, and since have seen confirmed, was a memo filled with errors designed to smear people investigating the president, but which nonetheless contained enough classified material to cause an almighty kerfuffle in Washington.
I told my wife that evening, “I think today will be remembered as a turning point. Either to the downfall of Trump, or the downfall of our democracy, but I don’t know which.”
I have not written much about this scandal, because so many quality words have already been written. But it is time to add something.
I was interested in Watergate years ago. Back in middle school, I read All the President’s Men. I wondered what it must have been like to live through those events — corruption at the highest level of government, dirty tricks, not knowing how it would play out. I wished I could have experienced it.
A couple of decades later, I have got my wish and I am not amused. After all:
“If these allegations prove to be true, what they were seeking to steal was not the jewels, money or other property of American citizens, but something much more valuable — their most precious heritage, the right to vote in a free election…
If the allegations… are substantiated, there has been a very serious subversion of the integrity of the electoral process, and the committee will be obliged to consider the manner in which such a subversion affects the continued existence of this nation as a representative democracy, and how, if we are to survive, such subversions may be prevented in the future.”
Sen. Sam Ervin Jr, May 17, 1973
That statement from 45 years ago captures accurately my contemporary fears. If foreign interference in our elections is not only tolerated but embraced, where does that leave us? Are we really a republic anymore?
I have been diving back into Watergate. In One Man Against The World: The Tragedy of Richard Nixon, written by Tim Weiner in 2015, he dives into the Nixon story in unprecedented detail, thanks to the release of many more files from that time. In his very first page, he writes:
[Nixon] made war in pursuit of peace. He committed crimes in the name of the law. He tore the country apart while trying to unite it. He sabotaged his presidency by violating the Constitution. He destroyed himself and damaged the nation through deliberate acts of folly…
He practiced geopolitics without subtlety; he preferred subterfuge and brutality. He dropped bombs and napalm without remorse; he believed they delivered a political message beyond flood and fire. Hr charted the course of the war without a strategy; he delivered victory to his adversaries.
His gravest decisions undermined his allies abroad. His grandest delusions armed his enemies at home…
The truth was not in him; secrecy and deception were his touchstones.
That these words describe another American president, one that I’m sure Weiner had not foreseen, is jarring. The parallels between Nixon and Trump in the pages of Weiner’s book are so strong that one sometimes wonders if Weiner has a more accurate story of Trump than Wolff got – and also if the pages of his book let us see what’s in store for us this year.
Today I started listening to the excellent podcast Slow Burn. If you have time for nothing else, listen to episode 5: True Believers. It discusses the politicization of the Senate Watergate committee, and more ominously, the efforts of reports to understand the people that still supported Nixon — despite all the damning testimony already out there.
Gail Sheehy went to a bar where Nixon supporters gathered, wanting to get their reaction to the Watergate hearings. The supporters didn’t want to watch. They thought the hearings were just an attempt by liberals to take down Nixon. Sheehy found the president’s people to be “angry, demoralized, and disconcertingly comfortable with the idea of a police state run by Richard Nixon.”
These guys felt they were nobodies… except Richard Nixon gave them an identity. He was a tough guy who was “going to get rid of all those anti-war people, anarchists, terrorists… the people that were tearing down our country!”
Art Buchwald’s tongue-in-cheek handy excuses for Nixon backers seems to be copied almost verbatim by Fox News (substitute Hillary’s emails for Chappaquiddick).
And what happened to the scum of Richard Nixon’s era? Yes, some went to jail, but not all.
- Steve King, one of Nixon’s henchmen that kidnapped Martha Mitchell (wife of Attorney General and Nixon henchman John Mitchell) for a week to keep her from spilling the beans on Watergate, beat her up, and had her drugged — well he was appointed by Trump to be ambassador to the Czech Republic and confirmed by the Senate.
- The man that said that the Watergate burglars were “not criminal at heart” because “their only aim was to re-elect the president” later got elected president himself, and pardoned one of the burglars. (Ronald Reagan)
- The man that said “just let the president do his job!” was also elected president (George H. W. Bush)
- The man that finally carried out Nixon’s order to fire special prosecutor Archibald Cox was nominated to the Supreme Court, but his nomination was blocked in the Senate. (Robert Bork) He was, however, on the United States Court of Appeals for 6 years.
- And in an odd conspiracy-laden introduction to a reprint of a youth’s history book on Watergate, none other than Roger Stone, wrapped up in Trump’s shenanigans, was trying to defend Nixon. Oh, and he was a business partner with Paul Manafort and lobbyist for Ferdinand Marcos.
One comfort from all of this is the knowledge that we had been there before. We had lived through an era of great progress in civil rights, and right after that elected a dictatorial crook president. We survived the president’s fervent supporters refusing to believe overwhelming evidence of his crookedness. We survived.
And yet, that is no guarantee. After all, as John Dean put it, Nixon “might have survived if there’d been a Fox News.”
Parsing the GOP’s Health Insurance Statistics
There has been a lot of noise lately about the GOP health care plan (AHCA) and the differences to the current plan (ACA or Obamacare). A lot of statistics are being misinterpreted.
The New York Times has an excellent analysis of some of this. But to pick it apart, I want to highlight a few things:
Many Republicans are touting the CBO’s estimate that, some years out, premiums will be 10% lower under their plan than under the ACA. However, this carries with it a lot of misleading information.
First of all, many are spinning this as if costs would go down. That’s not the case. The premiums would still rise — they would just have risen less by the end of the period than under ACA. That also ignores the immediate spike and throwing millions out of the insurance marketplace altogether.
Now then, where does this 10% number come from? First of all, you have to understand the older people are substantially more expensive to the health system, and therefore more expensive to insure. ACA limited the price differential from the youngest to the oldest people, which meant that in effect some young people were subsidizing older ones on the individual market. The GOP plan removes that limit. Combined with other changes in subsidies and tax credits, this dramatically increases the cost to older people. For instance, the New York Times article cites a CBO estimate that “the price an average 64-year-old earning $26,500 would need to pay after using a subsidy would increase from $1,700 under Obamacare to $14,600 under the Republican plan.”
They further conclude that these exceptionally high rates would be so unaffordable to older people that the older people will simply stop buying insurance on the individual market. This means that the overall risk pool of people in that market is healthier, and therefore the average price is lower.
So, to sum up: the reason that insurance premiums under the GOP plan will rise at a slightly slower rate long-term is that the higher-risk people will be unable to afford insurance in the first place, leaving only the cheaper people to buy in.