Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > alt.comp.microsoft.windows > #1594 > unrolled thread

Re: Email

Back to article view | Back to alt.comp.microsoft.windows

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Re: Email Andy Burnelli <spam@nospam.com> - 2022-05-26 16:04 +0100
    Re: Email Mike Easter <MikeE@ster.invalid> - 2022-05-26 09:29 -0700
      Re: Email Mike Easter <MikeE@ster.invalid> - 2022-05-26 12:08 -0700
    Re: Email Wolffan <akwolffan@zoho.com> - 2022-05-26 13:37 -0400
      Re: Email Mike Easter <MikeE@ster.invalid> - 2022-05-26 11:50 -0700
        Re: Email Wolffan <akwolffan@zoho.com> - 2022-05-30 10:40 -0400

#1594 — Re: Email

wasbit wrote:

> Tutanota - https://tutanota.com/
> Review (July 2021) - https://www.techradar.com/reviews/tutanota-secure-email
> 
> Mailfence - https://mailfence.com/
> Review (May 2022) - https://restoreprivacy.com/email/reviews/mailfence/
> 
> CTemplar - https://ctemplar.com/
> Review (Nov 2020) - https://www.techradar.com/reviews/ctemplar
> 
> I signed up to all of them just to see if it was possible to get a free
> account although I have not used any so far.

Thanks for being purposefully helpful by adding to the technical value.

To further add to the technical value of this newsgroup, I tested them.
 <https://i.postimg.cc/SNJbw7qD/freemail01.jpg> Test of Tutanota failed
 <https://i.postimg.cc/gjj1bm9n/freemail02.jpg> Test of MailFence failed
 <https://i.postimg.cc/VsZ3BrMM/freemail03.jpg> Test of CTemplar failed
 <https://i.postimg.cc/851qwLtd/freemail04.jpg> Test of Proton failed

While there's really no "privacy" in email given the messages themselves
often can contain personal information, it's still useful to not always
give away your home IP address when using those free email servers.

Hence, I always log into my Proton mail accounts using a proxy or vpn of
some sort, which, as almost all know, GMail and Apple hate, which makes
those two email services never private (despite their bullshit advertising
to the contrary that the average user actually believes simply "because
they said so").

On this newsgroup, we're above believing the advertising bullshit, I hope.

To that end, I already knew that Opera, Epic, and Tor proxies work for
Proton mail (as a user), so I wanted to test whether those proxy browsers
work for those mail servers wasbit kindly and helpfully had suggested.

Since some of them (e.g., Tutanota & CTemplar in particular) go to great
lengths to _hide_ the signup button (obviously so that you read through
their sales pitch, which we don't want to read), signup links are below.

Note that Tor is likely the best anonymity we hoi polloi can easily attain, 
the first test is whether they allow you to sign up using the Tor Browser.

Bearing in mind that with Tor you get whatever IP address the tor directory
hands you, I opened up the Mozilla Tor Browser with four tabs, set to each:
1. Tutanota <https://i.postimg.cc/SNJbw7qD/freemail01.jpg>
   <https://mail.tutanota.com/signup#subscription=free&type=private&interval=12>
2. MailFence <https://i.postimg.cc/gjj1bm9n/freemail02.jpg>
   <https://mailfence.com/registration/?lg=en&back=1&nextPage=/sw?type=L&state=0&lf=mailfence>
3. CTemplar <https://i.postimg.cc/VsZ3BrMM/freemail03.jpg>
   <https://mail.ctemplar.com/create-account?plan=FREE&billing=monthly>
4. Proton <https://i.postimg.cc/851qwLtd/freemail04.jpg>
   <https://account.proton.me/signup?plan=free&billing=12&currency=EUR&language=en>

1. Tutanota *Failed*
   "Registration is temporarily blocked for your IP address to avoid abuse.
    Please try again later or use a different internet connection."

2. MailFence *Failed*
   *Requires a Recovery Email Address!*
   *Requires Endless Captcha*

3. CTemplar *Failed*
   *Notice: CTemplar email service will be shutting down on May 26th 2022*

4. Proton *Failed*
   *Requires a Recovery Email Address or SMS!*

Note: I was surprised Proton failed the Tor test, but as I stated, with
Tor, unless you restrict the exit server in the setup, you get whatever IP
address you get from the directory server at the time you run the test.

I stopped at that point because all four failed the most basic test.
I can try again using a lesser level of anonymity (i.e., Opera & Epic).

To others signing up, realize your IP address (for many of us) _is_ you.
That means you need _something_ to hide your IP address when signing up.
(And of course, when using the email; but you have to sign up first.)
-- 
It's easy to post links - but it's a lot more effort to run the tests.

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#1595

Andy Burnelli wrote:
> Proton mail accounts

Proton is 'upgrading'/expanding its 'packaging' while still providing a
free account in addition to its pay accounts.

> The new, updated Proton offers one account, many services, and one
> privacy-by-default ecosystem. You can now enjoy unified protection
> with a modernized look and feel.

> You can now sign in to your Proton Account at our new website, 
> proton.me, our new centralized hub for all our privacy services. 
> Besides giving you full access to all of our services, including 
> Proton Mail, Proton VPN, Proton Calendar, and Proton Drive,
> proton.me is where you will find all our privacy resources in one
> place.



-- 
Mike Easter

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1598

Mike Easter wrote:
> Proton is 'upgrading'/expanding its 'packaging' while still providing a
> free account in addition to its pay accounts.

Previously I had a free proton vpn account, but not a proton mail.

The new packaging has provided my free proton vpn account w/ a new 
proton mail account, calendar, beta drive, along w/ the vpn.

But, it is actually just a 'device'/gambit/strategy to encourage the 
user to upgrade to the features of the pay account.  Still, from my 
perspective, the free has improved a little.

And nowadays there is a proton vpn wireguard integrator for such as 
Ubuntu's (or derivatives) network manager.

-- 
Mike Easter

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1596

On 26 May 2022, Andy Burnelli wrote
(in article <t6o4sp$1qjat$1@news.mixmin.net>):

> Hence, I always log into my Proton mail accounts using a proxy or vpn of
> some sort, which, as almost all know, GMail and Apple hate,

intriguing. I am currently connected, on two different Macs and an iPad, to a 
VPN service and have no problems with email using Apple Mail or Outlook. I 
don’t have a Gmail account to test, but back when I did, I didn’t have 
problems with VPNs then, either. I noticed several users in Apple’s 
community forum and a couple other places who did have a problem... the same 
problem. With the same VPNs. Apple and _most_ VPNs didn’t, and still 
don’t, have problems. Apple and two or three specific services had problems 
in 2019-2020, but those problems seem to have been resolved. No doubt you can 
provide actual evidence to the contrary. (Note that two of the VPN services 
in question were pay services, one was free. Still is, I think.)

Gmail I don’t know about, and care even less.
> which makes
> those two email services never private (despite their bullshit advertising
> to the contrary that the average user actually believes simply "because
> they said so”).

Hmm. Something sent over a VPN using encryption isn’t really private? Tell 
me more.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1597

Wolffan wrote:
> Andy Burnelli wrote
> 
>> Hence, I always log into my Proton mail accounts using a proxy or vpn of
>> some sort, which, as almost all know, GMail and Apple hate,
> 
> intriguing. I am currently connected, on two different Macs and an iPad, to a
> VPN service and have no problems with email using Apple Mail or Outlook. I
> don’t have a Gmail account to test, but back when I did, I didn’t have
> problems with VPNs then, either. I noticed several users in Apple’s
> community forum and a couple other places who did have a problem... the same
> problem. With the same VPNs. Apple and _most_ VPNs didn’t, and still
> don’t, have problems. Apple and two or three specific services had problems
> in 2019-2020, but those problems seem to have been resolved. No doubt you can
> provide actual evidence to the contrary. (Note that two of the VPN services
> in question were pay services, one was free. Still is, I think.)
> 
> Gmail I don’t know about, and care even less.
> 
Gmail's security doesn't 'like' the user to be accessing from a 
'strange' IP (or a strange unrecognized device), so it puts the access 
thru' some more hoops.

The idea seems to be that gmail doesn't consider access just knowing the 
email address and its pw to be sufficient security unless the conditions 
of the access are similar/compatible w/ gmail's security model.

Similar to the condition of a client accessing gmail's IMAP server w/ 
only eml + pw.

ArlenH (or AndyB) has his own ideas of privacy which often clash w/ a 
provider's ideas of security.


-- 
Mike Easter

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1599

On 26 May 2022, Mike Easter wrote
(in article <jfa0f5F1p0qU1@mid.individual.net>):

> Wolffan wrote:
> > Andy Burnelli wrote
> >
> > > Hence, I always log into my Proton mail accounts using a proxy or vpn of
> > > some sort, which, as almost all know, GMail and Apple hate,
> >
> > intriguing. I am currently connected, on two different Macs and an iPad, to
> > a
> > VPN service and have no problems with email using Apple Mail or Outlook. I
> > don’t have a Gmail account to test, but back when I did, I didn’t have
> > problems with VPNs then, either. I noticed several users in Apple’s
> > community forum and a couple other places who did have a problem... the same
> > problem. With the same VPNs. Apple and _most_ VPNs didn’t, and still
> > don’t, have problems. Apple and two or three specific services had
> > problems
> > in 2019-2020, but those problems seem to have been resolved. No doubt you
> > can
> > provide actual evidence to the contrary. (Note that two of the VPN services
> > in question were pay services, one was free. Still is, I think.)
> >
> > Gmail I don’t know about, and care even less.
> Gmail's security doesn't 'like' the user to be accessing from a
> 'strange' IP (or a strange unrecognized device), so it puts the access
> thru' some more hoops.

that’s why I don’t have gmail accounts anymore. Google really hated it 
when I didn’t use their ‘more secure’ apps and webmail, and insisted on 
using Thunderbird and MS Outlook and Apple Mail. They especially hated it 
that I declined to give them a phone number. I attempted to add my gmail 
accounts to a Win10 laptop using Thunderbird... and they were suddenly not 
sure if I was who I said I was. I was locked out. Fortunately I had the 
various accounts set up for IMAP on other devices, and could and did transfer 
all mail and contacts out of Google’s clutches.
>
>
> The idea seems to be that gmail doesn't consider access just knowing the
> email address and its pw to be sufficient security unless the conditions
> of the access are similar/compatible w/ gmail's security model.

Google seems to be yapping about changing their ‘security’ again, as of 
today or tomorrow. It should be interesting to see how many people get locked 
out.
>
>
> Similar to the condition of a client accessing gmail's IMAP server w/
> only eml + pw.
>
> ArlenH (or AndyB) has his own ideas of privacy which often clash w/ a
> provider's ideas of security.

yeah.

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | alt.comp.microsoft.windows

csiph-web