Reconsidering GMAIL

[iri]

also brocaps will definitely like this one (and others may want to unsee it):
http://d3f650ayx9w00n.cloudfront.net/700/22717.jpg

[GeeGee]

You don't have privacy on the Internet. You never had it. People are just freaking out now because they know for sure they are being spied on. It has been like this for years and years, but people didn't know or weren't sure it was happening.Of course thnderbird is more secure than Gmail, but it isn't secure either.

I'm very pro privacy, since the Internet is the last 'free' place on earth, even though it isn't that free at all. The problem is how uncomfortable it is to be secure on the Internet. Of course all of use could all use Tor, thunderbird and secure all of our data. Some of use do most of these things, but that is still not enough to be really secure.
Now there is this new wave of everyone wanting software and things like that to safely store and sent data on the web. It goes beyond just reconsidering if you want to use Gmail or not. This subject is very difficult since most people say things like 'I don't have anything to hide', which was also said in this thread. These people would never give up comfortably browsing the Internet for some security, since they dont see the bigger picture here, which is that this hurts every person, company and government out there. Things like Prism take away the freedom and independence of everyone on the Internet.
Sorry for the wall of text and thanks for reading.

[HoffmanMyster]

Google has always been incredibly transparent about their automated scanning of emails for ad-targeting purposes.  I didn't mind it, so I wasn't deterred from signing up.  But if you mind that, just don't sign up and don't interact in any way with Google services.  They also track what you search to better target ads to you.  Have you searched with Google lately?

The key here is that they tell you everything about this up front and don't keep secrets from you.  That's wonderful.  It allows us all to be informed and make informed decisions about what services to use.

There's a really interesting book about Google and their practices, their Don't be Evil stance, and a bit of history of the company - it's called In The Plex.

[SpAmRaY]

I'm not switching. I don't do anything illegal over e-mail anyways. Or anything illegal.

I don't think any of us do. The point is your personal information is exposed to Google and the government.

The legal/illegal thing is missing the point: what if you are developing a new product (a dish soap, a better mousetrap or an awesome chocolate chip cookie). What if you are a salesman and you want to keep your book of business to yourself? If you are a law-abiding citizen, shouldn't you be able to keep your competitive edge and keep these things secret? Of course you should.

Why would the government want to steal your soap?

Probably how they came up with soap on a rope.

Now there's something I haven't seen for a long time!  Is soap on a rope still made?

http://www.soaponarope.com/

[ishpeck]

"Google has finally admitted they don't respect privacy," said John Simpson, Consumer Watchdog's privacy project director. "People should take them at their word; if you care about your email correspondents' privacy, don't use Gmail."

You should try this: http://www.mailvelope.com/

You encrypt it in the client-side so it won't matter what Google does to the data on their servers.

[Halvar]

Google has always been incredibly transparent about their automated scanning of emails for ad-targeting purposes. 
...

The key here is that they tell you everything about this up front and don't keep secrets from you.  That's wonderful.  It allows us all to be informed and make informed decisions about what services to use.

That might have been true at some point, but it isn't any more. US law demands that email providers can essentially be asked to provide access to all of their data by the authorities and are not allowed to be open about it. The Lavabit case and the files about Microsoft provided to the Guardian by Edward Snowden both showed that very clearly.

http://www.democracynow.org/2013/8/13/exclusive_owner_of_snowdens_email_service

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jul/11/microsoft-nsa-collaboration-user-data

[HoffmanMyster]

Google has always been incredibly transparent about their automated scanning of emails for ad-targeting purposes. 
...

The key here is that they tell you everything about this up front and don't keep secrets from you.  That's wonderful.  It allows us all to be informed and make informed decisions about what services to use.

That might have been true at some point, but it isn't any more. US law demands that providers can essentially be asked to provide access to all of their data by the authorities and are not allowed to be open about it. The Lavabit case and the files about Microsoft provided to the Guardian by Edward Snowden both showed that very clearly.

http://www.democracynow.org/2013/8/13/exclusive_owner_of_snowdens_email_service

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jul/11/microsoft-nsa-collaboration-user-data

Oh.  I would never defend the government.  I was defending Google because they are frequently accused of being evil.  What you've just said, about the US demanding it, is the government's fault - that doesn't make it any less severe, not at all, but it does mean that Google isn't to blame.  Actually, it's more severe this way, because the government will not be held accountable for its actions and we all know that.  So you make a very good point, but it doesn't counter my point - right?  I want to make sure I'm interpreting correctly.

[thebeargentile]

It's still someone else's server you store it on, therefore you are "giving" it away.

Unfortunately, running your own server actually puts you at higher risk of being hacked, since you know less about security than these companies do. Gmail and Mac mail has been hit before, and Hotmail has been hacked too many times to count

My personal server (running Linux) gets hit with a hack attempt once every 30 seconds and that's after firewalling Africa, Asia and Russia.


The feds can always just slip a box between you and the internet and get everything anyhow.

This is such a good point, and it's important to make a distinction between "privacy" and "security."  There is a big difference between Google being able to scan your message for targeted ad placement, and some random person being able to brute force or exploit their way into your personal mail.  I had to support a user a little while back that decided to setup a mail server in cahoots with his buddy, and it ended up being hacked and becoming a spam mule.  The guy just didn't understand basic security strategies, and thought that he would be magically protected if he hosted his own mail. 

[Halvar]

Oh.  I would never defend the government.  I was defending Google because they are frequently accused of being evil.  What you've just said, about the US demanding it, is the government's fault - that doesn't make it any less severe, not at all, but it does mean that Google isn't to blame.  Actually, it's more severe this way, because the government will not be held accountable for its actions and we all know that.  So you make a very good point, but it doesn't counter my point - right?  I want to make sure I'm interpreting correctly.

Well, what you wrote was "they don't keep secrets from you". And that's the point that's not entirely true -- they do keep secrets from you regarding the access they provide for the US authorities, even though they are probabley forced to keep that secret.

For us non-US citizens that is even more severe than it might be for US citizens, because these are not our authorities, and US laws don't protect us against abuse of this data by them at all. It's their duty and purpose to gather as much information about us as they can, so to speak. There is no balancing between rights to privacy and security concern for our data at all. So if Google offered free email or other services to us and told us in their privacy poliy that they're keeping our data private and only scan it anonymously for their own ad services, that's has not been true.

[HoffmanMyster]

I see what you mean.  It's an interesting discussion point to mention these laws with respect to non-US citizens (it's brought up a lot with this topic, it's nothing new, but still).  I've always viewed the internet as the ultimate global network - which of course is what it's supposed to be, so duh.  But my point is that when I put something online I accept the fact that it is not contained within the bounds of my nation, but it instead travels to everywhere in the world, and this means that traditional laws and law structures are really not fit for anything online. 

So it sucks that non-Americans are being affected by my nation's actions, it really does.  But at the same time, when you decided to go online and interact with American companies, there was some inherent risk.  And really, the government is targeting American data - just created by non-Americans, but stored in America (voluntarily, by you).  This does not justify their actions or put blame on you.  The government simply should not be doing what they're doing.  But I do think that this description helps put the situation in line with an analogy - what if you got scammed by an American company, as a non-American?  The American laws would probably have a huge impact on the outcome, because you did business in America, despite being foreign.  In this case the government is screwing you, but it's kind of similar.

Anyway, I feel like I'm not really making a point here, but I'm going to post it anyway.  I mostly just get frustrated with people saying "Google is evil".  No, Google is not evil.  The government is evil and forced Google to do evil things.  Too many people blindly trust the government - even after all this spying stuff has come to light.

[Halvar]

Yes, I fully agree about that, that's a risk that people have taken actively. Also, the US are certainly not the only country doing something like this at all.

Google is not more evil than most other large companies in that industry, I agree. I mean, MS changed the whole architecture of the Skype service (which was originally a peer-to-peer encrypted service) to better accomodate wiretapping...

[davkol]

Anyway, I feel like I'm not really making a point here, but I'm going to post it anyway.  I mostly just get frustrated with people saying "Google is evil".  No, Google is not evil.  The government is evil and forced Google to do evil things.  Too many people blindly trust the government - even after all this spying stuff has come to light.

It's not true anymore that Google isn't evil. Their policy on privacy has changed, they've spied on users illegally, they're acting against net neutrality (see also the recent ban on customer's servers in their network), they tried to actively suppress mapping of contemporary language... not to mention search results censorship and stuff like that.

[Topre]

When were you ever a customer to Google? The saying "if you're not paying, you're the product" is very true with Google. They don't give a **** about you, you are not their customers, you are the product. Because Google is also a public company, those who own the company can do whatever they want, which is usually make more money.

[kmiller8]

This thread's count is 47