@jerry @Aaron what we really need is a way to securely send e-mail.

People will continue to send e-mail. There is no way this goes away antime soon. People will send sensitive stuff via e-mail.

We can spend time discussing just how exactly people should not use e-mail, or we can build a system that works.

I like the ideas behind PEP and AutoCrypt. I'd like to see them implemented in more clients.

@rysiek @Aaron I’m all for something that works and is usable. I can’t help but think that we need to take a step back and put some focus on designing the successor to smtp mail, rather than continuing to try to keep adding parts to Frankenstein.

@jerry @rysiek @Aaron@boringpeople.org
I have a feeling that right now, SMTP has the biggest adoption of all federated messagning protocols, and the second place is far far behind. Of all the new communication protocols I've seen recently, they're either popular, or federated, not both. And trying to get your new protocol adopted not just by people for their private communications, but also by companies, govts, and orgs for their internal and external communication is going to be extremely hard.

@Wolf480pl @jerry @Aaron there is some hope in the p2p world.

BitTorrent is not exactly a "messaging" protocol, but got immensely popular.

FireChat, a p2p messaging app, got very popular during protests in Romania. Sadly it's proprietary, so I'd stay far away from it.

Briar doesn't need any introduction in this group, methinks, but is not popular at all... yet.

But, messaging and e-mail are two different things. It's not just about sending the message. It's about the infra around it.

@rysiek @jerry @Aaron@boringpeople.org
Maybe we mean different things by messaging.
IMO email is a messaging protocol, but one with certain interesting properties:
- allows you to send very long messages, with attachments, after preparing and proof-reading the whole thing
- is a de-facto standard for official online communication, incl. official documents
- everyone has it

@Wolf480pl @jerry @Aaron exectamente! But we have to be explicit about what we're talking about (incidentally, anyone who heard me talk in private about infosec and internet messaging knows just *how* explicit I get, but I digress).

The last two of your points is what I meant by "infra around it". That's the hard part. The network effect.

But we have a head start since SMTP is an open standard.


@rysiek @jerry @Aaron@boringpeople.org
so what we need is:
- define a set of email extensions
- define a set of banned email features
- get every client and server to implement the extensions
- get most clients or servers to implement the feature bans
not necessarily in that order?

@Wolf480pl @jerry @Aaron servers need not implement the "feature bans".

And clients blocking HTML in encrypted e-mail is slowly happening already -- with the shining example of Mailpile: github.com/mailpile/Mailpile/i

@rysiek @jerry @Aaron@boringpeople.org yeah I guess it depends on a particular feature whether it needs to be banned client- or server-side, hence "or". Maybe the set of undesirable server features is empty, I don't know.

Sign in to participate in the conversation

Welcome to your niu world ! We are a cute and loving international community O(≧▽≦)O !