On 2013-05-21 3:08 AM, Mark Seiden wrote:
(i know that at least jake and ian understand all the nuances here, probably
better than me.)
bus still, i would like you to consider, for a moment, this question:
suppose there were a service that intentionally wanted to protect recipients of
communications
from malicious traffic? when i was at $big_provider, i spent an awful lot of
time and energy
communicating with colleagues and sharing threat intelligence about bad guys.
Gmail is very efficient at filtering out malicious traffic. It also
spies on all its customers and keeps all their mail in the clear forever.
For this reason I use mail services that perform absolutely no
filtering, and do my own filtering.
If I get filtered, I want to know it. Furtive filtering is a hostile act.
_______________________________________________
cryptography mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.randombit.net/mailman/listinfo/cryptography
