[email protected] wrote: > The respective email providers will then question this, > usually by denying access, and in the worst case, blocking access, > requiring a new password to be set up(!).
Dmitry Alexandrov <[email protected]> wrote to Greg Troxel <[email protected]>: > You are judging from a client point of view, while we are discussing what is > reasonable for a _server_. Their trust has asymmetricity, originating from a > flaw of centralised trust model of X.509, a flaw not technical but social, > yet not less fundamental: a client can and normally shall verify server’s > public key, but the server in practice cannot do the same, because a client > typically has none. By the way, K-9 partly supports public key (certificate) authentication, so if your hoster’s server does too (again, if they are so obsessed with security, they’d better do) and they play well with each other, that may be another right solution to the problem, and would not harm even if switching to TLS solves it. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "K-9 Mail" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
