I wonder if gmail doesn't completely trust your email domain? -- Mark
On Thursday, December 6, 2018 at 9:18:01 AM UTC-8, @TiddlyTweeter wrote: > > Greg, much, much appreciated. Its now clearer I get bounced on email when > I initiate an post. Otherwise OK. It somewhat bizarre :-). > > Thank you > J. > > On Thursday, 6 December 2018 18:13:45 UTC+1, Greg Davis wrote: >> >> Josiah, >> I did not get your original message on security. I'm using Gmail, checked >> SPAM and TRASH and it was not in either. These are your messages, as of >> 11:35am this morning, that I had received: >> >> [tw5] Re: TiddlyWiki at the local Community College 6:38am >> >> [tw5] Re: I love TiddlyWiki because... 7:17am >> >> [tw5] Re: Favicon is not displayed 9:36am >> >> [tw5] Re: [I'd like to TALK] ... About Security 9:43am >> >> On Thursday, December 6, 2018 at 9:43:04 AM UTC-5, @TiddlyTweeter wrote: >>> >>> For email users of this list ... I just wrote a post ... Could one of >>> you let me know if you got this message ... >>> >>> (Web users of the group can ignore this post) >>> >>> J. >>> >>> @TiddlyTweeter wrote: >>>> >>>> I'm getting very interested in TW as a potentially secure way to chat, >>>> and publish material that is ONLY for selected users/participants. >>>> >>>> Part of the background is that its becoming clearer that large online >>>> services are NOT, ultimately, able to secure conversation. I spent the >>>> last >>>> two days sorting out the aftermath for me of the Quora meltdown ... >>>> https://www.forbes.com/sites/daveywinder/2018/12/04/quora-hacked-what-happened-what-data-was-stolen-and-what-do-100-million-users-need-to-do-next/ >>>> >>>> The problem is those types of system are owned and run at huge scale by >>>> far off companies and you don't know what they are doing. In fact THEY >>>> often don't know what they are doing till its too late. This just is the >>>> latest of a long line of serious cloud hacks. I basically don't trust them >>>> now. The hassle re-setting everything after an attack is both a PITA and >>>> very worrying. Identity theft can be a very complicated thing to sort out. >>>> >>>> TW seems interesting if you can add *two step verification*. >>>> >>>> Practically I'm very interested in being able to run a TW online just >>>> for conversation with ONE person ... i.e. One Wiki Per Converser. In this >>>> way we can chat AND in teaching I can show all but only what is needed. >>>> This is appropriate for how I work, which is all one-on-one. More >>>> collectivist security models interest me too, but the simple >>>> person-to-person is a specific interest. And I think it may be simpler to >>>> establish really robustly? >>>> >>>> This is just one set of thoughts. My main concern is: can TW be >>>> maximally secure? I think, if it could be demonstrably so on-line it could >>>> be a USP for it. >>>> >>>> Any comments welcomed ... >>>> >>>> These are just early thoughts >>>> Josiah >>>> >>>> >>>> -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TiddlyWiki" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/bc5b6520-1539-4150-8e2b-5b90965d0486%40googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
