lastweakness

… Okay?

CPU usage is famously terrible with Electron, which i also pointed out in the comment you’re replying to. But yes, having multiple chromium instances running for each “app” is terrible

Yes, it really is that bad. 350 MBs of RAM for something that could otherwise have taken less than 100? That isn’t bad to you? And also, it’s not just RAM. It’s every resource, including CPU, which is especially bad with Electron.

I don’t really mind Electron myself because I have enough resources. But pretending the lack of optimization isn’t a real problem is just not right.

They didn’t just quadruple. They’re orders of magnitude higher these days. So content is a real thing.

But that’s not what’s actually being discussed here, memory usage these days is much more of a problem caused by bad practices rather than just content.

So we’re just going to ignore stuff like Electron, unoptimized assets, etc… Basically every other known problem… Yeah let’s just ignore all that

Facetiming is pretty commonly used i think

But I’ve tried both Mint and Ubuntu and the software updater constantly runs into issues very quickly after install.

I have a Blue-Build based custom distro (not many customisations tbh), that I’m planning to ship for my sister as well as me. So far, updates have been painless because it’s just one base image overwriting the other. I have a feeling that that’s where Linux distros in general is headed. I can imagine Bazzite being just right for you if you’re into gaming.

Pebble is still going pretty well though, so I don’t know if that’s a good comparison

Source: extremely common knowledge and the stranglehold that Google has on webdev

He’s getting at Firefox being unusable for one of his usecases. Though i guess you could argue that he could just use something like brave specifically for that use case while using Firefox for other stuff

Yep, i have the same. But yeah, other than that, damn smooth

Just disable them. It’s not like unused code paths consume resources usually.

Most of systemd stuff is decoupled well. You don’t need to use networkd to make use of resolved for example.

One key aspect that you seem to be missing is that Proton encrypts every mail, including those sent by or sent to unencrypted providers using your pgp key before storing them on the server. This isn’t a case scenario that can be handled without using a bridge. Thunderbird or any other mail client won’t know how to handle that.

What you described only solves the end-to-end encryption portion of the problem Proton is trying to solve. Not zero access.

Yes, mail headers are unencrypted. They never claim otherwise and neither did I. If it were encrypted, it wouldn’t be interoperable, which is something you want it to be as well right? I’ve always been talking about the mail content itself. Unencrypted mail headers don’t make it “not zero access”.

I feel like you’re just not the target audience for Proton. I just use Proton because I’m fine with the web UI and Proton Unlimited is mostly good value for me. I do also pay for Purelymail as i have a few domains and they’ve been wonderful too.

The bridge does the decryption using credentials you give it locally. Sorry for mentioning “auth”. I should have mentioned encryption instead.

Regarding the rest, it comes down to the zero access mailbox encryption’s implementation details. In all described scenarios, you’re not really using your master password as the “key” for your mailbox. But in proton’s and similar services’ case like Tuta, this is true. Any “zero access” service provider offering IMAP access without a bridge is simply lying to you as IMAP (the protocol itself) requires server-side decryption of the content, even if SMTP doesn’t. (Btw, SMTP is really an artificial limitation. Just not IMAP. If they give you smtp access, it wouldn’t send encrypted mails unless specifically configured to do so but would otherwise be the same.)

What you described is encryption at rest, but not zero access encryption (which is what Purelymail does btw).

Whether all this is needed and all depends on your threat model. I think most tech-savvy folks would be happy with something like Purelymail or Migadu tbh…

https://www.privacyguides.org/en/about/privacytools/

They can’t do traditional IMAP/SMTP simply because they always do client-side auth rather than tradition server-side auth, which inherently makes them more trustworthy than every other provider that does offer IMAP/SMTP-based provider to whom you always send your passwords in plaintext. This has the added benefit of having at least your own mailbox always be zero access encrypted.

https://www.privacyguides.org/en/about/privacytools/

Please don’t use privacytools.io anymore. Use privacyguides.org instead

What Proton is doing to e-mail is about the same that WhatsApp, Messenger and others did to messaging - instead of just using an open protocol like XMPP they opted for their closed thing in order to lock people into their apps.

PGP is not closed. What proton has done is make a really cool JS library for PGP as part of their Web UI (openpgpjs.org) which other projects, even those unrelated to Proton have used, like Mailvelope. They’re also pushing the PGP standard itself to support stuff like post-quantum encryption. So this is really odd to hear as Proton is, without a doubt, the most open and interoperable of all the properly encrypted providers.

Lavabit

With Lavabit, you were simply trusting them mostly blindly on their claims. Yeah it worked out that one time but could have gone very wrong.

Yes, they have it because GDPR does require it.

They’ve had it since far before GDPR took affect. They’ve also had bridge which has always allowed external backups and is in fact real time. They now also support forwarding mails, which should also suffice for your use case.

Open sourcing the server software is desired ofc, but would it really mean a lot for security? Not really. All the relevant bits are already open source. And none of it is really non-standard. But i do still wish for that for the sake of transparency. And yeah i wish they would move away from this almost source-available model.

Regarding SMTP, yeah i agree. But they do provide that through bridge and also for business users based on a per-request basis.

There are definitely a few artificial limitations and stuff that really pisses me off, like the limit on aliases in custom domains and SMTP for normal paid users, but a lot of the talk I’m hearing on lemmy about proton is just FUD.