Posteo vs Tutanota vs OpenMailbox
- Anmelden oder Registrieren um Kommentare zu schreiben
I don't need IMAP. More concerned with encryption, libre compliance, green energy, and security. Also needs to support custom domains, so Posteo may be a no go. Advice?
I love that Tutanota allows encryption with an 'agreed password', useful when you are sending to people who do not have/know how to use PGP. Does any other service have that?
I use posteo and it works very well for me.
The german computermagazine ct' listed them as very good when it comes to privacy and secruity.
Link to one article (german): https://www.heise.de/newsticker/meldung/So-funktioniert-E-Mail-made-in-Germany-2188248.html
I don't know the others so it's I'm probably not being very helpful here.
If you have questions regarding posteo i could try to help you.
Thank you! I have verified they do not support custom domains, so that is a no go for me (for now). They do look like the best otherwise.
I've been leaning toward OpenMailBox because of their normal name, IMAP support, and calendar/contact sharing capabilities, but I'm still a bit hesitant given their being in France, which I'd rank below Germany and Switzerland in terms of government respect for privacy.
At this point it looks like the only other alternative for me is KolabNow, but because the name is weird I'd probably need to have to use a custom domain, which would be a hassle to both set up and exit with if I needed to leave.
Kolabnow looks good, are they all libre? Is OpenMailbox all libre?
Those questions make little sense. You can never have control over a service someone else runs. See https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/who-does-that-server-really-serve
That FSF page is about criticizing "cloud computing" like Google Docs, which they call Service As A Software Substitute. It's not a blanket condemnation of getting your email from an email provider.
After all, the FSF also recommends KolabNow here (other than its webmail):
https://www.fsf.org/resources/webmail-systems
KolabNow offers similar services, like Collabra Online which it touts as a webified LibreOffice, but I was referring only to KolabNow's email, contacts, and calendar services.
As for being libre, they don't use that lingo, preferring "open source" which shows their corporate rather than individual orientation, at least for their pay services. But they do use the term "freedom" --
https://kolabnow.com/feature/freedom
If I were using a netbook with Trisquel Mini, or a Librebooted and Trisquelized ASUS C201 Chromebook, I might still use SaaSS services like KolabNow, or NextCloud with OnlyOffice, especially because the internal storage capacity of that computer would be so limited.
I am a translator!
Senor Banana has the point though..
It's not a blanket condemnation of getting your email from an email provider.
I have not pretended it is. Sending/receiving email is not SaaSS. My point only is, well, what I wrote: "You can never have control over a service someone else runs". https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/who-does-that-server-really-serve makes that same point, several times, e.g.:
For the server operator's sake, the programs on the server had better be free; if they are proprietary, their developers/owners have power over the server. That's unfair to the server operator, and doesn't help the server's users at all. But if the programs on the server are free, that doesn't protect the server's users from the effects of SaaSS. These programs liberate the server operator, but not the server's users.
Releasing the server software source code does benefit the community: it enables suitably skilled users to set up similar servers, perhaps changing the software. We recommend using the GNU Affero GPL as the license for programs often used on servers.
But none of these servers would give you control over computing you do on it, unless it's your server (one whose software load you control, regardless of whether the machine is your property).
That said, https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/network-services-arent-free-or-nonfree.html is definitely a better reference. RMS clearly explains there why "the four freedoms that define free software don't make sense for services":
What's clear is that the issues about a service are different from the issues about a program. Thus, for clarity's sake, it is better not to apply the terms “free” and “nonfree” to a service.
Let's suppose a service is implemented using software: the server operator has copies of many programs, and runs them to implement the service. These copies may be free software or not. If the operator developed them and uses them without distributing copies, they are free in a trivial sense since every user (there's only one) has the four freedoms.
If some of them are nonfree, that usually doesn't directly affect users of the service. They are not running those programs; the service operator is running them. In a special situation, these programs can indirectly affect the users of the service: if the service holds private information, users might be concerned that nonfree programs on the server might have back doors allowing someone else to see their data. In effect, nonfree programs on the server require users to trust those programs' developers as well as the service operator. How significant this is in practice depends on the details, including what jobs the nonfree programs do.
However, the one party that is certainly mistreated by the nonfree programs implementing the service is the server operator herself. We don't condemn the server operator for being at the mercy of nonfree software, and we certainly don't boycott her for this. Rather, we are concerned for her freedom, as with any user of nonfree software. Given an opportunity, we try to explain how it curtails her freedom, hoping she will switch to free software.
Conversely, if the service operator runs GNU/Linux or other free software, that's not a virtue that affects you, but rather a benefit for her. We don't praise or thank her for this; rather we felicitate her for making the wise choice.
I've just started using Disroot and they seem very good. They use only free software and they say they do e-mail encryption (although I haven't tried it), as well as free IMAP. They also host a Diaspora* pod, which is cool, as well as cloud storage and some other cool services.
I had to disable LibreJS to sign up, or their captcha thing wouldn't work. Also, their webmail doesn't load up for me when LibreJS is enabled, even though it doesn't flag any of the code on their site as non-free. I've been disabling LibreJS very briefly, to allow the webmail to load, then re-enabling it, which seems to work fine.
Try it out! :-D
They do look good! But no custom domain support. :^(
I've been looking through the Disroot e-mail options some more, and they have a feature where you can create custom 'identities'. For example, I just made: name at domain'. Although, I don't know if you can receive mail sent to those aliases - perhaps you can only send from them? (still, it seems suitable for all manner of mischief ;-) )
Does that sort of thing suit your needs? I don't know where they stand on green energy though ..
Not quite, but thanks for looking into it!
I ended up going with Tutanota, it is working quite well!
- Anmelden oder Registrieren um Kommentare zu schreiben