That email clients cleanup #1990
No reviewers
Labels
No Label
🔍🤖 Search Engines
approved
dependencies
duplicate
feedback wanted
high priority
I2P
iOS
low priority
OS
Self-contained networks
Social media
stale
streaming
todo
Tor
WIP
wontfix
XMPP
[m]
₿ cryptocurrency
ℹ️ help wanted
↔️ file sharing
⚙️ web extensions
✨ enhancement
❌ software removal
💬 discussion
🤖 Android
🐛 bug
💢 conflicting
📝 correction
🆘 critical
📧 email
🔒 file encryption
📁 file storage
🦊 Firefox
💻 hardware
🌐 hosting
🏠 housekeeping
🔐 password managers
🧰 productivity tools
🔎 research required
🌐 Social News Aggregators
🆕 software suggestion
👥 team chat
🔒 VPN
🌐 website issue
🚫 Windows
👁️ browsers
🖊️ digital notebooks
🗄️ DNS
🗨️ instant messaging (im)
🇦🇶 translations
No Milestone
No Assignees
1 Participants
Due Date
No due date set.
Dependencies
No dependencies set.
Reference: privacyguides/privacytools.io#1990
Loading…
Reference in New Issue
No description provided.
Delete Branch "patch-5"
Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?
Description
Resolves: #1707
Resolves: #1643
Resolves: #2112
Resolves: https://github.com/privacytools/privacytools.io/issues/2072
Resolves: https://github.com/privacytools/privacytools.io/issues/2136
Resolves: https://github.com/privacytools/privacytools.io/pull/2137
Resolves: https://github.com/privacytools/privacytools.io/issues/2141
Resolves: https://github.com/privacytools/privacytools.io/issues/1248
Resolves: https://github.com/privacytools/privacytools.io/issues/2133 - lets close this for now, as they're working on it.
Check List
I understand that by not opening an issue about a software/service/similar addition/removal, this pull request will be closed without merging.
I have read and understand the contributing guidelines.
I'm thinking we might have a sub category for Mobile clients.. Android and iOS, because on mobile platform things like this are never multi platform.
We should also look into some iOS clients that support PGP. Realistically we should be only recommending clients that can do PGP. Tutanota being the only exception, but that's not really a client, it's a service (so I wouldn't be recommending their app on this page).
I'm thinking Letterbox is probably a bit too experimental at the moment to be added (perhaps), it should be tested by someone with an iOS device. It seems you must side load through Testflight.
I'd probably add https://canarymail.io though, and yes I'm aware it's closed source, but you have a lot less options on iOS anyway.
I think swapping letterbox for Canary Mail works, and maybe letterbox could be put under worth mentioning (unless we are trying to get rid of that)?
This might be a good idea, we may make an exception here to the worth mentioning rule as it's something we want to keep an eye on.
Do we want to create a "Testing tools" section as mentioned in the issue? Or should that be something for the wiki/blog?
We could have a heading maybe instead of "worth mentioning" something like "Future items to be considered:" or something to that effect.
Hmmm, but should we try and distinguish between email clients that could be consdered, like tools such as Email Privacy Tester or some of the other things currently under 'Worth Mentioning' and 'Privacy Email Tools' ?
We don't have to mention Enigmail anymore https://blog.thunderbird.net/2020/07/whats-new-in-thunderbird-78/
I would still mention it, because OpenPGP support is not there yet: "Thunderbird 78.2, due out in the coming months, will offer a new feature that allows you to end-to-end encrypt your email messages via OpenPGP."
ah this is true, and you need that for card reader support.
I don't think Mailvelope deserves to be delisted. Could be but under "worth mentioning" or the proposed "Future items to be considered:" area perhaps?
I'd suggest it under the desktop section actually. It underwent an audit a while back https://www.mailvelope.com/en/blog/mailvelope-4.0
Both posteo.de and mailbox.org have articles for it too:
So I would assume they support it.
It's also well documented https://www.mailvelope.com/en/help
Something about having Mailvelope amongst the other email clients seems odd, perhaps we could create a sepeate section for extensions? Seeing as it isn't an email client, it feels weird that it is in with email clients, or maybe thats just me.
I'm also not opposed to adding https://neomutt.org down the bottom under worth mentioning maybe.
It is a multi platform, and I'm not against TUI clients like https://aerc-mail.org or https://meli.delivery in the future, if they gain some stability.
I'd be ok with that. notmuchmail could also be worth considering.
We should probably add a criteria, most likely just a copypasta of the email one but adapted for clients.
I think this is looking pretty good now.
@dngray same, however it would be good to create a criteria surely?
The issue I have with a criteria is, we test these products. Generally I don't like recommending closed source products, but we sometimes make an exception ie with CanaryMail for example.
I think the main thing we would require is that the client have support for PGP encryption, I think that's really all we can put there. We should also require mail clients support blocking of remote images, as those can be used for tracking pixels:
https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/remote-content-in-messages
@dngray perhaps we should include this somewhere on the page, otherwise I think we're pretty much done here!
Also, I think we could put Enigmail under worth mentioning for desktop?
I'm pretty sure that Enigmail is going to reach EOL somewhere this year since Thunderbird is adding its built in PGP support.
Redirected from Will OpenPGP cards be supported for private key storage?:
How to use Thunderbird 78 with smartcards
We should verify this works first.
I've verified this with 78.5 and this works quite nicely. There is a wizard that helps with conversion.
These releases included OpenPGP fixes, so it's being made 1st class:
Okay, so it looks like you've removed the repo that this PR merges from.
We will need another PR later to, so I'll unlink these issues from this PR.
For some reason this didn't end up merging with master, even though the status says it did, https://github.com/privacytools/privacytools.io/pull/2142 should fix that.