Ugh. I'm generally happy with roaming on #GoogleFi, but its German MVNO partner is blocking port 995, so I can't access my mail server, and tech support is like, "If you want to report a mail problem, you must initiate a chat request from that email address." I'm stuck in circles - obviously I can't login to the Google Fi app with a non-Google address, and this isn't an email problem, it's a connectivity problem. ALL outbounds on 995 are blocked, not just to my server.
Googling "port 995 abuse" produces a magnificent total of 0 results, so it's difficult to see what threat case they're actually defending against. Are they worried that people might … read their own email? Gotta stamp that shit out, fast.
@ferricoxide@angusm I don't leave any data on a server where it can be subpoenaed or hacked. All of my data sits on my laptop on an encrypted drive and in an encrypted backup in a remote site that I rotate once a week
If you own the server and control whether or not a message-deletion is truly a message deletion.
If you have a mail service provider that worries about data-integrity, they're probably also going to be backing up your mail spool for some number of days. And, if anyone's coming at them with a subpoena-like instrument (like an NSL), you're not going to know if they've been required to not only turn over backups, but dupe-on-arrival any emails that transit their system that are to/from you.
Overall, if you aren't doing message body encryption, whether you leave your message on the server or not can make little practical difference.
Lastly, depending who you're looking to protect your mail contents from, the message-body can be significantly less important than its metadata.
@ferricoxide@angusm no, I am on a mail server with half a dozen users run by a close friend and I know what the data retention policies are and I only read it from one device.
@pluralistic for years I maintained an alternative backup port 25 for my mail relay just for those ISPs that did stupid shit like this. Harder to move other standard ports around, especially on mobile
@pluralistic thank you for giving me another reason to not consider GoogleFi. I toy with the idea every couple of years, read a small but poignant horror story, and retreat safely back to T-mobile. While not perfect, I have none of the Google issues ya'll talk about.
@pauliehedron Yeah, I know. I have my EFF VPN that I can set up on my phone but a) it's a pain and b) mobile is slow enough so much of the time that I don't want to add a layer of indirection.
@pluralistic@pauliehedron dunno what tech the EFF is using, but if issues like this get to the point you’re consistently hedging against them, WireGuard is great, and very low overhead. I roll my own, I know there are commercial providers out there too, I just don’t use them.
I've been routing all Internet traffic through my own OpenVPN server at home for several years. On the phone I can't really say I notice much at all, it works just as well as if I was connected directly. There is an overhead, yes, but in a good setup you shouldn't really notice that much of it in real life.
This way Internet sites can't even tell that easy if or when I'm travelling; I have the same semi-static public IP address anyhow, regardless of where I am in real life.