Suggestions for a more privacy conscious email provider

Grant Taylor gtaylor at tnetconsulting.net
Mon Dec 4 22:52:57 CST 2017


I'm not personally really worried about this.  -  I was just calling out 
that it is a difference.  For others that do care.  ;-)

On 12/04/2017 03:42 PM, Andy Brezinsky wrote:
> If you're really worried about this, separate your mail storage from the 
> mail transport.  Run an inbound and outbound smarthost on your $5 VPS to 
> queue up mail and deliver it back to your house where your long term 
> mail is stored.  This gives you the benefit of the static IP at the VPS 
> along with the security and cheap storage of having the mail storage in 
> house.

I agree that the VPS Smart Host is a good solution.  However that puts 
you in a position that you are now administering multiple mail servers.

I'd suggest that people new to mail servers stick with a single $5 ~ $10 
/ month VPS that does all of the roles.  -  Then graduate to the 
multiple server solution.

> If you're worried about the short amount of time that messages are 
> queued up on your VPS before making it to your house then you really 
> shouldn't be communicating over email.

I think it depends what part of the communications you're worried about. 
  S/MIME and PGP tend to cover a lot of the (non-metadata) concern.



-- 
Grant. . . .
unix || die

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 3982 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20171204/55404c15/attachment.bin>


More information about the NANOG mailing list