Slashdot Mirror


Ask Slashdot: Recommendations For Non-US Based Email Providers?

First time accepted submitter jlnance writes "I don't particularly like the NSA looking over my shoulder. As the scope of its various data gathering programs comes to light, it is apparent to me that the only way to avoid being watched is to use servers based in countries which are unlikely to respond to US requests for information. I realize I am trading surveillance by the NSA for surveillance by the KGB or equivalent, but I'm less troubled by that. I searched briefly for services similar to ymail or gmail which are not hosted in the US. I didn't come up with much. Surely they exist? What are your experiences with this?"

38 of 410 comments (clear)

  1. Not sure I understand the question. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Actual communication security implies point-to-point security. In such a setting, a third-party service doesn't make any sense. Hence either what you're look for can't exist, or you won't know if it's secure.

    1. Re:Not sure I understand the question. by ImdatS · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Yes, correct.

      In my experience, having a mail server provider in Europe (e.g.) and using PGP/GPG could help. The problem is of course that your recipient also needs PGP/GPG.

      1&1 and Deutsche Telekom in Germany just announced that (paraphrasing it) they will take email security more seriously now. You might want t get an email account at GMX in Germany (product of 1&1) and then use PGP/GPG for fully confidential communication. I wouldn't use their webmail interface, rather suggest to use their IMAP/POP Interface using SSL/TLS.

      Using PGP/GPG *and* a foreign email service provider helps in (a) encrypting your email (PGP/GPG), and (b) (if used with SSL/TLS) communication, also hiding the sender/recipient identification, including your email's subject.

      On the other hand, I don't know if that would be really secure (for [b] at least), as the German secret service (BND) seems to forward communication information to the NSA (at least the meta-information)...

      If you really want to communicate securely, I recommend a "dead mailbox"-principle electronically, but by using PGP/GPG to encrypt the file in question, maybe even hiding the content as a picture or video...

    2. Re:Not sure I understand the question. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You would have to lease space in a datacenter, buy a domain, setup VPN, use securelinux (though probably not since it was written by the NSA) or solaris, run a VM inside that, always do a restore before accessing email and read through the tens of thousands of lines of code to delete out anything that MAY compromise your security (best use open source in this case). Also you will have to ensure that everyone you email is doing the same thing. So you may want to start mandating that everyone you email use your domain, but since it will b so expensie you should probably charge for it to at a minimum off set costs. Though you should probably charge enough to ensure that you can afford to quit your current job to do full time maintenance.

      After all that, probably be best you find a neutral country that has no agreements with the US and will refuse to work with it.

      But good luck!

    3. Re:Not sure I understand the question. by the_B0fh · · Score: 4, Funny

      If you restore your VM (that hosts your email) before accessing your email, didn't that just wipe out your emails?

      You need more paranoia please.

    4. Re:Not sure I understand the question. by methano · · Score: 4, Funny

      What if you used a pigeon? A third-party pigeon, that is.

      But like he said, you still can't be sure it's secure.

      And, of course, you'd need to use a US-based pigeon.

    5. Re:Not sure I understand the question. by tqk · · Score: 5, Interesting

      You would have to lease space in a datacenter ...

      Uh, no. Use Linux (or *BSD) and point your local SMTP at your ISP's Smarthost. Encrypt files locally with GnuPG and send them as attachments. The only difficult part is expecting the recipients to do the same in reverse and to treat your privacy as seriously as you do. There, you'll need to exercise judgment as to who to trust and with what (just like in every other area of life).

      I really couldn't give a rat's ass how many cycles the NSA wastes on trying to crack my encrypted attachments. I consider myself fortunate in not having to support them financially (I'm non-US). I've toyed with the idea of making a cronjob blast out emails to random addresses simply to supply them with stuff to waste time and effort on, but I don't really care that much to bother.

      If I ever manage to contact the Medellin or Cali or Zeta cartels' IT guys, I'll have a proposal for them, but so far no joy there. That would be great fun.

      --
      "Tongue tied and twisted, just an Earth bound misfit ..." -- Pink Floyd.
    6. Re:Not sure I understand the question. by Aighearach · · Score: 4, Funny

      The problem with pigeons is that they're susceptible to man-in-the-middle attacks.

    7. Re:Not sure I understand the question. by Kwpolska · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Let’s host in Antarctica instead!

    8. Re:Not sure I understand the question. by jader3rd · · Score: 4, Funny

      The problem with pigeons is that they're susceptible to man-in-the-middle attacks.

      I thought they were susceptible to cat-in-the-middle attacks.

    9. Re:Not sure I understand the question. by Aighearach · · Score: 4, Informative

      You realize that the NSA facilities in Germany are still intact, right? What was canceled is the part where the US, UK, and France could request Germany to surveillance on their behalf. Whatever basis the data sharing was under is not known, and there is no reason to believe it has been canceled. Chancellor Merkel denied it was even happening until it got leaked. Now you believe her that they stopped, on account of canceling the most public related agreement? I guess the NSA employees on US bases in Germany just sit around and play cards all day now, right?

      It has also been said publicly by German government officials that the old agreement was obsolete, and hadn't been actually used as the authority for anything since reunification! If you're going to fall for a bait-and-switch that is already reported on, how can you hope to avoid secret government surveillance?

      Actually what you really do is reward companies in the countries that have the least transparency, where you know the least about what they do to spy on your, or help others spy on you. You're better off choosing companies that take the risk of publicly asking for more transparency, and employing your own security such as PGP/GPG

    10. Re:Not sure I understand the question. by Znork · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Of course, the part that the NSA et al seems most interested in is the source and destinations of your mails to map your associations. By sending via your ISP smarthost you're still handing them that info, so if you want to cut them out of the loop you need to vpn the mail relaying outside their grasp and ensure encrypted smtp/tls direct between endpoints.

      Your random mail idea does screw with them in a nice way tho as it'd mess up their social graph and probably get yourself classified as an uninteresting spammer after which you can freely inform islamic insurgents how they can enlarge their manhood and obtain large fortunes from Africa by sending a small upfront payment.

      But for actual secure comms it's probably better to use i2p or some other darknet. And traffic on that screws with the snoops as well.

  2. Runbox.com by Gaygirlie · · Score: 5, Informative

    I am using www.runbox.com myself: it's a service based in Norway, it's pretty cheap considering, they do not have any NSA-ties or the likes. I dunno what else to say about it, really, so I'll just copypaste this from their site:

    Email Privacy in Norway

    Some countries, especially in Europe, have a constitutional guarantee of secrecy of correspondence, wherein email is equated with letters and therefore protected from all types of screening and surveillance. In electronic communication, this principle protects not only the message contents but also the logs of when and from/to whom messages have been sent.

    In Norway, freedom of expression and privacy of correspondence is governed by Article 100 and 102 of the Constitution and the implementation of the European Convention on Human Rights in the Norwegian Human Rights Act, especially Article 8: Right to respect for private and family life.

    Additionally, the Personal Data Act as set forth by the Norwegian Data Inspectorate regulates collection, storage, and processing of personal data.

    The Data Inspectorate was established January 1, 1980 and was among the first agencies in the world to facilitate the protection of individuals from violation of their right to privacy through processing of their personal data.

    Central principles of the Norwegian data privacy regulations are:

            Personal data must only be collected by private entities when consent from the user has been obtained.
            Personal data must not be used for purposes inconsistent with the initial purpose of collection except with consent from the user.
            Personal data must not be stored longer than required by the purpose of collection.
            Personal data must be kept confidential unless required by law or court order.

    Finally, the coming Data Retention Directive will soon be implemented in Norway but will only regulate electronic infrastructure providers, which Runbox is not.

    1. Re:Runbox.com by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Personal data must be kept confidential unless required by law or court order.

      That's a hole you can drive a truck though. The NSA justifies everything on those grounds.

    2. Re:Runbox.com by MightyMartian · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Besides, the way I understand it, whatever privacy protections remain apply to US citizens on US soil. Use a foreign email serviced, and it sounds like all bets are off.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    3. Re:Runbox.com by msobkow · · Score: 5, Interesting

      The Norway data pipes probably run through the UK, as do most of the pipes in the EU. So rather than installing back doors on Norway's servers, the UK just sniffs the big data pipe traffic and captures that directly. And they give not one whit about your constitutional protections, any more than the US respects the Canadian constitution and Charter of Rights when they sniff our traffic while it passes through the big data pipes south of the border.

      I don't think people are getting it yet.

      Between Australia, the UK, and the US, something on the order of 90% of the global data traffic runs through the leeching backbone nodes that have sniffers attached to them. They don't need the cooperation of your local governments and ISPs to do their dirty work.

      --
      I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.
    4. Re:Runbox.com by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      Yeah, it ends 100 miles inside the border.

    5. Re:Runbox.com by BUL2294 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      But the on-site / server backdoors are necessary unless there's some unknown backdoor built into SSL that the NSA, MI6, IDF, etc. can utilize. By default, my GMail uses HTTPS, but the NSA's backdoor to Google servers negates that advantage.

      So, unless there's an unknown backdoor built into SSL, as long as Runbox.com uses HTTPS, how should "Australia, the UK, the US", etc. know what was transmitted unless they use a brute-force attack?

      Just yesterday, NPR indicated that US-based cloud platforms stand to lose between $21 billion and $35 billion over the next few years over the NSA scandal... http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=210570888 . Lavamail and Silent Circle shut down unexpectedly & destroyed all data they had to not get caught up in the scandal...

      --
      Windows 3.1x calc: 3.11 - 3.10 = 0.00
  3. KGB better than NSA? by tonytally · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You'd really rather have the KGB looking over your shoulder rather than NSA? Surely you are joking.

    1. Re:KGB better than NSA? by Opportunist · · Score: 5, Insightful

      As a US citizen, I sure as hell would prefer the KGB looking over my shoulder. the chance that it has any kind of impact on my life is far lower.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    2. Re:KGB better than NSA? by gmuslera · · Score: 3, Interesting

      The KGB still don't send drones to kill innocents to other countries, things that happen with the NSA if you are not in US, and maybe in a short time, even if you are.

    3. Re:KGB better than NSA? by PolygamousRanchKid+ · · Score: 3, Informative

      The FSB and SVR, the artists formally known as KGB, have limited resources. They are used to going after those that they evalutate as threats.

      The NSA has unlimited resources. The NSA just goes after everybody. They can afford to skip the evaluation phase.

      --
      Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
    4. Re:KGB better than NSA? by gmuslera · · Score: 3, Insightful

      So far the countries that i've seen to do indiscriminated killing in other, not in war, countries because "there are hidden terrorists" are US and Israel. Maybe they manage to kill the suspicious people (with no certain that they were guilty, but they redefine them as plain terrorist after all), but they kill also everyone around. US sent drones to schools, funerals, weddings, games and so on because "there are a suspicious meeting there". I don't know what Russia is or may be doing, but i know what US is doing, and is bad enough.

    5. Re:KGB better than NSA? by TheGratefulNet · · Score: 4, Funny

      so, you're saying my video card is now bugging me, too??

      I knew it. I just knew it! nvidia is not to be trusted either.

      --

      --
      "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
    6. Re:KGB better than NSA? by cervesaebraciator · · Score: 3, Informative

      And, don't forget, Putin is the former head of the KGB.

      FYI: Putin was not, as is commonly stated, head of the KGB. The highest rank he achieved before his resignation was Lt. Colonel. He was appointed head of the FSB in '98 by Yeltsin, however. FSB is one of the successor organizations of the KGB, covering similar ground to that of MI5 (particularly counter intelligence and domestic surveillance, all the fun of the FBI and NSA rolled into one).

      It is interesting in this regard to note that George H.W. Bush was himself once Director of Central Intelligence (CIA head). One might almost get the impression that being privy to the secrets gathered by a state security apparatus has political advantages.

  4. Wrong question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Since the NSA programs are designed primarily to intercept communications between US and non-US folks, if you are in the US and store your mail somewhere else you are asking the NSA to collect all of it. Today, if you are in the US and have your hosting in the US the NSA only gets the parts that go between you and someone in another country (or where you said some "interesting" thing like "that new pressure cooker that fits in my backpack for camping is the bomb". If you move your mail to another country, the NSA will be collecting it all (assuming your communications end point is still in the US). Yes, encryption, VPN, yada, yada. You really don't gain much by moving it.

    1. Re:Wrong Question by julesh · · Score: 5, Informative

      Evidence suggests that scaling quantum computing to the large number of qubits required to decrypt 2kbit RSA would be extraordinarily expensive, if possible at all. The largest quantum computer[1] built so far outside of secret institutions has, I believe, 14 qubits (I may be a little out-of-date, but not by a long way). Scaling has occurred at a fairly constant linear rate of about 1 qubit per annum since the earliest machines were produced. There's no signs of an exponential take-off the way there was with conventional computing hardware, which suggests that the expense of scaling to larger and larger quantum computers doesn't get decrease the way it does with silicon.

      Some data points:

      1998: 3 qubits
      2000: 5 qubits
      2001: 7 qubits (largest achieved to date with single atom containing all qubits in different degrees of freedom)
      2005: 8 qubits
      2006: 12 qubits
      2011: 14 qubits

      This is the best private industry can do. I'd be surprised if the NSA were doing more than a factor of 10 better. To crack 2048-bit RSA, about 3000 qubits would be required[2], or about 20 times my best guess as the limit of what the NSA could have achieved. Besides, Shor's algorithm is not instant: even if it's faster than any classical algorithm, it's still third-order polynomial on the number of bits in the input, and quantum computers don't perform individual operations particularly quickly, so even if we assume the NSA has managed to make a quantum computer that's a thousand times faster per operation than existing private systems, to factor a 2048-bit RSA key on a 3,000 qubit computer would take about 8.6 billion operations running at about 10-100us each, which is to say approximately 1 to 10 days of time on the (enormously expensive) system (of which they almost certainly only have one, which will therefore have a very long prioritized queue of jobs waiting for it).

      And upgrade to 4096 bits, and they'll need a quantum computer with 6,000 qubits, and the job will take somewhere between a week and three months to complete.

      [1] I'm excluding so-called quantum annealing computers from this, e.g. various systems produced by D-Wave, because they cannot be used to run Shor's algorithm, so are not a threat to RSA. This is not so much an entry into the debate as to whether or not they should be classified as quantum computers, but a practical decision based on the subject under discussion.
      [2] traditionally, this would be 4096 (twice the number of bits in the input), but this arxiv paper claims 1.5 x bits in input or fewer is achievable through a method I don't really understand

  5. Roll your own... by flogger · · Score: 5, Insightful

    My email server is sitting in my laundry room. I also host some message forums and picture galleries for just my family and friends. It is how I communicate with them.

    Only about 1/3 of my family and friends use my server for email.... So any over seas email service is going to have the same limitation as mine. If I email my sister from my server, that email goes to gmail. So now the NSA knows what I sent to my sister.

    So unless everyone you communicate with is outside of the US or on a server outside of NSA's reach, it won;t do any good.

    Sorry to break it to you, but in the war against terror, the American people have lost.

    --
    ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
    "First things first -- but not necessarily in that order"
    -- The Doctor, "Doctor
    1. Re:Roll your own... by wezelboy · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Let's get hypothetical...

      One of your nephews or cousins that uses your e-mail server decides to purchase a pressure cooker online. He also has some friends in Europe that he e-mails once in a while. What do you do when the NSA asks you for all the e-mails stored on your server?

    2. Re:Roll your own... by ImdatS · · Score: 4, Interesting

      A while ago I had a similar thought. My solution was quite easy:

      Install an email system that does the the following: Normally, when "standard" email arrives, it is processed as usual.

      When an email arrives from an authorized sender (such as you), in a very specially formatted way and with special content, the mail server immediately starts destroying all emails, all communication logs, and all attached backups. It literally not only unlinks the files, but also replaces all impacted file-contents with "0". You can even do it on block-level completely reformat (overwrite) the hard disc in a way that it looks crashed. It then initiates a clean re-install of a clean, unused, fresh out-of-the-box system.

      The only that you have to do is to make sure none of the backups are available... Then again, I would probably NOT have historical backups of emails outside somewhere, but rather backups on devices that *are* connected to the server and erase those too...

      End result: "Ooops, sorry, but it seems, my server has crashed..."

  6. Use your own domain and host by MarioMax · · Score: 3, Informative

    Domain names are relatively cheap, and hosting is relatively cheap. I go that route myself. The only people that have access to my server is the hosting company (which is no worse than Google to be honest)

    if you have the means, the very best solution is to run an email server out of your home or place of business.

  7. Wrong Question by ocularsinister · · Score: 5, Insightful

    What you should be asking is "How do I get everyone to sign and encrypt their emails as a matter of course?"

  8. KGB definitely preferable except for Russians by Bruce66423 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Ultimately there are two reasons why - apart from the yuck factor, which is legitimate - why you don't want the NSA reading your email 1) If you say or do something which generates a shadow of suspicion, the probability that the Russians will act on it, to the extent of a SWAT team beating your door down and shooting your dog, is lower 2) If you are politically active, it's going to be less likely that the Russians will provide data to the FBI about your dubious activities Sure - avoiding either is a better ideal - but perversely I would prefer the KGB, unless I am resident in Russia, in which case they would be a very bad idea.

  9. Makes no difference. by dgatwood · · Score: 4, Insightful

    From all reports, most or all of the countries where spying occurs, despite their very vocal public outcry against what the U.S. is doing, are in fact sharing information with the U.S. government. And even if they don't, the U.S. can simply grab the data on its way out of the country to that server.

    The only way to make email secure is to abandon email in favor of a protocol that supports end-to-end encryption, such as iMessage, XMPP, etc. and to tweak your centralized server and/or clients to require that end-to-end encryption be used. And even then, the metadata (who sent mail to whom) is at risk. The only way to prevent metadata from being trackable is to either develop a new system in which locating a user does not require credentials and use Tor to connect to the centralized server (e.g. use wide-area Bonjour to advertise your current IP address) or design a whole new messaging system built in a darknet.

    Either way, email is and has always been just as secure as sending a postcard (which is to say, completely insecure), and cannot readily be improved upon significantly in this regard without starting over from scratch.

    --

    Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

  10. use encryption by stenvar · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Many E-mail providers overseas require you to give personal information to sign up, often due to legal requirements in those countries; sometimes they verify that with a credit card number or simply by comparing your address data with government databases. Many countries (including much of Europe) also have data retention requirements and give their own police and intelligence service nearly free reign, and they may well exchange data with the US anyway, so it's not clear you're better off. And some providers of anonymous services may simply be fronts for intelligence agencies. And, of course, if the other parties to your E-mail use a US provider, your data is already available to US intelligence agencies, and your foreign E-mail account will stick out.

    As an American, if you want to communicate privately, you have to use encryption, and preferably steganography. Getting an E-mail account in another country really doesn't help very much.

  11. Securing email is complicated by FuzzNugget · · Score: 3, Informative

    Securing your local data is easy, because you have end-to-end control. Securing email is complicated because you'll never be able to maintain complete control. It requires coordination and mutual understanding between you and everyone you email, and that's just not going to happen unless you're in a tightly-controlled organization and all of your communication is internal. I'm assuming you're an end-user at home, not an IT manager in a large corporate environment.

    If your ISP allows it (and that's a big if in today's spam wars), you could run your own email server to host email service for yourself, your family and your friends and require SSL/TLS connections for all communication. Don't forget TrueCrypt or luks/dm-crypt for disk encryption on the server itself. But this only protects against eavesdropping and snooping for email users on your hosted service. There's basically nothing you can do about emails sent or received from outside of your own service. And then there's the assumption that email recipients inside of your hosted service will adequately secure their own devices (good luck getting grandma to use TrueCrypt).

    If you can actually accomplish this, well, you have better powers of persuasion than I (my boss is a smart and tech savvy guy and I can't even convince him). Your best bet is: don't use email for anything you wouldn't want publicized.

  12. Re:NSA and foreign mail hosts by Clsid · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I think there are ways around it, not a 100% perfect but at least make their job a lot harder. Services like lavabit were good and it goes to show that they needed to use some nasty legal tactics to make them open up. Those tactics are not available when you use providers in countries like Russia or China. Sure, they can tap the underwater fiber all they want, but I think it still is better than nothing.

  13. Re:Norway has a 4th Amendment? by MightyMartian · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I'm not attempting to argue with you. The point is not what the NSA should or should not be doing, but rather about the practical considerations. On US soil, the claim is all they can gather is metadata (the SMTP envelop). Start using a foreign mail service, and it's very likely that everything after the DATA command is being stored as well.

    --
    The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
  14. That won't work: 1and1 has management in the US. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    1and1.com is a US-based company, or has management staff in the United States, so that won't work.

    This is what I understand:
    1) The U.S. government can force any company to do anything it wants.
    2) The U.S. government can demand that the company keep that secret.
    3) The U.S. government can put a U.S. employee in prison if 1 and 2 are not followed.

    Seems to me to be a vicious, anti-democratic government.