• Dark Arc@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    That mentality is part of the problem. More options is not inherently better, it’s more to maintain, more complexity, more feature requests in that direction (“well can I store a PGP key in the browser that isn’t uploaded to your servers so I can read my non-synced PGP mail”, “can I write mail using that”, “oh I changed my mind, can I convert mail to your PGP key from my PGP key”, “oh I changed my mind again, I’d actually like all my emails changed to my PGP key”, “oh could you sync my PGP key for me”, etc).

    It happens all the time, bending over backwards as a company for niche customers that want to use your toaster as a waffle iron rarely works out well.

    • DreadTowel@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      It’s a simple ask, not bending over backwards. I bet they haven’t touched the email encryption part of code in years, so it doesn’t add any maintenance burden either. I’ve looked at what they do - the only thing they’d need to change is their handling of email headers!

          • Dark Arc@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            Jesus, they literally use GPG and integrate with 3rd party GPG. How did you make that leap?

            • DreadTowel@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Internally, yes. So, they only allow it if it’s under their control. This wouldn’t be a customer servie nightmare because only people who know how to use it would use it. Plus, their version of PGP doesn’t encrypt the subject.

              • Dark Arc@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                No, you can set up PGP encryption to send PGP encrypted mail to non-proton customers via Proton. They’ve also been trying to work on standards that would make retrieving public keys/knowing the recipient accepts PGP automatic.

                You’re blatantly misinformed, and it’s irritating.

                Edit: I’ve blocked this person following their reply, but to their last point, “via Proton” literally means you use their service as a standard PGP mail client no strings attached, that can interact with any other PGP, and with no vendor lockin. That is literally the definition of using an open standard. There’s no insidious plot here.

                • DreadTowel@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Your tone and your assumption that everyone else is an idiot is irritating.

                  The key part of your first sentence is “via Proton”. Support for client side gpg is easy and they’re not doing it either out of some strategic play or purely out of stubbornness. Working on standarts is great! I’ve had a “Visionary” subscription to Proton for years, since before the VPN and all the extra stuff. I like the company, overall. But, as mentioned in my first comment, this is the singular most annoying part of their service to me.