![[TEST] Document Foundation Community](https://communitytest.documentfoundation.org/images/discourse-logo-sketch.png){kind=logo}
Oh - not to mention that it doesn't even accomplish the goal.
What about all of the email prior to adding 'Thunderbird 3' to the mix?
Or your new phone?
As I said, IMAP is the only sane, rational solution.
We're talking POP and Thunderbird.
IMAP is a pre-existing condition.
The ability for POP clients to keep all of their shared clients current is a glaring omission that should be rectified.
I regret not having the ability to do this myself.
IMAP is a security risk that increases the attack surface area. YaHoo, should I say more.
The only rational solution is to get in the boat to make sure the earth isn't flat.
When we engage in conversation, we are working together to find an answer, even if they are different questions. We are stepping into the boat.
I hope we've inspired someone who is capable of doing this to begin their journey.
Thank you Tanstaafl
We're talking POP and Thunderbird.
And like I said, POP simply isn't designed for such usage.
IMAP is a pre-existing condition.
No idea what you mean by that.
The ability for POP clients to keep all of their shared clients current
is a glaring omission that should be rectified.
It was, a very long time ago. The rectification is called:
IMAP.
IMAP is a security risk that increases the attack surface area. YaHoo,
should I say more.
No, you really shouldn't, because you obviously don't know what you're
talking about.
The only thing IMAP *might* have in common with Yahoo is that Yahoo
*may* support the protocol (whether or not it does, and if so how well,
is another question that I have zero interest in, because anyone who
uses it for email is someone who doesn't have a clue).
Ok, I don't know what Data Replication is.
Please see http://searchsqlserver.techtarget.com/definition/database-replication
I don't know what Key Exchange is.
Please see https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U62S8SchxX4
But I think somebody does.
The ability for POP clients to keep all of their shared clients current is a glaring omission that should be rectified.
Can you please rephrase that.
If you literally mean what you wrote, then please study both the POP and
IMAP protocol specifications, before making any suggestions as to what
should be considered for either an email host, or an email client.
IMAP is a security risk that increases the attack surface area.
As far as security, both IMAP and POP are security risks. They are
solutions to different threat models.
jonathon
Neither of which relate to serverless mail synchronization of local mail
stores.
What relates....
Thunderbird is a database of information. The fact that there is no data replication built in is not the inhibiting factor to doing so.
I have underlined the pertinent words from a quoted definition from the previously mentioned URL.
http://searchsqlserver.techtarget.com/definition/database-replication
*Database replication* is the frequent electronic copying data _from a __*database*__in __one computer__or server__to a __*database*__in another__so that all users share the same level of information._ The result is a distributed *database* in which users can access data relevant to their tasks without interfering with the work of others.
I believe it says "computer or server" not just server.
*Pretty Good Privacy* (*PGP*) is a data encryption <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data_encryption> and decryption computer program <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_program> that provides cryptographic <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cryptographic> privacy <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Privacy> and authentication <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authentication> for data communication. PGP is often used for signing, encrypting, and decrypting <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decrypting> texts, e-mails, files, directories, and whole disk partitions and to increase the security of e-mail communications.
Quoted from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pretty_Good_Privacy
The use of Key Exchange for the data replication suggests a way of safely internally exchanging the replicated data.
Most of the engine to use it is already in Thunderbird.
Please see https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/digitally-signing-and-encrypting-messages
Why are they not applicable "serverless mail synchronization of local mail stores"?
The ability for POP clients to keep all of their shared clients current is a glaring omission that should be rectified.
Can you please rephrase that.
If you literally mean what you wrote, then please study both the POP and
IMAP protocol specifications, before making any suggestions as to what
should be considered for either an email host, or an email client.
If LibreOffice where to involve itself with Thunderbird, It should meet the standard.
That is to say that if used on its own, it meets the standard of POP...But with LibreOffice, it can do much more.
IMAP is a security risk that increases the attack surface area.
As far as security, both IMAP and POP are security risks. They are
solutions to different threat models.jonathon
As true a statement as can written or read.
Thanks
Paul
Paul, would you please just stop talking about a subject about which you
obviously know LESS than nothing?
You're giving me a headache from so much laughing.
I guess you don't know much about the history of email. Originally,
people read their email on the computer it was delivered to. Then POP
allowed them to download to another computer, such as those new fangled
"PCs". POP was never intended to be used by more than one device.
Simply leaving a message on the server for a period of time, so that it
could be read on another device, was nothing more than a hack to get
around the limitations of POP. What you're asking for is a complete
redesign of POP and you still won't have what IMAP is designed to do.
Also, how is IMAP a security problem, given that the entire Internet is
not secure and mail servers are finally moving to StartTSL to encrypt
between servers. I run my own IMAP server and access it only via SSL/TLS
Yahoo has supported IMAP for a few years now. Of course they're not the
only IMAP provider.
Thunderbird is a database of information. The fact that there is no
data replication built in is not the inhibiting factor to doing so.
It is an email client, nothing more. If you want replication, you're
going to need some means for all clients to sync. An IMAP server does
precisely that.
The use of Key Exchange for the data replication suggests a way of
safely internally exchanging the replicated data.
Most of the engine to use it is already in Thunderbird.
Please see
https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/digitally-signing-and-encrypting-messagesWhy are they not applicable "serverless mail synchronization of local
mail stores"?
Key exchange is simply a method of exchanging encryption keys. I
mentioned this earlier in the context of directory servers. However
those are not the same as syncing email over multiple devices and,
again, key exchange requires a server.
If, as is usually done with IMAP, the email is stored on a server that
is neither owned, nor operated, nor controlled by the recipient of the
email, then the security issue is the IMAP vendor turning that email
over to third parties without your knowledge, authorization, or consent.
US Law is clear that such email _can_ legally be turned over to third
parties, if certain specific conditions are met. It is extremely
difficult for IMAP users to be out of compliance with those specific
conditions. The irony here is that when the law was passed, not only was
the norm to be out of compliance, but the being in compliance with those
conditions took a series of active steps, on the part of the end user.
Back then, no matter how hard Joe Sixpack tried, he would not have in
compliance with those conditions.(Ah, the days when 100 kb mailboxes
were the norm, and mail sysadmins were ruthless about delting your
email, regardless of your desires.)
jonathon
If you're worried about that then any email server is a risk, other than
your own. Until recently, all email was sent as plain text over the
public Internet. It was very easy to intercept. Also, if you're
leaving email on a POP server for a period of time, it's going to be
there when someone comes looking for it. If you really want security,
the answer is, as it has been for centuries, use encryption. Many
people already do that with PGP or X.509 certificates. Always assume
the "enemy" can eavesdrop on your communications, so protect the content
with encryption.
it's going to be there when someone comes looking for it.
That is not the threat model I was addressing.
jonathon
Then what was it?
Paul,
for the benefit of us lurkers trying to follow this discussion, could you in a brief statement explain why you think POP should be preferred? (I believe this is your general point? if not, a clear statement is welcome.)
I used to use POP (and it's still set up on a couple of my machines albeit not currently in use) but mainly I'm on IMAP. what I liked about POP was the ease of making local backups of email. it's been a couple of yrs since I've explored options in IMAP but that's probably not a big issue now.
anyway, please, just a brief statement of your take would be helpful.
and please, no violence, gentlemen -- no violence, I beg of you! Consider the furniture!
f.
You should be able to configure your IMAP client to download messages
for "offline" mode. There is also an archive function.
> I used to use POP (and it's still set up on a couple of my machines
> albeit not currently in use) but mainly I'm on IMAP. what I liked
> about POP was the ease of making local backups of email. it's been a
> couple of yrs since I've explored options in IMAP but that's probably
> not a big issue now.You should be able to configure your IMAP client to download messages
for "offline" mode. There is also an archive function.
yeah, like I said, got to do my research again. at the time I was wrestling
with gmail though I'd love an easy/easier way to mount a google-drive, but
that's a different matter and off-topic.
f.
--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscribe@global.libreoffice.org
Problems?
http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be
deleted
You should be able to configure your IMAP client to download messages
for "offline" mode. There is also an archive function.
yeah, like I said, got to do my research again. at the time I was wrestling
with gmail
Google provides a way to download backups of all of your google stuff
(calendars, contacts and email) in one fell swoop:
https://takeout.google.com/settings/takeout
though I'd love an easy/easier way to mount a google-drive, but
that's a different matter and off-topic.