[UCLA-LUG] Evolution

[Dan Helfman]

On Tue, May 02, 2000 at 07:54:44PM -0400, Matt Helsley wrote:
> On Mon, 1 May 2000, Denis wrote:
> > what are the differences in security between pine and all of those GUIsh
> > email clients?
> > 
> > denis
> Well, pine is more secure only because it resides on the same machine as
> the mail spool file. If I wanted to switch to a GUI client I would be
> forced to:
> a) use a combo of the GUI AND pine when I am at local vs remote sites
> respectively. This leaves various inconsistent mailboxes all over the
> place - making me even more sick.
> 
> b) Download my mail before reading it. AFAIK, all the standard mail
> download protocols (POP, IMAP, etc) are plain text (i.e. insecure). 
> --
> This means I may as well ssh into the mail server and use pine instead.
> 
> Unless of course there exists a way of doing secure mail transfer... I
> think I found a SecurePOP HOWTO by Yosh (?), but I don't think my mail
> servers are running POP in the first place. :P
> 

I get my mail with fetchmail going through an ssh tunnel. Thus, you can
securely get your mail with any protocol that fetchmail supports. And no lag
when typing email, because your client is local!

-- 
Dan Helfman
UCLA Linux Users Group: http://www.linux.ucla.edu
My GnuPG key: http://torsion.org/witten/public-key.txt