Email is certainly not secure. IT guys can not only read text email, they can also read passwords. A long while ago in the earlier days of IDS, I was shown an example of how IDS scanner could read the Yahoo password a user types in the browser. But, that doesn't mean anyone would potentially read your email and they don't.
However, in the longer run, the question then is: like a snail mailbox which is fundamentally a right of each person/household - does our individual email in this increasingly connected world fall into the category of individual's right? Should the government or semi-government be responsible for securing the privacy of individuals? Should email be technically free in a real sense? I know this train of thought has several other inter-related points as well but ... we can't just ignore Gmail's reading of our emails - even algorithmically - without paying some attention.
Unless you're an important person, celebrity etc, your email is not worth reading, hence under the context, there aren't people out there reading everyone's email. Proportionally, there wouldn't be enough time in this world for people to read every email of every person. Again, you have to look at it under the context of email having a common denominator property of each and every individual on this planet earth, just as, the post office mail box belongs to each and every household. Assume you can read my email and I can read yours, both of our email content would be intelligible and useless for each of us to waste time on.
Ultimately, the point is not if a machine or human is or can read email....the point is, whether present day civilization should give up this privacy aspect to machines/corporations/government etc. The answer is already obvious, somebody has to manage the technology and that somebody is most likely not you....so by default, you have given up your privacy to someone else, so it can be managed for you.
The more bigger and unresolved problem is whether government or corporation should use machines to profile each and every one of us to preempt potential criminals.
Comments
Email is certainly not secure. IT guys can not only read text email, they can also read passwords. A long while ago in the earlier days of IDS, I was shown an example of how IDS scanner could read the Yahoo password a user types in the browser. But, that doesn't mean anyone would potentially read your email and they don't.
However, in the longer run, the question then is: like a snail mailbox which is fundamentally a right of each person/household - does our individual email in this increasingly connected world fall into the category of individual's right? Should the government or semi-government be responsible for securing the privacy of individuals? Should email be technically free in a real sense? I know this train of thought has several other inter-related points as well but ... we can't just ignore Gmail's reading of our emails - even algorithmically - without paying some attention.
>But, that doesn't mean anyone would potentially read your email and they don't.
Oh yes it does — they can, and they do.
http://gawker.com/5637234/
http://www.net-security.org/secworld.php?id=12048
Unless you're an important person, celebrity etc, your email is not worth reading, hence under the context, there aren't people out there reading everyone's email. Proportionally, there wouldn't be enough time in this world for people to read every email of every person. Again, you have to look at it under the context of email having a common denominator property of each and every individual on this planet earth, just as, the post office mail box belongs to each and every household. Assume you can read my email and I can read yours, both of our email content would be intelligible and useless for each of us to waste time on.
Ultimately, the point is not if a machine or human is or can read email....the point is, whether present day civilization should give up this privacy aspect to machines/corporations/government etc. The answer is already obvious, somebody has to manage the technology and that somebody is most likely not you....so by default, you have given up your privacy to someone else, so it can be managed for you.
The more bigger and unresolved problem is whether government or corporation should use machines to profile each and every one of us to preempt potential criminals.
I think I'm making contribution here, so I'd appreciate people downvoting with a click, would make their counter point instead.