1. 17
  1.  

  2. 4

    IMO it bears saying also that what an incoming IP address means has shifted dramatically in the last 10 years.

    For example when i switched my household from Ipv4 to native ipv6, my Comcast peering point changed from somewhere in Massachusetts where I live to one in Atlanta, Georgia.

    This blew websites trying to authenticate my identity by geo-locating me using my IP address out of the water.

    (There’s a funny story here also about my wife who works for a bank and was acceptance testing some fraud detection software, but that’s better told over a beverage in less broadcast-y circumstances :)

    1. 2

      No, it’s not. It just gives you a false sense of privacy.

      1. 1

        How do you mean?

        Obviously the use of your email for crimes is out of the picture as a subpoena solves that. And global passive adversaries are always going to be watching.

        But for the average person my-pseudonymous-address@emailprovider.com should be sufficient for communicating to other people who lack subpoena or NSA powers, no?

        1. 4

          An awful lot of people have subpoena powers.

          For instance, if you have ever used your personal email address for any communications with your work colleagues, a case involving your workplace could subpoena your emails. You might even be so lucky as to have them semi-publicly accessible afterwards.

      2. 1

        I’ve always wondered how I can do this in Postfix. Not having your webmail add the header is one thing, but not putting the IP in the Received header when using the authenticated submission service is another.