Should you still recommend FastMail as a secure alternative?

[mariusz]

In December, Australia passed a law that thwarts strong encryption and possibly forces Australian companies to introduce a government agencies encryption backdoor into their applications. Since FastMail is an Australian company, should it still be recommended as a viable alternative to GMail, then?

[eby]

Fastmail always had the ability to decrypt if requested by law. The other two options on the list do encryption on the user side so it probably makes sense to at least be more specific on what the services offer privacy-wise. https://fastmail.blog/2018/12/21/advocating-for-privacy-aabill-australia/

[sebastienvercammen]

+1

Some standardized details should definitely be included for each external service, to be aware of the details. E.g. For mail this is backdoor potential and legal requirements, VPNs would include IP logging as well.

[jgallias]

ProtonMail and Tutanota are Encrypted Alternatives, but if you don't need the encryption than FastMail is probably the best first choice.

[jgallias]

This site seems best for regular people to consume; these kinds of considerations might be better for sites like https://www.privacytools.io/ and https://prism-break.org I'd say split the baby and specify 1:1 alternatives separately from "encrypted" alternatives

[brianlovin]

Happy to consider removing FastMail, although I'd just counter that almost every other service listed on Security Checklist has a US presence which means it's vulnerable to Gov backdoors and data requests.

[jgallias]

No I think we should leave FastMail and if anything break out ProtonMail and Tutanota into an "Encrypted" section/sub-section. I know of and can see a lot of regular people needing to use and switch between both.