Re: [libreoffice-users] Thunderbird potential as the official/default email-client for LO? Re: [board-discuss] BoD decision from 2015-10-05

On 3/3/2016 2:44 PM, Felmon Davis wrote:
> On Thu, 3 Mar 2016, Paul D. Mirowsky wrote:
>
> > My experience with IMAP through a browser is helping friends install 
> > Thunderbird, friends who have had there account taken over in AOL, MS 
> > Mail and YaHoo.
> > When I install Thunderbird, I suggest to them that it does not 
> > require using a browser, greatly reducing the chance of being tripped 
> > up on <click here> websites.
> >
> > Some have gone to POP, others have stayed with IMAP on Thunderbird 
> > and are very happy.  The only reason they ever choose IMAP is 
> > synchronization.
> >
> > In extending Thunderbird with this capability
> >
> > 1. Make secured e-mails without trusting the the server. Security ends
> >   where trust starts. I trust Mozilla to produce a safe POP client and
> >   trust LibreOffice would be in kind if they where to take it over.
> > 2. Have Thunderbird POP installed on multiple devices that align
> >   themselves to e-mail address(es) securely without the interaction of
> >   a server except for PGP.
>
> I'm not sure I wholly grasp what you are proposing but this is a bit 
> clearer.
>
> the best I can make out, the advantage you seek is to prevent 
> confidential data from sitting on servers open to prying eyes.
>
> I don't see how using POP achieves this as it involves a server and as 
> Tansfaafl has pointed out security can be achieved with encryption 
> (whether POP or IMAP, or diskette, or usb drive etc).
I think I was scrambling several separate ideas in my head.

1. Thunderbird POP client generates a synchronization file.
2. Securing the synchronization file for transfer with PGP
3. Synchronization files are a special case, that within the
   Thunderbird program, are handled differently than a regular e-mail,
   but look like standard e-mail to the server.
    1. Because Thunderbird POP creates its own synchronized file, it is
       not dependent on the e-mail server to control deleted, new or
       marked e-mails.
    2. If the mail server(s) are stripped to only message passing for
       POP, it would be simpler, quicker and easier for code review.
    3. Thunderbird is the true source of control for these actions, as
       this is so, the security comes with Thunderbird, not the server(s).

This part is a concept of a middle ground between TOR mail services and 
IMAP.
I think I've beat it to death or pushed it to life.

Thanks
Paul

> sorry the tone of the conversation got rude - computer people 
> sometimes are like overly sensitive artists (oops! now I've insulted 
> two crowds!).
>
> well, interesing but this topic on this thread is probably at its end. 
> to insure it, I'm saying Hitler likes your ideas! <g> that should do it.
>
> f.
>
> > In regards to LibreOffice
> >
> > 1. Sharing document to online services in the cloud is OK, but why does
> >   it have to be Google or Microsoft some other document sharing
> >   service. People want to share their information within a limited
> >   scope of addressees.  If LibreOffice <File - Send - E-mail Document>
> >   it is already leaning in that direction, why not push it a little 
> > more.
> > 2. The graphical interface of LibreOffice has made some huge strides.
> >   If LibreOffice took over Thunderbird, wouldn't it be great to have a
> >   'Properties' panel on the right to e-mail.
> > 3. If we already have <Edit - Track Changes - Record Changes>, why
> >   shouldn't it push those changes to a pre-defined list of people
> >   automatically via Thunderbird.
> >
> > I just don't believe that because somebody else already did it, it 
> > couldn't done better and couldn't be done without a server. Probably 
> > more than 80% the of technology is already written in LibreOffice and 
> > Thunderbird.  It is not starting from zero as has been implied.
> >
> > Thank you for listening
> > Paul
> >
> >
> > On 3/3/2016 4:09 AM, Felmon Davis wrote:
> > > 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.


--
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