From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/88930 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: David Engster Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general Subject: Re: oauth to be required for gmail Date: Thu, 26 Dec 2019 11:04:27 +0100 Message-ID: <87h81nfln8.fsf@randomsample> References: <8736dkhx05.fsf@bobnewell.net> <877e2uvpve.fsf@gnus.org> <87tv5yxgae.fsf@randomsample> <878sn3qpco.fsf@mid.deneb.enyo.de> <87lfr3fdkr.fsf@randomsample> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: blaine.gmane.org; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:195.159.176.226"; logging-data="252003"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@blaine.gmane.org" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cc: ding@gnus.org To: Bob Newell Original-X-From: ding-owner+M37133@lists.math.uh.edu Thu Dec 26 11:05:35 2019 Return-path: Envelope-to: ding-account@gmane.org Original-Received: from lists1.math.uh.edu ([129.7.128.208]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1ikQ1O-0013NO-Iv for ding-account@gmane.org; Thu, 26 Dec 2019 11:05:34 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.math.uh.edu) by lists1.math.uh.edu with smtp (Exim 4.92.3) (envelope-from ) id 1ikQ0m-0003w8-Un; Thu, 26 Dec 2019 04:04:56 -0600 Original-Received: from mx1.math.uh.edu ([129.7.128.32]) by lists1.math.uh.edu with esmtps (TLSv1.3:TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92.3) (envelope-from ) id 1ikQ0i-0003tS-Bq for ding@lists.math.uh.edu; Thu, 26 Dec 2019 04:04:52 -0600 Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([95.216.78.240]) by mx1.math.uh.edu with esmtps (TLSv1.3:TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92.3) (envelope-from ) id 1ikQ0e-0007Rf-NX for ding@lists.math.uh.edu; Thu, 26 Dec 2019 04:04:52 -0600 Original-Received: from randomsample.de ([5.45.97.173]) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:DHE_RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1ikQ0Y-0007g7-Hq for ding@gnus.org; Thu, 26 Dec 2019 11:04:44 +0100 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=randomsample.de; s=a; h=Content-Type:MIME-Version:Message-ID:Date:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:Cc:To:From; bh=Q2coS8vtnfbBDsMB3MOMIZsFmv3UhI2drbxEye1rtpg=; b=OubAZtEQZdj48iKX+DfpFZyVtfypCWzAu2Hxp4xNV4pMCNqoqKvoIf2WCtVspfRooSFZDt6IatzqSKXznAAK7N8NiPs2m9ho6GKg68I2KiIEMFNRFcyDz38tPGnxRNBP; Original-Received: from ip5f5abab0.dynamic.kabel-deutschland.de ([95.90.186.176] helo=void) by randomsample.de with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1ikQ0X-0003Hg-93; Thu, 26 Dec 2019 11:04:41 +0100 In-Reply-To: (Bob Newell's message of "Mon, 23 Dec 2019 19:16:01 -1000") List-ID: Precedence: bulk Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.gnus.general:88930 Archived-At: > In the end I'll likely just set up the oauth credentials and put in > the necessary software changes, but I have serious considered your > "real" solution. There are a couple of problems, though. I have a lot > of gmail-specific coding (perhaps a bad decision on my part) and a lot > of stuff in the gmail ecosystem. But my fear is that, should I change > to another provider --- I don't know, FastMail or someone--- they > might in time go the same route. Eliminating "less secure" login > methods certainly seems to be trending. Anything is possible, but I highly doubt FastMail would go that route. I don't think they even have their own OAuth2 domain. Instead, they support different forms of two-factor authentication (U2F, OTP, SMS, Yubikeyk. authenticator apps, etc.). For passwords, they have a very nice system were you can set passwords separately for each app you're using. You can view statistics like number of failed logins and remove passwords if you think they might be compromised. They even still support unencrypted protocols like FTP (but you need to set a specific password for it). If I wouldn't self-host, I'd surely consider using FastMail. From what I can see, they really try to support as many use-cases as possible. -David