yashsingh1/xdaforums huggingface dataset:
[Android Apps and Games] nubla:
Thanks for the screenshot, that helped jog my memory. In my case I had only the option of entering a phone number, since I use a de-Googled phone running e-OS and have no SIM, and I don't have a physical security key. I suppose I could have gotten the latter but it seems to add a fair bit of complication.. I begrudgingly ended up used a voip DID, but that's still a phone number.. even a Google Voice number could be used but that is dangerous.

If @GalaxyA325G has a Google enabled phone then perhaps the on-device prompt will be the least obtrusive way to enable 2SV/2FV, after which an authenticator app can be configured and the Google prompt option removed if so desired. Or of course there's the physical security key option for those serious about security.

I don't see how you arrive at this conclusion. By the same logic your regular password is trading away your privacy...

With 2SV/2FA you are essentially creating a 2nd password/key that is ideally (though not necessarily...) stored on a different medium. That different medium can be anything, like an OTP app/program, or even a piece of paper (one time backup codes).

Since you have clearly researched so many related topics, I would suggest learning a bit more about 2SV/2FA such as OTP apps to demystify it for yourself. I initially found it confusing too.

The only problem I see here is that Google does not give the option to set up authenticator apps right away and first forces one of the 3 options listed by @mkasimd.

P.S. Apologies for dragging on this off-topic discussion... On the topic of FairEmail, I'm just reallyl glad it's still working. I'm not sure if it's just me, but after having switched to app passwords from Oauth due to the failures a few days ago, I seem to be getting slightly better battery life.
[Android Apps and Games] mkasimd:
You claim that no matter what method would be available, it'd always be trading privacy for security when it comes down to 2FA.

As you talk about logic, let's go down to mathematical logic and proofs, such that I will undeniably prove that this claim is untrue. The proof method I'm going to use is also called "reductio ad absurdum"

Claim: Let 2FA be a method that always without any exception trades privacy for security.

Proof 1 (generally about 2FA):

Let us configure a naive 2FA that uses offline-working TOTP applications as well as backup codes (this one is not offered by Google, but it's a classical 2FA approach). As you can choose which TOTP app you use and as you can limit the TOTP app's access to the internet (e.g. using netguard), it doesn't have any privacy implications. Therefore you do not trade privacy for security. Therefore the claim is wrong.

Proof 2 (now including Google 2FA):

Let us now buy a FIDO U2F key offline at a store paid in cash (no credit card, no electronic trace of purchase). This bought item later when configuring it generates a random secret key upon use with which any entries are stored encrypted within the purchased item (nobody knows that random key, it's on the FIDO hardware only AFAIK). The FIDO key is added to your Google account while only you have physical access to the purchased device such that exclusively you determine when, where and how the FIDO key is used. Therefore there are no privacy implications. Therefore you do not trade privacy for security. Therefore the claim is wrong even when Google is concerned.

Remember: paying in cash is still possible while due to COVID, you can even wear a mask while purchasing without catching any negative attention. If you are afraid the serial numbers of the money you withdrew in an ATM could be traced back to you, you can also go to a grocery store first and ensure you have changed the banknotes. You can also use gloves to leave no fingerprint at all. It purely depends on your level of distrust towards the society.

Now as for free privacy-friendly email providers: I use disroot.org as well as maintain an own mail server at a German cloud services provider. Disroot is a community-driven email provider and a Dutch foundation financed through donations.

Anyways, you can use a FIDO key and have zero implications to your privacy where giving personal information to Google is concerned, or you can use a different email provider such as Disroot and not use Google at all, or you can host your own mail server and not use Google at all. You have multiple choices available. Therefore, your claim about having no other choice is proven wrong as well.

Either way, using Google 2FA + app password within FairEmail was and still is - as proven above - possible without "selling" your privacy. Just using Gmail in general is hardly possible without chipping away some of your privacy. The latter statement however is independent from Google's 2FA.

Hope the logic behind each statement is explained transparently enough now. At least, I won't respond any further on this topic as everything's already told IMO.
[Android Apps and Games] M66B:
Using a Gmail account in FairEmail will inevitably leak your IP address, and thus your rough location, but nothing else, except the obvious: the messages you receive and sent and their meta data (sender, receiver, subject, etc).

Note that it is not a good idea to use a VPN to hide your IP address because you'll probably run into "Please log in via your web browser" at an inconvenient moment.

For HOTP and TOTP I recommend FreeOTP+.

I think enough has been said about the privacy aspects of a Google account now. Whether a Google account on your device is a privacy concern or not is off-topic here. If you want to keep discussing about this, please create another XDA thread for this. You can leave a link to the created thread here if you wish.
[Android Apps and Games] M66B:
The status page has been update.

FairEmail in the Play Store

Status and frequently asked questions

email.faircode.eu
[Android Apps and Games] M66B:
I received a response from the EU of which you can find a summary here:

FairEmail in the Play Store

Status and frequently asked questions

email.faircode.eu

"... undertakings, even dominant, are in principle free to define the terms of use of their products and services"
[Android Apps and Games] TooMuchSloeGin:
In this context, it may be useful to remind those who use either KeePass2 on the desktop and/or the KeePass2Android port (as I am doing for ages) that both nowadays support TOTP OOTB, so if you use them anyway (or plan to) you should be able to get rid of a separate app for TOTP.
[Android Apps and Games] TooMuchSloeGin:
This is an attempt to share a couple things I have learned while trying to understand how FairEmail (FE) works. The first and most important thing is that FE sports something its developer variously calls "Unified Inbox Folders" or "Unified Folders". IMO, these terms are complete and total misnomers and figuring out what they really mean has cost me several false starts and some hours of trial and error. For me, a "unified inbox" is a virtual Inbox that collects mails from several accounts and presents them in a single "virtual folder". This feature is something I do not want at all as I keep my (seven) accounts strictly separate and unified inboxes are of no use to me (though I accept others may find them useful). Further and by extension, "unified folder" for me implied that some other folders, ie Sent or Outbox, will similarly collect all mails from the various accounts' Sent or Outbox folders... etc.

So when selecting the item to be shown on the start screen I completely disregarded the two options with "Unified" in them and also the option for showing the primary account (as I have not defined one) and instead went for the list of accounts. That works but it was far from ideal. It was only much later when I was, against my own ideas, experimenting with those so-called "Unified Folders" (which very confusingly are also called "Unified Inbox Folders" elsewhere) that I discovered that these beasts have nothing whatsoever to do with any form of "unifying" or "unified" folders. A so-called "Unified Folder" is simply a folder, any folder, that shows up in a list, the list of so-called "Unified Folders". At least for me, these wordings are highly misleading and a much better name, IMO, would have been "Main Folders" or "Selected Folders" -- in which case I would have looked into that feature much earlier. Alternatively, if that wording has to stay, then a very basic introduction (or explanation) into the working of the four different start-up screens would be a good idea.

Further, as I don't use a "Unified Inbox" (I also do not use the System folders (in the Navigation menu)) the button in the top bar to switch to these is utterly useless to me. By contrast, a button (or some other means) to switch between the so-called "Unified Folders" list and the Accounts screen would be great as these are the only two screens I will ever use. As things stand I can't get to this screen w/o changing the relevant start-up setting which is way to much tapping and swiping!

Last but not least, the visual appearance of the app, while working, is stone ugly. Too many font styles and font sizes, buttons and links (in a somewhat haphazard arrangement), garish colours... a complete eye sore. Some may like it, but I find it distracting and loud and not at all "deliberately minimalistic by design, so you can concentrate on reading and writing messages." A further theme that is not as visually distracting would be very welcome.

My 2p of course, like all the rest of this post. Hope it helps someone.
[Android Apps and Games] M66B:
My guess is you'll want to use the 'Accounts' startup screen. Note the you can tap left to go to the folder list of an account and right to go to the inbox of an account.

'Unified folders' refer to the folders selected for the unified inbox, by default all inboxes. So, this is the right term IMHO. Main or selected folders will for most people be more confusing. 'Unified inboxes' or 'Inbox folders' might be an alternative, but this will be confusing if something else than inboxes are selected.

There is just one font family and there are just three font sizes, exactly according to the material design standard.

You can collapse the buttons in a message, even though there are only a few of them.

If you mean the setup screen: there are parts functionally deliberate ugly. However, this is not where you spent most of the time!
[Android Apps and Games] herlgl:
I just realized that your website has no link to actually buy FairEmail.

There is this page which describes FairEmail: https://email.faircode.eu/

And there is actually a site to buy from: https://email.faircode.eu/donate/

Wouldn't it make sense to link the "donate" website on the main FE website?
[Android Apps and Games] M66B:
If I would add a link, Google will automatically remove the app from the Play store.

This is not a story because this happened in the past with NetGuard.
[Android Apps and Games] TooMuchSloeGin:
No, I definitely do not want the Accounts screen (I really love it if somebody tells me what I want). As I already wrote I started with that screen but it turned out that this is far from ideal for my workflow. Only after discovering that I can long-press various (but not all) folders in my various accounts and collect the selected ones in a single screen (those dubious "Unified Folders" which are also called "Unified Inbox Folders") was I getting to something that looked workable.

As to the stone ugliness we will have to agree to disagree, material design standard or not.

I think I will get FE to do what I need but I will refrain from any further posts (other than severe bugs).
[Android Apps and Games] M66B:
I read your comment, and I suggested the 'Accounts' start screen with a remark about tapping left or right in an attempt to help you ...

Much have been said about the design. What I have learned is that it is impossible to make everybody perfectly happy.
[Android Apps and Games] TooMuchSloeGin:
I wrote that message about the various screens and "Unified Folders" not because I needed any help. If you read this fully you will have seen that I had already found a solution which works well for me and does not include the account screen.

I wrote it solely because the wording of the "Unified" options is IMO so misleading that I wish I had read what I've written above before setting up FE as that would have saved me quite some time. And this is not a "design" problem, this is a case of mislabelling stuff and leading users (or rather, at least one user) down the garden path with those "Unified" monikers.

Over and out.
[Android Apps and Games] fraschi51:
'Unified Inbox' is a very common term in the mail space.
[Android Apps and Games] Daniel1515:
I personally prefer Authenticator Pro. It's also open-source and also has a Google Wear app, so I can get the 2FA codes on my watch (Samsung Galaxy Watch4) which is very convenient :)

There's also Aegis which is great too. It doesn't support watches as they're very principled about only using open-source libraries, whereas watch support requires proprietary Google libraries.
[Android Apps and Games] meisanerd:
OK, just an FYI, you do not sacrifice privacy by enabling 2FA. 2FA is quite possibly better for privacy than passwords, depending on what you pick for passwords, as it isn't generated by your thoughts.

Basically, a private key gets generated. This private key is then used to encrypt the current time as a 6 digit number. This 6 digit number is then confirmed as correct on the other side by having it do the same encryption. Absolutely nothing requires any sort of online access for that to work, nor any sort of identifying information. At the end of the day, a TOTP 2FA solution is just a password, that changes every 30 seconds, and cannot (depending on implementation on the receiving end) be used more than once. So it is better from a security perspective, as well as potentially a privacy one.

The app password solution is actually decreasing security as far as Google accounts go, because it is basically a password that bypasses 2FA. So by setting up an app password, you are basically saying you can log into Google with either your (gmail address + password + 2fa), or (gmail address + app password). In both of those instances, if the password is leaked or guessed, only the first will protect you from having someone able to log in.

Now, that being said, there is potential privacy loss depending on what the end service requires when you set up 2FA, but that is totally unrelated to 2FA in and of itself. And in this instance, if you have issues giving Google a phone number (which they mainly require because people are stupid and like to break their 2FA apps), you are likely already sacrificing privacy anyway, as they can still scan all of your emails, as well as track things like your location based on connecting IP address anyway. This app will not protect you from Google. What it does protect you from is all those tracking cookies and images that are embedded in the email itself. Although it is debatable how much that would help anyway as Google's scanning has also been known to trigger those tracking implementations in certain instances, so it might not even prevent the sender from knowing your account has received the email. All in all, if you are that paranoid about privacy, you should probably be setting up your own email account, or going through one of the providers that actually does provide privacy, rather than using Google.
[Android Apps and Games] de_Wolf:
@GalaxyA325G, did you read this message from today?
[Android Apps and Games] GalaxyA325G:
That message answers the questions that OTHER people asked, where I agree with Marcel that whether or not having a Google mail account is private has NOTHING whatsoever to do with Fair Email per se.

I said that so many times that I'm surprised you're directing Marcel's post to me, since I'm NOT the person who needs to understand that fact.

I said exactly what Marcel said, many times, and well before Marcel said it, so you're preaching to the choir if you direct that post from Marcel to me.

What Marcel answered in a sentence is what it took me multiple posts to get into the heads of the patently illogical people who claimed otherwise.

It's THEY who Marcel's answer is for; not me (I agree with what Marcel said even before he said it).

What Marcel answered is the issue for those illogical people who don't understand that the privacy is ASTOUNDINGLY different between:

a. Just periodically logging into a Google mail server, and,

b. Permanently setting up an on-device Google Account

I know the difference.

Marcel knows the difference.

The still-unanswered yet patently logical question I have for Marcel to answer is critically important for a privacy-based MUA...

QUESTION ABOUT FAIR EMAIL OPTIONS:

Assuming the starting point of no on-device Google Account...

Q: Which of these Fair Email Google mail server options is "most" private?

1. 2SV/2FA (using any of a half dozen secondary methods), or,

2. What Fair Email terms "GMail (Android)", or,

3. What Fair Email terms "GMail (OAuth)".

Note Marcel knows the answer, so he can instantly nip this tangent in the bud by answering that question in a single word... (where I suspect the answer is undoubtably #3 but others strongly think it's #1 apparently, so I could be wrong - but it's NEVER gonna be #2.
[Android Apps and Games] M66B:
The desired single word answer is "none". Google scans all your messages and you can only hope that the gathered information isn't used in an un-private way. Option 1 (assumed to be app passwords) and option 3 do not send extra information to Google. Option 2 requires an on-device Google account. You can control the sync options of a Google account via the Android settings. If these options work as expected and are turned off, no information should be sent to Google. This applies to all other Google services and apps, like Maps and Drive, too. You'll need to go into the settings and turn things off and trust that Google honors this.

I expect to see no more messages about this subject anymore, with no exceptions for anyone. If you want to continue discussing about this, you should create a new XDA thread for this.
[Android Apps and Games] x2k13:
Maybe some Mod/Admin should move all of this to a new, seperate (!) thread and leave a link?
[Android Apps and Games] Oswald Boelcke:
Sir, I've noted this statement. I assume you want any related post being deleted even without your report. Am I correct?

Regards

Oswald Boelcke

Senior Moderator
[Android Apps and Games] M66B:
After two friendly reminders, removing seems reasonable to me.
[Android Apps and Games] Timmmmaaahh!:
Ikr 😂

Spoiler content hidden.

Now, let's try and keep this conversation friendly and fun. Have an amazing Sunday everyone!
[Android Apps and Games] M66B:
This will be in the next version:

How do I use Send?

Edit: I am not sure how this should be called in the app.

Some background:

Firefox Send - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org
[Android Apps and Games] de_Wolf:
Sorry, my English is not the best, so it is not so easy for me to understand complex texts.

I don't use the Firefox browser on Android because it doesn't allow too many important add-ons, I use alternative browsers (Kiwi-/Iceraven browser).

As I understood it for me the easiest way is to transfer the files via a console:

GitHub - timvisee/ffsend: :mailbox_with_mail: Easily and securely share files from the command line. A fully featured Firefox Send client.

:mailbox_with_mail: Easily and securely share files from the command line. A fully featured Firefox Send client. - timvisee/ffsend

github.com

If I am completely wrong, also sorry :-)
[Android Apps and Games] Timmmmaaahh!:
FairFile?
[Android Apps and Games] M66B:
Suppose you want to send an attachment safely and privately. In the next version you can use the insert link dialog to upload such a file and insert a link to the uploaded file into a message. The file, including the meta data, like the file name, is encrypted on your device and can be downloaded and decrypted via the link only, which includes a secret key. This key is not stored on the server. In other words, the file is end-to-end encrypted.
[Android Apps and Games] M66B:
A bad review because trashing a conversation trashes all messages in a conversation. Right, what else should happen?!
[Android Apps and Games] M66B:
This is a preview version with the new 'Send' (FairFile ;-) function:

https://bitbucket.org/M66B/fairemail-test/downloads/FairEmail-v1.1946a-github-send-release.apk
[Android Apps and Games] Irish_Dude:
I see Virus total integration recently got added to Fair Email but I cant see any virus total options in settings. Do we have to activate the virus total option marcel? Im guessing it scans incoming emails for viruses?

Fair email just keeps getting better and better, outstanding work Marcel
[Android Apps and Games] mkasimd:
Please go to the inbox, open the hamburger menu and select "about". Check your version number. If it is lower than 1.1942, then you must update FairEmail first.

Otherwise, see here:

FairEmail/FAQ.md at master · M66B/FairEmail

Fully featured, open source, privacy friendly email app for Android - M66B/FairEmail

github.com
[Android Apps and Games] Irish_Dude:
Im all setup now, thanks buddy
[Android Apps and Games] dctrbnsttr:
Works great for me!
[Android Apps and Games] chris122380:
That's how all email clients I've ever used handle conversation emails.
[Android Apps and Games] NetsuiteGuy:
I have a fairly simple rule that moves all messages from a certain sender or to a certain recipient into a folder.

This suppresses the notification.

Is this expected behavior?

Is there a way around it?
[Android Apps and Games] topcaser:
Hi, my default browser is Fennec. Nevertheless until yesterday fairmail did ask me for each link which browser to open. That's totally fine to me and totally appreciated behaviour. But now fairmail opens bromite browser defaultly without showing me the browser dialogue. How can I revert back?
[Android Apps and Games] M66B:
The rule is probably not the problem. Are new message notifications enabled for the target folder?
[Android Apps and Games] M66B:
I guess this FAQ can help you:

https://github.com/M66B/FairEmail/blob/master/FAQ.md#user-content-faq182
[Android Apps and Games] NetsuiteGuy:
That did it thanks.
[Android Apps and Games] M66B:
This is pretty frustrating:

I asked for increasing the token grant rate limit again, for the fifth time, but I have no hope anymore that this will be granted.
[Android Apps and Games] M66B:
Like I said before, I can't support the app like this. So, it might be over and out now.

Effectively, Google is limiting the growth of the app this way and I can't do anything about it. So, please don't complain about whining, etc.
[Android Apps and Games] de_Wolf:
Is it possible to ask G***le for an explanation of the exact causes of these fluctuations in the token grant rate? At the moment, neither the sharp decline nor the sharp increase seems to be very comprehensible.
[Android Apps and Games] M66B:
Given how they responded so far, I think this is pointless.
[Android Apps and Games] de_Wolf:
Well, considering what is at stake for you/us, I would try it and not bury my head in the sand with the thought "This doesn't make any sense...".

That's just my opinion.
[Android Apps and Games] M66B:
I will try as reply to the message I receive from Google.
[Android Apps and Games] M66B:
I am getting death threats again. To the guy doing this: given the other sorrows I have this won't help to keep the project alive, on the contrary. Note that this app was made for you and not for me. I can do without you.
[Android Apps and Games] de_Wolf:
For what reason, @M66B?
[Android Apps and Games] M66B:
You tell me. I don't know.
[Android Apps and Games] mkasimd:
There's never a reason for death threats..
[Android Apps and Games] M66B:
I replied like always, but I don't think Google will raise the token grant limit.

I don't know what to do anymore, but I can't support the app like this because what should I tell people who can't use or configure a Gmail account?