[Android Apps and Games] jow1234:
Normally, I would have kept quiet - but since you mentioned me explicitly, here we go.

What exactly did you expect? I made a few observations and suggestions (politely and with quite a bit of explanation added). You turned it down, which, BTW, is perfectly OK. FairEmail is your "baby", and you can do with it whatever you want, go in whichever directon you please. But did you actually expect me to write a glowing five-star review as a reaction? "I can't use it, but it is such a nice software, I love it?" Fact is, even though it IS a nice app, it is not usable for what I (!) need. That's what my review says, and I stand by that.

I attempted to be fair, gave the app 3 stars, even called it nice and clean and user-friendly. Which is far more praise than the average Joe Sixpack would have given you unter the circumstances. Most people would have left a one-star review with the single word "unusable", or something very much like it. THAT would have been unfair, I I guess we can agree on that at least.

I did not intend to frustrate you, but I damn well won't praise you unter the circumstances, either. To use my review as a pretense to shut things down and pout is... well... politenes prevents me from using THAT word publicly. I guess I can call it "an overreaction" without ruffling too many additional feathers?

Also please note that while my suggestion is SIMILAR to the (mostly deprecated) mechanism of "key pinning", it is NOT the same. What's generally known as "key pinning" is a rule dictated by the server or its administrator in an attempt to improve security - but it also brings certain side effects and pitfalls that made it such a dangerous tool (not to mention hard to implement correctly) that in the end, it was not commonly used and finally got deprecated. What I'm suggesting is based on user interaction and user choice.

Just to put the above into perspective. Yes, I know quite a bit about certificates, encryption, and in particular what's (reasonably) safe and what isn't. 25+ years of Unix (not limited to Linux) server administration don't go by without leaving at least some knowledge behind. (*) I don't claim to be perfect or to know it all, mind you. But I know that what I'm talking about is NOT a security risk, at least not in a realistic scenario. Your current implementation, which basically allows unsafe connections and simply adds a warning "that's unsafe, don't do that" is far more risky, and my suggestions would help make things quite a bit safer. That does, on the other hand, mean a certain amount of work for you to implement it; I fully recognize that, and I realize that your time as a (the?) developer of FairEmail is quite limited and that you absolutely need to prioritize what you implement, and when to implement it. (**) Your initial reaction, "it's on the list, but not a priority" was perfectly fine with me. Your update, "go away, no-one needs that anyway" was not.

(*) I do take offense at those who called my opinions "junk" and worse - obviously without even understanding what I'm talking about. Your comments speak louder about you and your ethics than about me.

(**) Believe me, I've been there myself (written quite a bit of Freeware, as we called it, long before the times of Linux, Android, Google and all that).