The law that lets police hack your email

The law that lets police hack your email.

-- Tom

 

Is there any reason to leave messages that old on the server? If anything from six or more months ago comes up, it can wait until you access your local archives. Right?

 

Gmail has encouraged people to keep their email instead of deleting it and to just archive it instead.

Time to do some house keeper thanks for the info lotuseclat

 

You have no idea how widespread the concept of "convenience" is...

 

I do my best not to think about that very much

 

Ok, Louseclat, I owe you one. I had no idea what-so-ever. My e-mail accounts under my real name (not my obfuscated email) have stored messages going back 5 years. Glug.

 

Slightly off-topic: the main reason I don't keep emails stored on email servers is because of hacking. If a hacker manages to breach the security of your webmail account, it might get a lot of useful data about you (and about other accounts that you are using) if you keep your emails on server. On the other hand, if your Inbox is empty, you are "starving" the attacker.

 

Yes, Nebulus, you are of course correct on being slightly off topic. However, the legal knowledge surprised me. I became instantly concerned regarding my public email accounts that possess my real life name. I simply did not realize that anything over 6 months is treated as a credit number on a monthly statement thrown in the proverbial garbage can on the street.

 

The text of the article states that I should be able to notice a difference between new email and email that is 6 months old. What is that difference? What am I looking for?

It implies there is a change in the mail when it has been read by the authorities. What is that telltale?