Making data privacy & cybersecurity accessible for everyone.

Skiff Should Be A Reminder To Us All

Last week, encrypted email, cloud, and calendar provider Skiff announced they will be shutting down in six months after being acquired by Notion. This has understandably caused a lot of frustration in the privacy community as many people were initially quite excited about Skiff. Several other privacy outlets – including Michael Bazzell, Privacy Guides, and even our own Surveillance Report – have all discussed our own frustrations, lessons learned, and plans going forward. But really, this is nothing new. Two years ago (nearly to the month), CTemplar also suddenly shut down, and we saw nearly the same scenario play out (with different reasons being given by the companies). So this week, let’s take a moment to reflect back on the second email shutdown The New Oil has survived and see what lessons we can take away for the next inevitable disruption.

Reminder: Beware the Little Guys

In the above-linked CTemplar blog post, I wrote that “in the privacy space, we are very skeptical of new services.” Since then, I’ve seen a shift away from that. I’m not a fan. On the one hand, I’ve written in the past about how no service or tool is perfect and how we should always be striving for better services that improve upon those shortcomings. In the CTemplar post, I also mentioned the value of supporting the little guy and how every major organization was once a “little guy.” However, I think that the privacy community has taken this mentality too far. Not a week goes by that I don’t see some new forum post, email, or Surveillance Report question about some new service I’ve never heard of before. It’s great that so many new people are recognizing the room for improvement and stepping up to the challenge, and that so many privacy enthusiasts stand ready to support these efforts. But in the CTemplar post, I also touched on the fact that starting a new service is really hard and riddled with uncertainty. It could be a Big Tech or government honeypot. Even if it’s not and the creators are genuine, it’s incredibly easy to accidentally screw up implementation and allow for bugs and vulnerabilities (if it happens to the big, well-funded giants on a regular basis, why would the small, cash-strapped startups be any safer?). And of course, any new company in any industry must compete, and that’s never a sure thing no matter how much money you throw at something or else there’d be no such thing as “box-office bombs” and venture capitalists would have a far higher success rate.

I know that advice is contradictory, but life is complicated, contradictory, and messy. Still, two things can be real – like how new services should be both supported but also treated cautiously. It’s okay to donate to a new service you believe in that you think is doing interesting things, but you probably shouldn’t immediately move everything over to be your primary service. Relationships have some pretty consistent rules and characteristics across the board, whether it’s with a potential romantic partner or a corporation. One such rule is to go slow. You wouldn’t propose marriage on the first date, so why on earth would you move all your most sensitive data into a brand new service you just discovered that’s less than two years old and just launched their first stable release six months ago and you can’t find any expert reviews of it? Explore, support, but temper your excitement. Wait to see what the experts say and if the service really is here to stand the test of time.

Reminder: Control Your Data

This is a topic I clearly need to discuss more: the tech space in general – but especially the privacy space – is rife with ephemeral projects, whether because they get sold, abandoned, or forced out of business. The single best way to defend against this is to control your data, and the best way to do that – I think – is to think in “standards.” The internet was never Netscape, Explorer, Firefox, or Chrome (or apps, for that matter). It was always HTTP, TCP/IP, the OSI model, and other such standards. These have been improved upon over time (such as HTTPS and DoH/DoT), but the core standards have never changed. And they're open! Accessing The New Oil today is no different than accessing Myspace in 2003 or the CERN website in 1991, except it’s probably a lot faster, easier, and better-looking (no offense, Proton/CERN alumni).

If you don’t know what any of that stuff means, don’t worry about it. Here’s the point: try to think about how to reduce your data to a standard – preferably an open one – and then preserve that. For the record, I don’t mean a literal web standard like the ones above, but I do mean the same ideas and principles. Bear with me and I’ll come back to that. Since this post was inspired by Skiff (and built off my CTemplar post), let’s take email for example. Like it or not, email isn’t going away any time soon. Nearly all websites require email to sign up for an account, for example, and lately there's been a big push for services to forgo a password logon entirely and instead email you a link every time you sign in. (Not a fan.) However, email is an interoperable standard. Whether you use Proton, Tuta, Mailbox, or Gmail, that login link is going to get sent to you. So regardless of whether you’re wanting to check out a new provider or simply improve your own data sovereignty, the question to ask here is “how can I think of email as a 'standard' to ensure that I retain control of my email no matter what?” The most extreme option here is to self-host your own email server, but that’s generally not recommended unless you’re an expert – there’s too many opportunities for things to go wrong and suddenly your emails will be blocked (possibly both sending and receiving) and you may not have any idea for a long while. Instead, the next-best option is to control the email address, because then you always control where the emails go. You’re not bound to a specific provider, which means you can migrate for any reason – shutdown, censorship, better options, etc. The good news is that this is incredibly easy to accomplish. You simply buy your own domain name from any reputable registrar for a few bucks a year, and most email providers have instructions on how to set it up. Then, if you decide you want to use a different provider, you just look up their instructions instead.

Now, of course, experienced readers will go “email isn’t a standard, Nate.” And you’re 100% right. As I said, I don’t mean to think in literal standards like HTTP or TCP/IP. What I do mean is think in terms of “universal” and “interoperable” – like a standard. As I said earlier, email is universal. Proton, Tuta, Gmail, Yahoo, every email provider is built on the exact same standards that make email function, such as SMTP, RFC 5322, and MX DNS records. Of course, Proton & Tuta offer different protections and technical features than Gmail and Yahoo (and even each other) but the core product is identical: an email is an email and will be delivered to or sent from anywhere (not including restrictions such as company or government censorship). As such, you can think of an email the same way you think of any standard: how can I ensure that I always receive my emails, send emails, and have my emails? As I said, the first two are easily accomplished via custom domains: if you ever have issues or find a better provider, simply migrate over with a few clicks and some help from the provider and you’re golden. The last one can be accomplished by exporting your emails, a feature that going forward I will consider a non-negotiable requirement to be listed on The New Oil because of situations exactly like this. Most providers also let you import emails, allowing you to transfer as if nothing ever happened. Backing up your emails via exporting on a regular basis and owning a custom domain essentially untethers you from any one given provider for email, making you independent, resilient, and in control of your own data.

Practical Application

This thought process can be applied to nearly anything. “How can I save this file in a format that’s compatible with other word processors or operating systems?” “How can I save my backups in a format that’s recoverable and usable?” “What would I do if this messenger shuts down tomorrow?” Not to victim blame, but perhaps the biggest failing with the Skiff fiasco – and CTemplar before it – was not asking these kinds of questions in advance and planning ahead. One should always have an exit strategy and backup plan in place, even with the most trusted and long-standing services, and one should always look for opportunities to reduce their dependence on these platforms as much as possible. (Note: I would like to recognize that some people are truly living paycheck to paycheck and cannot afford to pay for a custom domain or even a premium email aliasing service. This is valid, and I still encourage you to ask these questions and come up with solutions that are within your means, even if they’re less than ideal.)

It is, of course, worth noting that there’s only so much you can do. You can’t literally own your own domain registrar, and even if you could you couldn’t own the organization who makes the kinds of decisions that affect your specific domain. Therefore you can never 100% be certain of your domain name. But even as an everyday individual, you can rest assured that it would take a lot to get your domain name revoked or taken away, and for most of us that’s simply not something to even worry about. Likewise, for a lot of apps, you can export your data but it may only be readable by that same app. It’s important to be aware of these limitations and ask if you’re comfortable with them. I am a Qubes user, and I don’t expect that to change any time soon. My backups from Qubes can only be read by another Qubes device, and for me that’s okay. The purpose of these backups is to have them as literal backups – to be able to reload them on another Qubes device in the event of theft, loss, or damage of my Qubes laptop. On the other hand, I want my emails to be portable so that I can open them with another provider (or at very least, another program) so that I don’t lose all my past correspondence if I ever have to migrate services. These are two very different use cases that warrant consideration.

Whatever services you’re using today, there’s a near 100% chance you won’t be using most of them in 10 years. Whether they shut down or whether you simply migrate to something that better suits your needs, the software you’re using will almost certainly change in the future. The question is if you’ll be ready when that happens. Everyone who was depending on Skiff directly must now scramble to migrate and pray that they didn’t overlook anything when the dust settles. Don’t be caught in that situation when the service you depend on sheds this mortal coil and joins the choir invisible. If you’re lucky, you’ll decide that the time is right to move on to another project and have all the time you want to make the switch. We can’t always be so lucky. The best time to plant a tree is 20 years ago. The second best time is today. I’ll end with what I said when CTemplar shut down:

Controlling your data is important and powerful. It makes you independent, it makes you resilient, and it makes your life simpler by being prepared for when things change – and in tech, things are always changing. Part of threat modeling is planning for what could go wrong and then putting systems in place to mitigate it if it happens. Maybe you weren’t affected by this CTemplar situation. That doesn’t mean you won’t be affected by the next one. Be sure to review the products and services you use and plan ahead. There’s always room to improve. Take this time to learn some lessons and apply the necessary changes to your own posture.

You can find more recommended services and programs at, and you can find our other content across the web here or support our work in a variety of ways here. You can also leave a comment on this post here: Discuss...