[alisonsandy]

> This is anti-competitive behavior designed to make it as hard as possible to use email client software

Use App password. They are not blocking any 3rd party clients. Are you advocating using real password in every random client that may or may not transmit it in full text elsewhere?

I do assume you know security essentials.

[jonathanstrange]

I will do that if our university decides to switch on 2-factor authentication (which would be total chaos), but my trust in Google's ability to make this effortless and easy in third-party email clients is zero. See my other post why.

Regarding security: Google had physical fiber optics connections to the NSA and claimed they didn't know about them. It's not a very credible claim but if if was true, then it would be proof that Google has no competence in security at all.

[alisonsandy]

Any decent 3rd party client does this already. Take for example, thunderbird or k9-mail - major open source ones. Even Mail (from Apple, macOS) does this. What else you need? Sure if you use mutt or ALPINE read the related forums for help.

while anyone can criticise any large company one should do it for the correct reasons.

[jonathanstrange]

Your frankly-speaking somewhat condescending reply fails to address the issue. This has nothing to do with the client software, which is claws-mail in this case. My organization does not enable 2-factor authentication. Once they do, claws-mail can be configured to use "App passwords."

But if you look at my other post, quotes of Google's own documentation of "App passwords" and various testimony in this thread do not inspire much confidence that this will work as an acceptable long-term solution. As I said elsewhere, the rationale behind all of this seems to be anti-competitive behavior. It's not new idea to disguise anti-competitive behavior as security issues (cf. e.g. Apple's code signing and Gatekeeper). This also explains the misleading and incorrect term "Less Secure Apps" Google uses.