For statistical credibility, here’s the growth change versus January 2024, which still shows we are the leader in custom domains when compared to current recommended email services:
| Provider |
Domain Names
(2024 via SecurityTrails) |
Domain Names
(2025 via ViewDNS) |
Percentage Change |
MX Record |
| Forward Email |
418,477 |
506,653 |
+21.1% |
mx1.forwardemail.net |
| Proton Mail |
253,977 |
334,909 |
+31.9% |
mail.protonmail.ch |
| Fastmail |
168,433 |
192,075 |
+14% |
in1-smtp.messagingengine.com |
| Mailbox |
38,659 |
43,337 |
+12.1% |
mxext1.mailbox.org |
| Tuta |
18,781 |
21,720 |
+15.6% |
mail.tutanota.de |
| Skiff (defunct) |
7,504 |
3,361 |
-55.2% |
inbound-smtp.skiff.com |
2 Likes
Your posts here seem more PR than genuine engagement. As does much of your website.
For instance on your website here: Frequently Asked Questions you state that Netflix uses your services. Without any qualifiers. But a simple MX lookup shows the following https://ibb.co/jP4M8Qf6
Your homepage states “We’re the world’s first and only email service to use quantum-resistant and individually encrypted SQLite mailboxes”. Which carefully ignores the fact that other providers have quantum-resistant encryption. Just not implemented in the same way as yours.
You need to drop the superlatives and stop trying to compare yourselves to everyone else in an underhand manner. Then perhaps you might gain trust.
Hi there - we’ll look at adding another column for MX verification.
dig games.netflix.com mx +short
10 mx1.forwardemail.net.
10 mx2.forwardemail.net.
Ref: https://mxtoolbox.com/SuperTool.aspx?action=mx%3Agames.netflix.com&run=toolpage
These and other statements made are simply not true and not verifiable. Other services do not use ChaCha20-Poly1305, nor do they share the source code for independent auditing. Additionally, individually encrypted and sandboxed mailboxes have vast security advantages. If you can share a link to the source code and/or independent 3rd party audit of other providers that prove your statements, please do.
Thanks for that. So you only supply services to a subset of their operations?
I also took the time to go through the rest of the table for you.
I may have missed something on the other threads. But can you also share a link to a 3rd party audit of your quantum encryption please? EDIT: As if you demand it of others you need to show it yourself.
And here are some details of Tuta’s post quantum encryption. Tuta Launches Post Quantum Cryptography For Email | Tuta . And yes, I know that their server side code is not open-source. But the encryption process can take place in the open-source apps.
Thank you for the clarification. I should have thought to do a TXT lookup as well for those ones!
It does show how exaggerated some of your claims/marketing is when you state that an entire entity uses your services but it turns out to only be a small subset of it.
That’s usually how it is done if you visited any website that have “trusted by” section, will just show company/entity name not exactly what service or product they use it for.
3 Likes
@forwardemail do you guys think your product also qualifies to be added to Self-Hosted Email - Privacy Guides too?
Unfortunately, this page lacks a criteria.
1 Like
Yes 100%! We have an interactive CLI installer, Docker image (auto-published based off SemVer GitHub releases), and several guides:
Thanks for sharing that.
2 Likes
Quick question - Am I understanding correctly that to use the service you are required to bring your own domain name? Also, that there is no web interface?
@CarefulMouse - Thanks for asking these questions. I think this was the reason why I passed on Forwardmail when looking for a secure email service. I wanted to blend in instead of having a custom domain that’s more traceable.