61–70 of 129 posts
Now if only websites will stop rejecting plus-addressed email addresses as invalid. The most frequent offenders are mom & pop websites that you just _know_ are going to get breached.
It's always fun interacting with customer service reps when they for example confirm my email address... "errrrrr yeah so we email you at ourname@...?"
Now if only websites will stop rejecting plus-addressed email addresses as invalid. The most frequent offenders are mom & pop websites that you just _know_ are going to get breached.
That's not going to help, since everybody knows you can just strip everything after the '+' and get to the main mailbox.
If a mail comes in from an unknown sender to known address I know that the address is compromised.
Ideally I would like to plug my password manager to generate an address and automatically add email filters in place.
Although I was thinking about a service that would just give randomalphanumeric@example.com for all its users, so they would be on the same host and no connection between addresses could be implied. It could or even should be receive only.
Finally. This has only been allowed since RFC 822 (1982). Is there any reason why Microsoft did not support this from the beginning (of Exchange)?
1982? Back then Microsoft's attitude toward the Internet was "embrace, extend, and suffocate." It made little sense for them to work with the nuances of standards, according their business model back then. I have added this capability to every commercial web property I've worked on.
I tried doing email validation the modern way: if '@' in emailfield then return True else 'email address needs an @'. The user gets a confirmation email anyway, and the sign-up process was literally name, email, tick a box that you read the privacy policy, and click continue, so they can just re-do that if they typo'd the address.
Iirc the boss decided to set requirements for a regex that I was to implement instead. Or maybe he made the regex and I tweaked it saying "this won't match .amsterdam domains", not sure anymore.
Now if only websites will stop rejecting plus-addressed email addresses as invalid. The most frequent offenders are mom & pop websites that you just _know_ are going to get breached.
Also, I once encountered a site where spam+xyz worked for signup but failed validation on the login form. I think it was something important too, like a utility or bank.
The process for sending email /from/ a + address is tricky. First -- in GMail at least -- you have to explicitly set up a + account as being in your list of "from" accounts and then you have to remember to use it every time you reply! Not to mention forgetting the email I gave them when resetting passwords sucks, too. "Was that foo+hn or foo+ycombinator or foo+ycombinator.com or foo+hackernews or... hm... uhhh..." (Y…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You can also use this with a "." (email.spam@gmail.com) in Gmail.
Periods are ignored in gmail and anything after a + is also ignored, so all of these will go to the same mailbox: johndoe@gmail.com john.doe@gmail.com j.o.h.n.d.o.e@gmail.com johndoe+spam@gmail.com john....doe+spam@gmail.com but johndoe.spam@gmail.com wouldn't go to the same mailbox.
FastMail had some of the cleverest ideas for plus addressing. username+tag@fastmail.fm could be given away as tag@username.fastmail.fm
Nowadays I just use tag@mydomain when I interact with websites.
Now if only websites will stop rejecting plus-addressed email addresses as invalid. The most frequent offenders are mom & pop websites that you just _know_ are going to get breached.
I figured sites wouldn't want to accept it because they know you are most likely filtering their emails so they have a much less chance of getting through to you.
If someone is stealing emails/passwords from a site obviously they will just strip characters after the plus to obtain your normal email address?
Finally. This has only been allowed since RFC 822 (1982). Is there any reason why Microsoft did not support this from the beginning (of Exchange)?
I've been using "Microsoft 365" since 2012, outlook w/ a custom domain and all the grandfathered features. The +tag has always been supported, and I can't really tell what the difference between "Office 365" and "Microsoft 365" is, since the latter appears to include the former, if not identical.
"Microsoft 365" now includes all of Windows 10, Office 365 (Office on PC) and Azure. This is more geared towards the home market.
Then, there's "Office 365 for Business" which as the name implies is more for business/corporate customers.
It looks like your custom domain is using the old Outlook.com/Hotmail architecture, which already supported + in email addresses - while Microsoft's corporate offering (running on a cloud based Exchange Server) still doesn't, and they're pushing support for it out later this year.
Now if only websites will stop rejecting plus-addressed email addresses as invalid. The most frequent offenders are mom & pop websites that you just _know_ are going to get breached.
I use shopname@firstname.lastname.email, with my own lastname.email domain. Fastmail makes configuring your dns records for this super simple. It's always fun interacting with customer service reps when they for example confirm my email address... "errrrrr yeah so we email you at ourname@...?"