How are users that do this not getting absolutely blasted with spam? I stopped using catch-alls years ago when mail servers were getting inundated with (random letters & numbers @ mydomain) types of emails. Are they added them to an allow list in Postfix or something similar?
Using a catch-all domain is a mistake
291–300 of 304 posts
Re: Using a catch-all domain is a mistake
#292Seems like the compliant is having to relay the email address verbally...
in the last 10 years I could probably count on one hand the number of times I had to verbally give out my email,
Hell the Hilton example with their mobile app you do not even need to talk to the front desk person at all to check in..., even before this miracle of technology, I never had to give out my email...
So I will continue to use Catchall's thanks
Re: Using a catch-all domain is a mistake
#293I’ve recently began getting spam with random digits in front of @mydomain, and even a “wtfwtf@mydomain”.
I think the times of catch all domain working are over. Now I’m fully transitioning to SimpleLogin.
Re: Using a catch-all domain is a mistake
#294Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah I don't understand what the kerfuffle is. Sometimes they express disbelief or surprise, but it's never been a problem beyond telling them "I control the whole domain, you get a special address so I know if your database gets hacked and/or my information sold via this channel" and that almost always results in the employee being interested in getting the same thing for themselves.
Do you live in a region where the majority of people are adept with a computer?
Mix of CA and IL, but CA is like half rural desert and half SF bay.
I don't think it requires much computer literacy to understand what an email address is, how annoying SPAM is, and the problems of identity/credit theft.
Sure, these are first-world problems, but so is having to furnish an email address at all.
Re: Using a catch-all domain is a mistake
#295I've been doing this for 5 years and while I agree that leaks are rare, it has been only smooth sailing. I use thunderbird with an addon that automatically sets the responding email address, and have a script called "email" that generates a random address (no prefix or anything) and puts it in my clipboard. If I want to k ow what I used an email for, I can find it in my password manager or by checking from where that…
What add-on do you use?
Re: Using a catch-all domain is a mistake
#296Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Simply update your address with the post office and you're done." Welcome to the 19th century! Which is when mail redirection to a new address was introduced in the UK. I'd be amazed if it wasn't around then or earlier in the USA as well. Simply fill out a form and your mail will be redirected for up to two years (albeit at a cost). Or use a PO box and a mail forwarding service which offers filtering of junk mail. I…
The US has mail forwarding for 1 year, but that doesn't solve the problem, as you still need to update the source information with all the companies. I usually end up spending several hours changing addresses when I move. It's better to do this right away than to rely on the forwarding completely. Some places get the change of address info automatically and update their records, but it's never the ones you actually w…
A workaround for some forms that don't accept PO Boxes:
Type something like P0 B0X
Type the address of the post office and then the PO Box number like an apartment number
Re: Using a catch-all domain is a mistake
#297Earlier quoted context omitted.
You can search by email in most password managers.
Yes but I'm talking about incoming email classification.
I don't understand. You can have filtering rules like "when a new message arrives with 12345@mydomain.com in the To: or Cc:, move mail to lists/foo-list folder".
Re: Using a catch-all domain is a mistake
#298Earlier quoted context omitted.
With all those similar stories I wonder why people even bothering with changing an email recipient when some random guy asks about it. Like... delivery guy asked and?..
And they don't want to keep having that conversation, presumably.
Pretty much yeah. Not only is it an annoying conversation, it's also a deeply boring one.
Re: Using a catch-all domain is a mistake
#299Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Welcome to the 19th century! Which is when mail redirection to a new address was introduced in the UK. That’s not the same thing. Everyone still has your old address and you need to update it with them. Not terribly painful if you move once every 5 years. Pretty annoying and error prone if you move every 6 months.
Hence option 2 - the PO box.
Which is rejected as a valid address by many banks, government forms, etc. I want something that the post office guarantees has a real person behind it so I can use it for literally everything that requires an address.
Re: Using a catch-all domain is a mistake
#300Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes but I'm talking about incoming email classification.
I don't understand. You can have filtering rules like "when a new message arrives with 12345@mydomain.com in the To: or Cc:, move mail to lists/foo-list folder".
Yes, but if you don't do it immediately you won't remember that 12345 means this or that company; and also yes, you can search for 12345 and see that all email coming to that address is from a certain company, but maybe they haven't yet sent any email, etc.
Also if you use random strings that are not actually random (you just try to come up with something on the spot) you're very likely to reuse patterns for different third parties.
In the end it's more "stateless" to have a simple rule to attach an email to a given company, than maintaining a separate reference list (or lists! one in a password manager, the other in your email client).
But it's not very important, and mostly a question of personal preferences.