Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why don’t we do email verification in reverse?

blog.yossarian.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 329 posts

Re: Why don’t we do email verification in reverse?

#171

Post by arinlen »

blowski wrote: post #131
arubania2 wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You could consider setting up a separate email account just for the verification messages and have that on your phone.

Why should I have to go through all that faff when I have a perfectly good password manager?

> Why should I have to go through all that faff when I have a perfectly good password manager?

If you are not using dedicated special-purpose email addresses with specific services, you're already grossly mismanaging your online safety.

Think about it for a second: how does your password manager help you if your email password gets leaked?

Re: Why don’t we do email verification in reverse?

#172

Post by woodruffw »

jstanley wrote: post #170

> I’ve repeatedly dealt with services where the verification email [...] is marked as spam Spam filtering in email is performed on the receiving side. You're the recipient, so if your spam filter is filtering emails you want, it's your spam filter that is defective and you are the only one who can solve that.

This is simultaneously true and not useful: most people use an email provider, and the provider dictates the spam policy. Aggressive policies are competitive, because spam annoys users more than the occasional missed message.

Re: Why don’t we do email verification in reverse?

#173

Post by OJFord »

jstanley wrote: post #170

> I’ve repeatedly dealt with services where the verification email [...] is marked as spam Spam filtering in email is performed on the receiving side. You're the recipient, so if your spam filter is filtering emails you want, it's your spam filter that is defective and you are the only one who can solve that.

That's at least debatable, I send SPF failures to spam, which obviously catches some legitimate stuff, but at very least that's the sender's problem too.

Re: Why don’t we do email verification in reverse?

#174

Post by amelius »

Why do we even need email verification?

I don't want to allow a website to link my identity to my email address or phone number.

I don't want the website to push me messages.

I am capable of storing passwords, so no need to send me password recovery emails.

Email verification should be optional.

Re: Why don’t we do email verification in reverse?

#175

Post by Jyaif »

amelius wrote: post #174

Why do we even need email verification? I don't want to allow a website to link my identity to my email address or phone number. I don't want the website to push me messages. I am capable of storing passwords, so no need to send me password recovery emails. Email verification should be optional.

Because services don't want to be spammed with fake accounts.

Re: Why don’t we do email verification in reverse?

#176

Post by cdmoyer »

yunohn wrote: post #142
simonw wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right: this would fail for me on my laptop, because I use gmail for email and don't have anything setup such that a mailto: link would compose a new email from my gmail account.

It’s actually quite easy to set this up, if you missed doing so when it asks: https://support.google.com/a/users/answer/9308783?hl=en

If you use chrome and only chrome.

Re: Why don’t we do email verification in reverse?

#177

Post by amelius »

Jyaif wrote: post #175
amelius wrote: post #174

Why do we even need email verification? I don't want to allow a website to link my identity to my email address or phone number. I don't want the website to push me messages. I am capable of storing passwords, so no need to send me password recovery emails. Email verification should be optional.

Because services don't want to be spammed with fake accounts.

Could you be more precise about what you mean by "fake" accounts?

Re: Why don’t we do email verification in reverse?

#179

Post by vbezhenar »

Jyaif wrote: post #175
amelius wrote: post #174

Why do we even need email verification? I don't want to allow a website to link my identity to my email address or phone number. I don't want the website to push me messages. I am capable of storing passwords, so no need to send me password recovery emails. Email verification should be optional.

Because services don't want to be spammed with fake accounts.

Creating fake emails is easy. Rent VPS for $5, set up postfix and you have infinite number of emails.

Re: Why don’t we do email verification in reverse?

#180

Post by vbezhenar »

woodruffw wrote: post #172
jstanley wrote: post #170

> I’ve repeatedly dealt with services where the verification email [...] is marked as spam Spam filtering in email is performed on the receiving side. You're the recipient, so if your spam filter is filtering emails you want, it's your spam filter that is defective and you are the only one who can solve that.

This is simultaneously true and not useful: most people use an email provider, and the provider dictates the spam policy. Aggressive policies are competitive, because spam annoys users more than the occasional missed message.

> spam annoys users more than the occasional missed message.

For me it's the other way around. I don't care about occasional spam. But the possibility of missing message means that I'm forced to read ALL spam periodically.

Post reply on HN