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

Gmail, Yahoo announce new 2024 authentication requirements for bulk senders

blog.google

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 420 posts

Re: Gmail, Yahoo announce new 2024 authentication requirements for bulk senders

#91

Post by rbut »

kvakerok wrote: post #88
rbut wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm having the same thoughts. On one of my SaaS apps workers receive details on their shifts via email. If I allow them to one-click unsubscribe, I know there will be many who do so accidentally, with no idea how to resubscribe. Currently they need to sign in and manage their contact methods in settings (email, SMS, etc). Thus they know how to re-enable it if they disable it. I can see many support requests from mana…

You can simply put two buttons on the email, one for unsubscribe, one for re-subscribe. If they unsub by accident they can simply pull the last email and re-sub. It's not rocket science.

AFAIK Google shows you an unsubscribe button/link separate to the email and performs the POST request to your server. There's no option to ask Gmail to show a resubscribe button/link.

Re: Gmail, Yahoo announce new 2024 authentication requirements for bulk senders

#92

Post by eastbound »

xnx wrote: post #68
overstay8930 wrote: post #17

Doesn't matter to me, if an email doesn't have a one click unsubscribe I just mark it as spam. Messes with their email reputation so they hopefully get kicked off of reputable email services.

"!" key shortcut to mark as spam in Gmail web interface. I use it all the time. If I didn't expect and don't want the email you sent, then it is spam, regardless of what fine print I clicked through unknowingly at some point. Would love for an "Unsubscribe Sunday" unofficial holiday to catch on to the same degree as "Cyber Monday".

Why would you ever unsubscribe? Unless I remember subscribing, then this is spam.

I don’t ever remember subscribing to anything. Almost all email is undesired, apart from password reset emails.

Re: Gmail, Yahoo announce new 2024 authentication requirements for bulk senders

#93

Post by austhrow743 »

EvanAnderson wrote: post #80
austhrow743 wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My reading is that in your comment they replied to, you said you require confirmation for unsubscription. One click unsubscription is presumably what they want.

I require a button to be clicked to confirm. No entry, no JavaScript, nothing else. Just something to make a POST request because I receive GET requests for almost every URL I send out. My experience is that every unsubscribe goes to a form w/ a submit button. Shitty ones make you type your email address. (Mine doesn't.)

I dont have a problem with that but it’s definitely a second click.

Just did a bit of unsubscribing and sydneytools.com.au, abc.net.au, squabblr.co, bundlehunt.com, and healingstreams.tv all one click unsubscribe.

Re: Gmail, Yahoo announce new 2024 authentication requirements for bulk senders

#94

Post by vaporary »

EvanAnderson wrote: post #58
ClassyJacket wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, I know I've seen someone talk about this before, I think it's their link safety checking thing: https://techcommunity.microsoft.com/t5/security-compliance-a...

It's odd that they're, essentially, fuzzing my app.

Agreed, it's curious! I wonder if they would still fuzz it if you changed the URL scheme to include the identifier as part of the URL path, rather than as a parameter? e.g., hxxp://example.com/unsubscribe/abcd1234

Please report back if you try it :-)

Re: Gmail, Yahoo announce new 2024 authentication requirements for bulk senders

#95

Post by megous »

solardev wrote: post #6
zitterbewegung wrote: post #4

Oh fun so basically no one will be able to setup their own email servers by themselves anymore. Antispam is killing the open internet now.

...and saving email at the same time. It's totally unusable without spam filters, and the open models/blacklists don't come anywhere close to Gmail's capabilities.

Any data? Or just "I say so"...

Before I decided to leave it due to its horrendous false positive rate, gmail was driving like half of notification emails from my servers and mailing lists to spam, despite me never marking them as such. I was regularly missing important things.

It's much better with just regular client side bogofilter and some training on my personal mail/spam archive. And I do zero server side filtering, it's just all content based.

I don't care about capabilities, I just want near 0 false positive rate on the kind of email I receive (and not some common model), even at cost of some false negatives, and Gmail doesn't deliver there at all. And I don't want any arbitrary 5xx rejections for my senders, since I know how annoying that is on the sender side. Gmail will not guarantee that.

Re: Gmail, Yahoo announce new 2024 authentication requirements for bulk senders

#96

Post by eastbound »

LeifCarrotson wrote: post #55
overstay8930 wrote: post #17

Doesn't matter to me, if an email doesn't have a one click unsubscribe I just mark it as spam. Messes with their email reputation so they hopefully get kicked off of reputable email services.

I honestly don't care about their reputation, I just mark anything I don't want as spam. It's easier than finding the tiny 8-point link at the bottom and rolling the dice on whether their unsubscribe is one click or not. I don't feel obligated to protect their shitty business model.

I once went to an Atlassian conf and they resold all our emails to dodgy people. Or perhaps leaked them over the black markets.

Not only I keep receiving almost the same email suggesting to buy 5,000 email addresses of Atlassian customers with always the same fields, but it’s always from different domains.

I didn’t think of submitting an Atlassian ticket for each spam I receive. That would teach them.

NEVER give your true email to Atlassian.

Re: Gmail, Yahoo announce new 2024 authentication requirements for bulk senders

#97

Post by abdullahkhalids »

atomicnumber3 wrote: post #35
chimeracoder wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Oh fun so basically no one will be able to setup their own email servers by themselves anymore. Antispam is killing the open internet now. It's been a long time since you've been able to set up your own email servers without DKIM and expect that your emails will get reliably delivered to Gmail users, especially for bulk mail. The second requirement is more or less already a legal requirement in the US, and the thir…

This is my impression too. I briefly used emails from a domain I own to my gmail account as a way to send myself "notifications". My impression was that absolute table stakes to even make e-mail deliver work AT ALL were: - non residential IP (I had to proxy through my VPS) - SPF - DKIM - use TLS with a modern cipher And even with this, I still had to "favorite" (or whatever) AND set up a rule to "never send to spam"…

I have my personal mail hosted on a hetzner server using mailinabox. I didn't do anything fancy except whatever mailinabox's default config is.

I have no problem with email deliverability to gmail/outlook. I think the difference is that my emails are two-way communication. I email someone, they email back or vice versa. Not a continuous stream of unreplied emails from my personal server to some gmail address (which does look like spam).

I imagine if you set up a script to reply to these emails from your gmail account with lorem ipsum and then deleted those replies after a few days, your problems will disappear.

Re: Gmail, Yahoo announce new 2024 authentication requirements for bulk senders

#98

Post by taveras »

jsnell wrote: post #81
TylerE wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem comes, as I know very well, is that when you have a common sounding email, all kinds of people use it for all kinds of things. I get dozens of transactional emails a week from stores multiple states away. A big part of why I’m stuck on/with gmail is that filtering redirects about 90% of those to spam.

> A big part of why I’m stuck on/with gmail is that filtering redirects about 90% of those to spam. That doesn't really make sense? If you used an address on your own domain, other people would be pretty unlikely to enter that email address instead of their own. The problem with misaddressed email should be limited to domains with really high username density; nobody else than the Gmails and Outlooks of the world nee…

Transactional email intended for other people is exactly my problem.

My name is common in certain areas, and I consistently get transactional email from banks, telecoms, and insurance companies around the world.

These businesses do not verify that their customer’s email is truly their own prior to sending emails.

Framing custom domains as the solution to this problem is a bit rash, no?

Re: Gmail, Yahoo announce new 2024 authentication requirements for bulk senders

#99

Post by airstrike »

pirsquare wrote: post #51
albertgoeswoof wrote: post #26

This might be good news, but as it comes from Google and involves email centralisation, I’m sceptical. At MailPace we already enforce DKIM, it’s pretty basic stuff. But list-unsubscribe is optional for our senders. We can make this a requirement and manage lists for senders who don’t / can’t implement a webhook to handle it (we already default to blocking resends to emails that hard bounce). However I am curious how…

Why would you allow users to unsub from transactional emails?

Something something the customer is always right?

Re: Gmail, Yahoo announce new 2024 authentication requirements for bulk senders

#100

Post by wredue »

kvakerok wrote: post #88
rbut wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm having the same thoughts. On one of my SaaS apps workers receive details on their shifts via email. If I allow them to one-click unsubscribe, I know there will be many who do so accidentally, with no idea how to resubscribe. Currently they need to sign in and manage their contact methods in settings (email, SMS, etc). Thus they know how to re-enable it if they disable it. I can see many support requests from mana…

You can simply put two buttons on the email, one for unsubscribe, one for re-subscribe. If they unsub by accident they can simply pull the last email and re-sub. It's not rocket science.

Or, send an email saying

“Hey. You unsubscribed. Here’s a link to resubscribe if you happen to want to!”

Right after someone unsubs.

Post reply on HN