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

261–270 of 420 posts

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

#261

Post by lostapathy »

adrr wrote: post #127

Can we add a TTL to marketing emails? Max length is two weeks before the email is automatically deleted.

I put together some time-based filtering I use on my own inbox, it's awesome.

I like letting most of my email land in my inbox, because I don't want to need to check (and purge a bunch of folders). But email of declining value will automatically get moved to folders after a certain amount of time. for example:

* Monitoring alerts go to trash after 4 hours (if it's still broken, I'll get more emails, after all).

* shipping notices from amazon etc go to trash after 3 days (long enough for the item to arrive on time)

* Notices from ups/fedex about "your item is arriving today" go away after 24 hours

* Marketing I don't mind seeing but has a shelf life - I have 2 or 3 time intervals setup for those

* Mailing lists I'd like to read (but often don't get back to) delete after 2 weeks

* Utility bills move to a folder for utility bills after 24 hours

etc. It's awesome - but oddly enough, nobody I ever tell about it gets that excited.

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

#262

Post by kevin_thibedeau »

somehnguy wrote: post #234
ACow_Adonis wrote: post #218

Earlier quoted context omitted.

i can't be the only oldskool person on hacker news who knows not to click on unsubscribe buttons because it just identifies you as a legitimate email/mark... these are spammers, not cases where you ever actually signed up to some kind of legitimate newsletter or discussion group. to pretend good faith is your first mistake...

That's the case for spam sent by illegitimate parties (actual spammers), but any real company (what OP is referring to) will respect the unsubscribe button because they're at risk of being sued otherwise. Clicking unsubscribe in those cases actually does work & doesn't put you at risk of anything.

I get spam from legitimate companies who don't honor the unsubscribe links. The problem is that many of them use third-party services to handle the unsubscription server so you're feeding the data broker ecosystem with confirmation that you're an active address.

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

#263

Post by RockRobotRock »

WirelessGigabit wrote: post #120
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…

Side-note: for list-unsubscribe, do you determine the subscriber's identity that needs to be unsubscribed based on the sender or the receiver (like @unsubscribe.service.com)? Reason I'm asking is Unsubscribe rarely works for me due to my catch-all not SENDING emails from the address it was received on. It sends it from my actual address. Very annoying.

Addy.io formerly AnonAddy does a good job at that. FastMail also.

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

#264

Post by Silhouette »

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…

I'm cautious as well. We all hate the spam and dark patterns, and Google is a relatively responsible citizen of the email world in my experience so I hope this will be a positive step.

However if email blocking becomes too aggressive then it can easily result in mails containing information that senders are literally required by law to provide to the recipient being silently dropped, which essentially means the mail service has caused the sender to unknowingly break the law. The penalties for not providing required information under consumer protection rules can be extremely serious in jurisdictions like the EU.

And Joe Random can be a real customer who you are really required to provide with information but can still hit the "this is spam" button if they don't particularly care or want to see it so reading too much into self-reported spam flags is a bit of a slippery slope. Combine that with mandating one-click unsubscribe but possibly without recognising types of emails that again the subscriber literally can't legally not send (at least not without sending the same information to the same recipient some other way instead) and there could be some real danger here.

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

#265

Post by bruckie »

tgsovlerkhgsel wrote: post #155

> we’ll enforce a clear spam rate threshold that senders must stay under I hope they make it really strict. I'm sick of companies that send you spam ("newsletters") just because you interacted with them once, then when you unsubscribe, you get unsubscribed from that one list, so they keep spamming you just with a slightly different newsletter type. (Edit: Also, everything requiring a notification - by e-mail if they…

> I hope they make it really strict.

The threshold is "spam rates reported in Postmaster Tools below 0.3%".

That sounds pretty low to me, but I'm not in the bulk email business. I guess maybe a very small number of users actually report spam? Or maybe Google is being strict.

Source: https://support.google.com/mail/answer/81126#zippy=%2Crequir...

(I work for Google, but on something totally unrelated, and don't speak for them or have any inside knowledge.)

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

#266

Post by eru »

mlyle wrote: post #249
jack1243star wrote: post #248

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is no "mistake" in wanting to unsubscribe from a mail list. This is just dark pattern to increase friction, whatever scenario they try to come up to justify.

I share your frustration, but there is no evidence that you read the comment you're replying to. That comment explains that there's a scenario where people can be accidentally unsubscribed in the presence of mail forwarding, and the requirement to enter an email address can patch over this.

Well, you could still pre-fill that field.

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

#267

Post by robocat »

kijin wrote: post #237
figassis wrote: post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's worse. An unsubscribe link that asks you to submit your email. Few things anger me more, because they went through the trouble of pretending to comply, and a decision was made to make my day more difficult.

That exists for a reason, and it's not nefarious at all. Lot of people, especially of the older generation, forward all sorts of emails to their friends and family every day. If one person who received a forwarded email doesn't like it and clicks the unsubscribe link, the original recipient (who clearly likes the email enough to forward it around) gets unsubscribed. That's a bug. If you don't like the unfunny newslet…

I think you are mostly wrong. OP is complaining they sometimes have to enter their email address - that is absolutely unnecessary make-work.

The page can prompt the email address, and have a simple unsubscribe button. Not perfect, but okay.

Even better, one-click unsubscribe features (e.g. Gmail's App) are presumably set up to work for the current recipient (not the original sender) so the problem is resolved for anyone using an email client with inbuilt unsubscribe.

The forwarding problem is only for html link unsubscribe. Personally I hate trying to play find-the-ubsubscribe-link, so I use the email client feature where possible (which also helps Gmail rate/flag spam).

Mostly I haven't had problems with repeat spammers, except a republican politician (I'm not in the USA so doubly annoying).

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

#268

Post by nusl »

kevin_thibedeau wrote: post #259
nvr219 wrote: post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I use fastmail masked email (which is basically the same thing) with the firefox plugin. I love it.

It gets better when you have your own domain and you can register with throwaways using spamco@mydomain.

[dead]

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

#269

Post by ihaveajob »

tgsovlerkhgsel wrote: post #155

> we’ll enforce a clear spam rate threshold that senders must stay under I hope they make it really strict. I'm sick of companies that send you spam ("newsletters") just because you interacted with them once, then when you unsubscribe, you get unsubscribed from that one list, so they keep spamming you just with a slightly different newsletter type. (Edit: Also, everything requiring a notification - by e-mail if they…

The worst offenders are those without a link to unsubscribe, and who instead ask you to "reply unsubscribe", which happily for them is also a signal to the email provider that you've interacted with them and therefore are not spam.

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

#270

Post by jimbobimbo »

nvr219 wrote: post #236
cryptoegorophy wrote: post #232

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wish Apple Hide My Email features existed 20 years ago. Any new signup now is I use hide my email.

I use fastmail masked email (which is basically the same thing) with the firefox plugin. I love it.

What is the add on name?
Post reply on HN