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

411–420 of 420 posts

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

#411

Post by martijnvds »

OJFord wrote: post #214
pirsquare wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would you allow users to unsub from transactional emails?

Because I don't need or want: - confirmation of my order - my order has been despatched - my order is out for delivery - my order has been delivered to locker - reminder to collect from locker - my order has been collected from locker - feedback on customer support chat experience - my return label has been generated - reminder to return my item - my refund is processing That's Amazon, in case it's not obvious. I don…

I get most of those twice, because the carrier is _also_ sending me "we received a package for you", "it is out for delivery" etc.

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

#413

Post by gus_massa »

geek_at wrote: post #302
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…

Just a perspective from the other side of the coin: I host various services for schools like online registration for parent - teacher conferences. When the platform is live hundreds of parents are logging in, choosing their appointments and have to confirm them via email (only one email per person not per appointment) And Yahoo is the Single worst email service to send to. I have correctly configured sfp, dmarc, dkim…

> And Yahoo is the Single worst email service to send to.

During the pandemic we had a lot of problems with the confirmation email for our 5000 T.A. in the virtual campus of the university. I had to guess what was happening because I was not part of the administration team, just collecting forwarded messages form the T.A and guessing:

* Gmail: Most of the time it works.

* Yahoo: The server receives a few hundred emails per day and the other are delayed. These were confirmation emails with half an hour tolerance, if they were lucky to pass the next day they were not useful. (After a week the sending server stops retrying.)

* Hotmail: Sometimes the email is received and sometimes it just disappears. No spam folder. No bounce email. It just evaporate. (Try sending an email from hotmail to the no-reply address and cross your fingers.)

* Others: No enough data to have a good guess.

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

#414

Post by solardev »

megous wrote: post #333
solardev wrote: post #215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, sorry, it's purely anecdotal. And also more applicable to the last few decades, when other email services were still terrible, than nowadays with many adequate options. I think I have the opposite preference to you: false positives are OK to me if that means less spam gets through. In fact I've seen many of those notifications in my gmail spam and thought to myself, "Huh, you know, maybe I don't need those that b…

I largely communicate with people who contact me for the first time (people who use my FOSS projects). Different needs, I guess.

Oh yeah, I can see how that'd be a problem if you have regular public-facing contacts.

I really wish Github had a DM feature =/ It feels so weird these days to email someone out of the blue.

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

#415

Post by LeifCarrotson »

eastbound wrote: post #96
LeifCarrotson wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

I think that happens with most conferences these days.

Happened to the disposable email address I sent to the International Manufacturing Technology Show, the A3 Automate show, and the Advanced Manufacturing Expo.

I understand giving my business card or email address to a new vendor I meet at the show. That's the point of the thing.

I do not understand why these shows sabotage themselves by selling their reputation to spammy marketers.

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

#416

Post by aunterste »

defulmere wrote: post #383
geek_at wrote: post #302

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just a perspective from the other side of the coin: I host various services for schools like online registration for parent - teacher conferences. When the platform is live hundreds of parents are logging in, choosing their appointments and have to confirm them via email (only one email per person not per appointment) And Yahoo is the Single worst email service to send to. I have correctly configured sfp, dmarc, dkim…

> And yet after like 50 emails to parents with yahoo email addresses they are giving me errors because of "unusual volume of emails from your domain" Scandalous, it's almost as if the established major providers have a financial interest in making it difficult for smaller providers and individuals to send mail using their own domains!

It is - this would be the better antitrust angle to pursue

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

#417

Post by heroprotagonist »

Planet Fitness have a system that will send you mail simply if you visit their website.

Steps to reproduce:

* Search for a gym on Google maps.

* Click a Planet Fitness result that's somewhere nearby.

* Expand to their website link, follow it, and browse several pages on their site.

* Do NOT give them your email.

* Wait a few days and check your email.

* Watch your email through the next couple weeks for follow-up emails that continue to urge you to action.

This will probably require you to use a browser with an extensive history. EG, not one with temporary container tabs or other such privacy considerations. Something you've used the email on in a variety of scenarios, enough to have it linked to your identity with some sufficiently large advertising agency.

It's illegal, a complete violation of CANN SPAM act, but I imagine it makes them more money than they'd lose if they ever actually got slapped down.

I just wonder which information provider they're using that has 'sold the goose', so to speak. By giving an email address they no longer sit between the company and the user's marketing efforts, so it must be fairly expensive to do. But it enables these kinds of follow-up campaigns.

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

#418

Post by everybodyknows »

gus_massa wrote: post #413
geek_at wrote: post #302

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just a perspective from the other side of the coin: I host various services for schools like online registration for parent - teacher conferences. When the platform is live hundreds of parents are logging in, choosing their appointments and have to confirm them via email (only one email per person not per appointment) And Yahoo is the Single worst email service to send to. I have correctly configured sfp, dmarc, dkim…

> And Yahoo is the Single worst email service to send to. During the pandemic we had a lot of problems with the confirmation email for our 5000 T.A. in the virtual campus of the university. I had to guess what was happening because I was not part of the administration team, just collecting forwarded messages form the T.A and guessing: * Gmail: Most of the time it works. * Yahoo: The server receives a few hundred emai…

> sometimes it just disappears. No spam folder. No bounce email. It just evaporate.

Gmail will do this too. Happened a few months ago with a single (important) message from a private individual sender on Hotmail, one unknown to my Google account. The fix was adding the Hotmail address to a Google Contact.

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

#419

Post by kodapoda »

Feature request: please require a direct unsubscribe link in emails. The new trend is that companies use 3rd party tracking services, which are blocked by my DNS settings. So I can't even unsubscribe from 60-80% of emails without disabling my custom DNS. Google requires the unsubscribe link to be present already, they just need to require it to be accessible.

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

#420

Post by kodapoda »

drdaeman wrote: post #201
georgyo wrote: post #181

Reading all the comments makes me think I'm an outlier. I very aggressively unsubscribe from everything so I get very little mailing list spam. Maybe a few messages a month. What I do get _constantly_ is spam email messages to my inbox from Gmail and Outlook domains. At least one a day for many years. Because it from Gmail, they have very little spam filtering done, yet if any other provider sent these messages then…

> I very aggressively unsubscribe from everything Never unsubscribe from anything you haven't subscribed for (or at least where you haven't gave your email address to the sending party), because I believe any interaction with unsolicited emails provide spammers with a clear signal that their spam is not just delivered but also read and interacted with, so they get more agressive.

Agreed. I block these addresses instead.
Post reply on HN