191–200 of 272 posts
One thing that has always been expensive and still is is email validation. $35 per month and you still have to pay $1.20 per 100 validation. Does anyone know why this feature is so pricey?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sending an email is absolutely a solved problem. I can send a message to my address in 2020 using a 2003 Fedora Core 1 box without a domain using only what's part of the POSIX standard, and I'll receive it just fine. I just did a few days ago, actually. It even got past my provider's spam filter. I could probably have done it using earlier software than 2003-era mail/mailx, but that was the quickest way I could find…
You can still do that. However, I, as a receiver of email, get thousands of spam messages a day. So, I use services that block them before they even reach my view, or get sent directly to the spam folder. If you want to send me an email, that's solved. If you want to send it to ten thousand people on your mailing list, and not have it end up in the spam folder, you may have more work.
You might miss something valuable. Perhaps from a long-lost relative. Or a prospective client or employer.
And once you're actually looking through the spam folder, what good is it really?
My company (MailChannels) sends email on behalf of more domains than any other transactional email provider (see https://trends.builtwith.com/mx/transactional-email/traffic/... ) because our customer base is hosting companies rather than individual senders. The whole transactional space has matured in the past year with SendGrid's acquisition by Twilio and Mailgun passing through a couple of different private equity…
The thing that annoys me is the standard operating procedure in tech is to offer stuff for free until a bunch of people depend on it and then to start charging as much as you possibly can once there's a large enough customer base that a reasonable percentage won't have any choice but to bear the updated costs. Mailgun did a pretty nice job by offering a pay-as-you-go tier, but they still took features from the free p…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ugh. I settled on Mailgun for this use case recently and now I'll have to switch. I used to use https://medium.com/@ashan.fernando/forwarding-emails-to-your... to do this cheaply via SES, but it was a pain to set up for new domains and had some odd behavior at times. https://improvmx.com was something else I came across, but I don't feel great trusting an unknown service with all my incoming mail. Zoho works and is f…
I have used both ImprovMX and ForwardEmail.net so can comment on them. ImprovMX has always worked great. I have used it for a handful of email addresses that all forward to my personal account. If your personal account is gmail it's also very easy to set up a "send as." I will definitely use this first next time I need something like this. ForwardEmail is indeed open source and works pretty good. It's a little more s…
https://github.com/forwardemail/free-email-forwarding/blob/m...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
SO I just tested. After working out that on macOS I now need to use nc -c instead of telnet... I _can_ send mail manually, but it _does_ end up in gmails's spam folder saying "Why is this message in spam? It is similar to messages that were identified as spam in the past." Iain-2:~ iain$ nc -c gmail-smtp-in.l.google.com 25 220 mx.google.com ESMTP k5si5682618pls.209 - gsmtp EHLO elided.org 250-mx.google.com at your se…
I wonder why google treats this simple email as spam. It contains nothing that should trigger the spam filter aside from where it came from.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sorry to hear about that experience. One of SES's primary goals was keeping abuse off of the service, though no system is perfect. When I worked on SES, more than 50% of the team's total time went into fighting abuse. Part of that effort was comprehensive monitoring of a variety of feedback signals, including bounces, spam complaints, and other data. Individual senders are encouraged to monitor their own sending via…
I submitted multiple reports to email-abuse@amazon.com including headers, and received automated responses. For some spammers I reported them 4 times, but the spam kept coming. I think you've confirmed what I said in my parent comment...SES doesn't take a zero tolerance approach. I think it is the shared IPs that I've blocked (54.240.27.189/24). You'll see they are on multiple blacklists.
If you really distrust mail from those IPs so much, why not just filter it straight to SPAM? At least you'd be delivering it and your users could whitelist senders (or domains) they trust.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think this is what happens in open systems. The alternative is walled gardens, like FB messages. Even those suffer from spam, although it's much less of the wild west.
The alternative is simple: For stranger to stranger communication, both business and non-business set up a web form. With a challenge if needed. For friend to friend communication, use email, friends' address in on a white list. For business to consumer communication, white list is again used. For spammer to anyone communication, including business lists that refuse to take you off, not on white list so doesn't get i…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
SO I just tested. After working out that on macOS I now need to use nc -c instead of telnet... I _can_ send mail manually, but it _does_ end up in gmails's spam folder saying "Why is this message in spam? It is similar to messages that were identified as spam in the past." Iain-2:~ iain$ nc -c gmail-smtp-in.l.google.com 25 220 mx.google.com ESMTP k5si5682618pls.209 - gsmtp EHLO elided.org 250-mx.google.com at your se…
I wonder why google treats this simple email as spam. It contains nothing that should trigger the spam filter aside from where it came from.
If your domain has SPF headers which don't permit mail from the (residential?) IP you're connecting from, that'll be a major factor as well.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I submitted multiple reports to email-abuse@amazon.com including headers, and received automated responses. For some spammers I reported them 4 times, but the spam kept coming. I think you've confirmed what I said in my parent comment...SES doesn't take a zero tolerance approach. I think it is the shared IPs that I've blocked (54.240.27.189/24). You'll see they are on multiple blacklists.
Do you literally block (aka drop) mail from SES IPs? That's awful for your users. If you really distrust mail from those IPs so much, why not just filter it straight to SPAM? At least you'd be delivering it and your users could whitelist senders (or domains) they trust.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I wonder why google treats this simple email as spam. It contains nothing that should trigger the spam filter aside from where it came from.
Most mailservers don't send emails one character at a time. You appear to have a mental model of how a spam filter works that doesn't include fingerprinting the behavior of the sending server? Even open source mail servers do that, for example postscreen is a part of postfix.
(Not sure I care enough to try...)