3 ms·

> It's not as shiny as Apple's thing, but it's 100% selfhosted and I own the domain. Apple's system is "shiny" because it provides near total anonymity, wherea

> It's not as shiny as Apple's thing, but it's 100% selfhosted and I own the domain. Apple's system is "shiny" because it provides near total anonymity, whereas your setup has all the deliverabilty issues of a self-hosted domain and rather uniquely identifies you...at the domain level? I'm not sure why you are maintaining a hundreds-of-lines virtual table and a web UI, instead of just using a regex or two to capture phil.*@domain2.com or something along those lines (maybe you want to do one including a year or something to cut down on spam), or blacklisting as needed by having postfix reject during the SMTP session so the email is marked as invalid and is removed from the spammer's database. Or, I dunno, just use VERP? I don't think I've yet run across anyone smart enough to drop VERP from email addresses.

binwiederhier 5y ago
I'm maintaining hundreds of lines because I started with one. And i was too lazy to change it. Your approach it probably better ;-)
megous 5y ago
Apple's system will only work until they decide to shut you out or shut down this service for whatever reason. Anonymity is not really a concern for most uses, privacy, longetivity and reliability of reception is though. I still want to use random unique addresses even for important and trusted services, not just for throwaway uses. So third party domain is not an option. I use self-hosted unique addresses mostly for registering to services, so forwarding those messages in both directions through Apple's service would expose all those services to a silent takeover via password reset by Apple's employees in control of this service. So this service is exactly as useful as those random throwaway email inboxes available on the web. More polished maybe.
- 0xCMP 5y ago
  I imagine Apple would come down on them pretty hard in the App Store if they did that so for most applications it's enough of a deterrent that most places would not do it. I also think that because Apple can mostly control which addresses and how many of them there are it can control the spam issues enough to avoid that problem. If not... then yea that's gonna happen in a few years. Would be short sighted for Apple to not do it though.

binwiederhier 5y ago

I'm maintaining hundreds of lines because I started with one. And i was too lazy to change it. Your approach it probably better ;-)

megous 5y ago

Apple's system will only work until they decide to shut you out or shut down this service for whatever reason. Anonymity is not really a concern for most uses, privacy, longetivity and reliability of reception is though. I still want to use random unique addresses even for important and trusted services, not just for throwaway uses. So third party domain is not an option. I use self-hosted unique addresses mostly for registering to services, so forwarding those messages in both directions through Apple's service would expose all those services to a silent takeover via password reset by Apple's employees in control of this service. So this service is exactly as useful as those random throwaway email inboxes available on the web. More polished maybe.

0xCMP 5y ago
I imagine Apple would come down on them pretty hard in the App Store if they did that so for most applications it's enough of a deterrent that most places would not do it. I also think that because Apple can mostly control which addresses and how many of them there are it can control the spam issues enough to avoid that problem. If not... then yea that's gonna happen in a few years. Would be short sighted for Apple to not do it though.