3 ms·
Responding gives the sender the ability to better explore the detection rule space and find a way to get through. Exactly what a legitimate sender wants and wh
by yellow_postit 4y ago
Responding gives the sender the ability to better explore the detection rule space and find a way to get through.
Exactly what a legitimate sender wants and what a provider would not want to give an adversary. Now the adversary has to also incur a cost to determine successful deliver vs open/engagement rates make it just that much harder.
- lbriner 4y agoI think it's a false economy. At best it is security by obscurity. Google tell you why things are spam and often they even return quite detailed error emails when they don't accept stuff it doesn't benefit an attacker that much. Any decent attacker already knows that they should sign stuff and make identifiers align and can do so trivially easily. People like Yahoo are the opposite and are completely opaque as if they are doing anything that clever. All they can realistically do is check originating IPs, message content, alignment etc. just like everyone else. Since I can still a lot of very decent SPAM in my inbox, their lack of transparency clearly doesn't work so they might as well help legitimate senders to deliver stuff properly.
- rsync 4y ago"Google tell you why things are spam and often they even return quite detailed error emails when they don't accept stuff ..." Where are you seeing these details ? I have never seen any bounce messages from messages I send into @gmail.com that end up in a spam folder ...
- GoblinSlayer 4y agoIn case of gmail you can have an account there and see what goes through.