3 ms·
> No, if your idea of validating an email is more complicated than "should have an @ symbol", I guarantee you, there is counter example that will mess you prett
by dividedbyzero 4y ago
> No, if your idea of validating an email is more complicated than "should have an @ symbol", I guarantee you, there is counter example that will mess you pretty system up.
Requiring b2b users to use their @company.com email is common and some b2b customers actually expect to be able to configure that. Another simple case is stripping out any "+whatever" from gmail addresses and to flag that sort of thing for other eomains so support can verify it's not a case of someone creating 72 trial accounts. Yes, rejecting users due to naive and incorrect validation is bad, but treating emails as entirely opaque strings isn't always an option either.
- xigoi 4y ago> Another simple case is stripping out any "+whatever" from gmail addresses and to flag that sort of thing for other eomains so support can verify it's not a case of someone creating 72 trial accounts. trial1@mypersonaldomain trial2@mypersonaldomain trial3@mypersonaldomain
- dividedbyzero 4y agoBut for that you need a personal domain and the ability to configure something like that, whereas everyone in a corporation that runs their email through Google can use the +abc thing out of the box, and I've seen it used a ton. The goal with measures like that is usually not to catch every single one who tries to game the free tier but to ensure it's more inconvenient to do so than just buy it for most people, and typically filtering +abc emails will be just one of several different measures taken to that end.
- xigoi 4y agoThere are sites where you can easily get all addresses of the format something@yourname.sitename.xxx.