5 ms·

You don't need double opt in unless you are sending them emails. Assuming we're talking about a typical web app, this isn't the case. The method you propose a

You don't need double opt in unless you are sending them emails. Assuming we're talking about a typical web app, this isn't the case. The method you propose actually has a pretty massive usability flaw. When someone signs up on my site, they are immediately logged in and free to use it. Content they upload/create isn't made visible to other until they confirm their account registration via emailed link. The email verification is to prevent spammers. Signups occur almost always directly because "I want to do X", and if you put a barrier between the sign up and the "do X" like waiting a half hour for an email confirmation, then a significant number of people will simply give up and never complete the signup.

Xylakant 14y ago
Yes, true, there are some cases where you don't need double opt-in, but we're in trade-off territory here [1]. If you decide that your customers value privacy less than usability, fine with me. The point is: It can be done. [1] Most services that I've signed up to lately log you in once you confirm the email. That's what I regard as the best compromise and for that case, the scheme works perfectly without leaking information.
- papsosouid 14y ago
  You are confusing two issues. The first is that you don't need double opt in. This is simply the reality, you don't. There is no such German law. The only law like that is that you need to prove people opted in if you send them commercial email. The second is the usability question. Sites where you can't login until you have received and clicked the activation link are throwing away signups. The usability of "wait a half hour before you can do anything" is really, really poor. You can certainly argue that having fewer signups is a worthwhile trade-off to gain some privacy, and in some cases I might even agree. But I don't think that is true in most cases. As others have pointed out, you get thousands of emails about signup/login/reset related issues when you try not to leak this info. You get zero emails about leaking it.
  - Xylakant 14y ago
    I'm not confusing anything. Yes, technically you're right: Only if I send them commercial emails I need their explicit consent. However, pretty much any email a commercial service sends may treated as a commercial email by a court - even the reminder "you signed up here". There's a whole bunch of special cases where that doesn't hold, however, if you're ever planning on sending emails you're making your companies lawyer sleep better if you have double opt-in. There's other reasons to use double opt in. I register for your service with no double opt in and I have a typo in my email address. I then log out and forget about it. I just lost my account. Double opt-in prevents that. Think of a forum where you can register with an email address and make public statements - if said forum has no double opt in and you register with my address and slander someone I'd take that forum to court since they neglected to prevent that. I might not win, but the forum would be drawn in the fight. I know that most corporate lawyers I've worked with get twitchy if you propose removing double opt in - even in cases where it's technically not required. I guess lawyers are more the "play it safe" kind of people. I agree with you that double opt in is not the silver bullet that magically fixes everything, but as I said - we're deep in trade-off territory here. I also dispute the point that you get zero emails about leaking the information that someone is registered. I have worked on projects where that information was absolutely privileged and it was of utmost importance that no info about who's registered could be leaked.
    - papsosouid 14y ago
      You clearly are confusing things, because you acting like I am arguing against email confirmations. Your response basically makes no sense as you are ignoring the method I use, and creating a false dichotomy of "double opt in or not". Your view of the legal situation is laughable. You are welcome to do whatever you like, but don't try to claim it is a legal requirement unless you are going to back that up with facts. >I also dispute the point that you get zero emails about leaking the information that someone is registered. I have worked on project where that information was absolutely privileged and it was of utmost importance that no info about who's registered could be leaked. It doesn't seem like you are trying to discuss this in good faith. Read my post again, I was pretty clear that privacy matters in some cases, but that I do not think it is the common case.

Xylakant 14y ago

Yes, true, there are some cases where you don't need double opt-in, but we're in trade-off territory here [1]. If you decide that your customers value privacy less than usability, fine with me. The point is: It can be done. [1] Most services that I've signed up to lately log you in once you confirm the email. That's what I regard as the best compromise and for that case, the scheme works perfectly without leaking information.

papsosouid 14y ago
You are confusing two issues. The first is that you don't need double opt in. This is simply the reality, you don't. There is no such German law. The only law like that is that you need to prove people opted in if you send them commercial email. The second is the usability question. Sites where you can't login until you have received and clicked the activation link are throwing away signups. The usability of "wait a half hour before you can do anything" is really, really poor. You can certainly argue that having fewer signups is a worthwhile trade-off to gain some privacy, and in some cases I might even agree. But I don't think that is true in most cases. As others have pointed out, you get thousands of emails about signup/login/reset related issues when you try not to leak this info. You get zero emails about leaking it.
- Xylakant 14y ago
  I'm not confusing anything. Yes, technically you're right: Only if I send them commercial emails I need their explicit consent. However, pretty much any email a commercial service sends may treated as a commercial email by a court - even the reminder "you signed up here". There's a whole bunch of special cases where that doesn't hold, however, if you're ever planning on sending emails you're making your companies lawyer sleep better if you have double opt-in. There's other reasons to use double opt in. I register for your service with no double opt in and I have a typo in my email address. I then log out and forget about it. I just lost my account. Double opt-in prevents that. Think of a forum where you can register with an email address and make public statements - if said forum has no double opt in and you register with my address and slander someone I'd take that forum to court since they neglected to prevent that. I might not win, but the forum would be drawn in the fight. I know that most corporate lawyers I've worked with get twitchy if you propose removing double opt in - even in cases where it's technically not required. I guess lawyers are more the "play it safe" kind of people. I agree with you that double opt in is not the silver bullet that magically fixes everything, but as I said - we're deep in trade-off territory here. I also dispute the point that you get zero emails about leaking the information that someone is registered. I have worked on projects where that information was absolutely privileged and it was of utmost importance that no info about who's registered could be leaked.
  - papsosouid 14y ago
    You clearly are confusing things, because you acting like I am arguing against email confirmations. Your response basically makes no sense as you are ignoring the method I use, and creating a false dichotomy of "double opt in or not". Your view of the legal situation is laughable. You are welcome to do whatever you like, but don't try to claim it is a legal requirement unless you are going to back that up with facts. >I also dispute the point that you get zero emails about leaking the information that someone is registered. I have worked on project where that information was absolutely privileged and it was of utmost importance that no info about who's registered could be leaked. It doesn't seem like you are trying to discuss this in good faith. Read my post again, I was pretty clear that privacy matters in some cases, but that I do not think it is the common case.