I think that you might want to reevalute e-hawk. The price is really competitive: http://www.e-hawk.net/pricing/
That said prefiltering out known-by-you bad ones is always smart. Tom On Feb 21, 2015, at 6:35 AM, Gil Bahat <g...@magisto.com> wrote: > From Magisto's perspective, having publicly announced reaching 50 million > users 2.5 months ago, such costs can rack up very, very quickly to tens of > thousands of dollars per month. This applies not just to e-hawk but also to > akismet, to email verification/validation services and to transaction fraud > services. at least the latter can be directly linked to revenue... > > At minimum to make this economically viable, we will have to wrap any such > service with our own rudimentary implementation to filter out / downrank the > blatantly bad stuff. > I didn't do this research for signup fraud yet, but for e-mail address > verification there is little point in getting an inflated bill from your > vendor for doing something which you can do in-house cheaply and efficiently, > like maintain a DEA blacklist, good domain whitelist and do some parked > domain detection. And then let the vendor handle the more complex remaining > stuff. > > Gil > > > On Sat, Feb 21, 2015 at 12:13 PM, Paul Kincaid-Smith <p...@sendgrid.com> > wrote: > I'm glad you found the UGC blog post useful, Gil. > > To make sure I understand your comment on pricing, were you referring to > E-Hawk's pricing or the costs to integrate other "blocklists and bot > detection mechanisms?" > > What orders of magnitude are you seeing for signups on your service? Seems > like an interesting problem to solve. > > On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 2:00 AM, Gil Bahat <g...@magisto.com> wrote: > Excellent stuff, comprehensive and yet very straightforward. e-hawk in > particular seems a great alternative to rolling something on our own and > starting to evaluate various blocklists and bot detection mechanisms. can get > very very expensive though at our signup rate. > I find the idea to apply akismet to outgoing UGC a great one, because > 'standard' outbound spam filters don't aim UGC sharing systems, rather they > aim at ISPs, ESPs and big webmail providers. > > Thanks a lot, extremely useful. > > Gil Bahat, > DevOps/Postmaster, > Magisto Ltd. > > On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 11:20 AM, Paul Kincaid-Smith <p...@sendgrid.com> > wrote: > Hello Gil, > > I am the postmaster for magisto, an app centered around user generated > content (UGC). we enjoy some popularity, and with popularity comes abuse. > There are users who utilize magisto to generate content to be used for > spamvertisement and/or other unsavory content. they will then "invite" users > to see this content, in an unsolicited fashion, using the built-in content > invite mechanism. > <snip, snip> > in short - recommendations are most welcome, reference to best practices or > case studies from applicable examples. > > Here is a blog post that consolidates my Delivery and Compliance teams' tips > for safely emailing user generated content: > https://sendgrid.com/blog/how-to-safely-email-user-generated-content/ > I hope it's helpful to you. > > --Paul > > > > > _______________________________________________ > mailop mailing list > mailop@mailop.org > http://chilli.nosignal.org/mailman/listinfo/mailop
_______________________________________________ mailop mailing list mailop@mailop.org http://chilli.nosignal.org/mailman/listinfo/mailop
