month that Scott
Weiss started Bonded Sender).
All we ask is that if you are going to do a ton of querying, that you transfer
the zone to a local copy instead of querying directly.
Anne
--
Anne P. Mitchell, Esq.
Email Law & Policy Attorney
Legislative Advisor
Author: Section 6 of the CAN-SPA
fact that we charge a relatively small
monthly sum to the senders makes firing them pretty painless. Thus it has
always been - best practices over money *always* - we can take this stand
because we are, always have been, and always will be, privately held, and the
buck stops with me).
Anne
--
Ann
B tests) not doing the right
thing!
Thank you,
Anne
---
Anne P. Mitchell, Esq.
Internet Law & Policy Attorney
CEO Institute for Social Internet Public Policy (ISIPP)
Author: Section 6 of the CAN-SPAM Act of 2003 (the Federal email marketing law)
Creator of the term 'deliverability
ubject line of the test
email.
Anne
---
Outsource your email deliverability headaches to us, and get to the inbox,
guaranteed!
www.GetToTheInbox.com
Anne P. Mitchell, Esq.
CEO Get to the Inbox by SuretyMail
Author: Section 6 of the CAN-SPAM Act of 2003 (the Federal email marketing law)
Au
Does anyone have a copy of the netflix phishing that they could forward to me
at amitch...@isipp.com, including the body of it?
TIA!
Anne
> On Feb 2, 2021, at 1:04 AM, Benny Pedersen wrote:
>
> On 2021-02-02 03:25, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
>> Since it's already hitting 8.9, why do more?
>
> t
rule-provision-under-can-spam-act
The more in-depth version is here:
https://www.ftc.gov/sites/default/files/documents/federal_register_notices/definitions-and-implementation-under-can-spam-act-16-cfr-part-316/080521canspamact.pdf
Anne
--
Anne P. Mitchell, Esq.
Dean of Cyberlaw & Cybersecur
mailings, each of which you have to
> seek out individually) is … well, not going to work with many users,
> especially the less technical.
Not to mention that it is a violation of Federal law. Federal law requires a
"one-step" unsubscribe method.
Anne
--
Anne P. Mitchell, Esq.
The offending sender has been terminated by the ESP.
> On Aug 7, 2019, at 3:06 PM, Anne P. Mitchell, Esq.
> wrote:
>
> Hi David!
>
> We are the IADB, and if you are getting spam from an accredited IP address,
> we definitely want to know about it. The reason that em
Hi David!
We are the IADB, and if you are getting spam from an accredited IP address, we
definitely want to know about it. The reason that email from that IP gets that
score is because it is supposed to be 100% opt-in - clearly if you didn't opt
in, then it's not - and so we will take the resp
>
> I don't want to weigh in on the perceived worth of your signature, but
> are you aware of the signature convention that has been around for
> decades? It is mentioned in RFC 3676 and many other places:
>
> There is a long-standing convention in Usenet news which also commonly
> appears i
> On Nov 24, 2018, at 4:25 PM, @lbutlr wrote:
>
> This is a very excessive signature block. I’m glad your proud of your resume,
> but inflicting itnon a mailing list with every post is a bit much.
It's not a matter of pride, and I generally don't disagree with you...however
when discussing
> On Nov 21, 2018, at 12:03 PM, Bill Cole
> wrote:
>
> On 21 Nov 2018, at 13:03, Anne P. Mitchell, Esq. wrote:
>
>> Except for the private right of action provided in GDPR, and small claims
>> court in the U.S.
>
> Are you saying an EU law can create an ac
tty damned gutsy.
It will almost certainly be sorted out through lawsuits, and that will
definitely be popcorn time.
> On Nov 21, 2018, at 11:03 AM, Anne P. Mitchell, Esq.
> wrote:
>
>
>
>> On Nov 21, 2018, at 8:48 AM, Bill Cole
>> wrote:
>>
>> T
> On Nov 21, 2018, at 8:48 AM, Bill Cole
> wrote:
>
> There is no reason for anyone without a commercial presence in the EU or CH
> to be concerned with GDPR.
Except for the private right of action provided in GDPR, and small claims court
in the U.S.
And, for entities that spam enough p
> The email address is an address, part of your personally identifiable data.
> If an identifiable entity in the US sends mass mail to European addresses,
> then they must have a representative in Europe and comply with the GDPR.
I somehow missed that John is in the U.K., and actually re-rea
>
> Gents,
Ahem. ;-)
>
> I somehow became subscribed to a list, political in nature, in whose mail I
> have no interest. This is a legitimate AFAIK, US organization.
>
> Thus far, several uses of their unsubscribe link had not provided relief.
> Direct email to the founder and ope
>
>>> There are spams hitting negative scoring rules e.g. MAILING_LIST_MULTI,
>>> RCVD_IN_RP_*, RCVD_IN_IADB_* and they are constantly trained as ham.
Just a reminder, if you ever receive spam which is tagged as RCVD_IN_IADB (or
*any* flavour of IADB tag) *please* forward it to me personal
>
> On Thu, 1 Mar 2018, Sebastian Arcus wrote:
>
>> I know I have brought up this issue on this list before, and sorry for the
>> persistence, but having 7 different rules adding scores for the IADB
>> whitelist still seems either ridiculous, or outright suspect:
>>
>> -0.2 RCVD_IN_IADB_RDN
>
> I know the definition of spam is very subjective and dependent on your
> particular the mail flow along with the expectations of the recipients.
>
Back when I was in-house counsel at MAPS, Paul (Vixie) and I came up with this
definition of spam:
“An electronic message is “spam” IF: (1)
Ironically, Gmail's spam filters have filtered every single one of the emails
in this thread. :-\
Anne
Anne P. Mitchell,
Attorney at Law
Author: Section 6 of the CAN-SPAM Act of 2003 (the Federal anti-spam law)
Legislative Consultant
CEO/President, Institute for Social Internet Public Policy
L
>
> My sense is that ESPs engage ISIPP thinking they are getting an advocate and
> ambassador to mailbox providers when in fact they get a teacher/evangelist
> for sender best practices.
ITYM 'schooled in best practices. ;-) ;-)
Anne P. Mitchell,
Attorney at Law
CEO/President,
SuretyMail
>
> What do you call *verified* opt-in (what the marketers call "double opt-in"),
> where the recipient needs to comfirm that they gave permission for contact
> via that email address before receiving any content, in order to avoid
> unwanted third-party subscriptions?
Confirmed opt-in, whi
>
> 'magically' re-subscribe after a while, or simply get around rules by
> creating a new list and re-subscribing everybody who unsubscribed.
Just so you know, that behavior is specifically made illegal by CAN-SPAM. And
Sebastian, I see that you are in the UK, which already has tighter law
Bill, thank you for this excellent explanation, and for the kind words!
For those of you who don't know us, or me, I came out of MAPS; I was in-house
counsel for MAPS during the first rash of lawsuits against MAPS brought by
spammers. To say that I am rabidly anti-spam would be an understateme
Hi Guys!
This thread was only just brought to our attention, and the thread is now
several levels deep and a bit old, so if you can help me out with letting me
know what the outstanding issues are, I'd really appreciate it.
As best as I can tell from reading through the thread online, there a
MailChimp has said that they believe that they have terminated all accounts
that were responsible for this. BUT, they say, this is a group that keeps
cropping up (think whack-a-mole), so to please report any more of these that
anyone receives.
Anne
Anne P. Mitchell,
Attorney at Law
Author: S
Sorry for top-posting, but just to let folks know, our contact has just let me
know that he is on this; I'll report back with anything I hear that I can share.
Anne
>
> Hi,
>
>>> Another email from a whitelisted mailchimp address that contains malware.
>>>
>>> https://pastebin.com/ay83iWjC
>
>
> On Friday 20 October 2017 at 19:29:31, Anne P. Mitchell Esq. wrote:
>
>> Anne P. Mitchell,
>> Attorney at Law
>
> I'm intrigued as to what the "Esq." in your From address indicates?
>
> Please feel free to reply offlist if appropriate
>
> Hi,
>
> Another email from a whitelisted mailchimp address that contains malware.
>
> https://pastebin.com/ay83iWjC
>
> It's also not tagged when not whitelisted, and I hoped someone had
> some ideas on what further can be done to block it.
>
> Complicating things, it's in Italian.
>
>
On 9/16/2017 4:36 PM, Chris wrote:
> I'm also seeing issues with ISIPP which is in 20_dnsbl_tests.cf. I've
> attached the message I sent them as well as their reply. Another issue I
> noticed with ISIPP is Sep 16 12:09:38 localhost named[1284]: host unreachable
> resolving 'ns1.ns.isipp.co
30 matches
Mail list logo
