[mailop] Dicectory of SMTP providers, aka Hacker News Discussion - pt12

[Simon Lyall via mailop]

A few may have seen:

After self-hosting my email for twenty-three years I have thrown in the towel
Article: 
https://cfenollosa.com/blog/after-self-hosting-my-email-for-twenty-three-years-i-have-thrown-in-the-towel-the-oligopoly-has-won.html
Discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32715437

and

Self-Hosted email is the hardest it's ever been, but also the easiest.
Article: 
https://vadosware.io/post/its-never-been-easier-or-harder-to-self-host-email/
Discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32720234

Which are mostly about how small sites have problems getting mail 
delivered to the big providers.


I am not proposing solving this today (and please no discussion on 
this) but I noticed the second post (and parts of the first post's 
discussion) talk about small sites relaying though larger providers to get 
delivery.


I was wondering if people would like to do a directory of service 
providers that enable this?[1] This could be as simple as notifying the 
second provider or I could personally host a page or we could have a page 
on the mailop site[2]


Thoughts on what/where to create such a list?

And please no discussion about fixing mail delivery for smaller sites, 
that topics comes up enough already.



[1] - This would be separate from API-driven providers, like mailchimp. 
Basically providers that people to sign up to and use as a smtp relay for 
all their outgoing email with a improved chance of it being delivered. And 
I know lots of providers kinda do both but I guess we can see how it ends 
up looking.


[2] - I am unsure if this would be a good idea, we want to keep mailop 
fairly neutral.


--
Simon Lyall  |  Very Busy  |  Web: http://www.simonlyall.com/
"To stay awake all night adds a day to your life" - Stilgar

___
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop

Re: [mailop] SMTP noise from *.bouncer.cloud

[Andrew C Aitchison via mailop]

On Sun, 4 Sep 2022, Radek Kaczynski via mailop wrote:


Thanks to members of this group I learned that
we still have a homework to be done if it comes to transparency, and
making it easier to folks like you to easily identify us.
I hate the fact that this topic has stolen so much time and
attention of some of you because it wasn’t as easy to identify
Bouncer.cloud ( http://bouncer.cloud/ ) :(



I think that I todays world there is so much polarization that
sometimes some center is needed. In this case, I think there are so
many senders who need to hear the rules, but unfortunately they
usually are not exposed to perspective of Mail Operators.  And I
know it sounds ridiculous but when they hear from a List Cleaner
some truth they may be bit more open to hear.

If it comes to GDPR compliance, if the “data subject” will approach
us about the information about them we will be obliged to act on
this.

As we are just a data processor we will have to inform the data
controller about such request and let them act.


I was going to suggest that you use, say
sa...@customer.pl
as the envelope sender in your probes.
That may have SPF, DKIM, DMARC implications,
but since it sales@ not personal data in GDPR terms,
in principle would you be happy to do that ?

Coincidentally, I have just been helping someone enable
SMTP VRFY in exim. I suppose that you do use VRFY
when it is availble ?

--
Andrew C. Aitchison  Kendal, UK
   and...@aitchison.me.uk___
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop

Re: [mailop] SMTP noise from *.bouncer.cloud

[Radek Kaczynski via mailop]

Carl, Yes, I’m aware that you do see the addresses, and thus the naming 
convention currently used is designed to be transparent- so there is no hiding.
Thanks to members of this group I learned that we still have a homework to be 
done if it comes to transparency, and making it easier to folks like you to 
easily identify us.
I hate the fact that this topic has stolen so much time and attention of some 
of you because it wasn’t as easy to identify Bouncer.cloud ( 
http://bouncer.cloud/ ) :(

Hans-Martin- thank you for pointing that out that there is some privacy-proxy 
turned on on those domains. That wasn’t my intention, and I’ll have to check 
that.

As I said- long time ago we decided not to hide.
Even though we are just a small team of 5 people, (far smaller company then 
most our competitors) thus very fragile to people in power like you.

I know our business model is far from being perfect, and I don’t like few 
things about it.
But I do see some bright side of it- I hope that when someone comes to us 
instead of to some
other email verifier- they will at least hear some of my “Email Deliverability 
- result of Love&Respect”speech.

Maybe it will change some behaviors of few “unaware spammers”.
I know I have a small influence, but in some cases can be a bridge between two 
opposite sides.

I think that I todays world there is so much polarization that sometimes some 
center is needed. In this case, I think there are so many senders who need to 
hear the rules, but unfortunately they usually are not exposed to perspective 
of Mail Operators.
And I know it sounds ridiculous but when they hear from a List Cleaner some 
truth they may be bit more open to hear.

If it comes to GDPR compliance, if the “data subject” will approach us about 
the information about them we will be obliged to act on this.

As we are just a data processor we will have to inform the data controller 
about such request and let them act.

However I’ll have to check with my legal council what should we do in case data 
controller does not act. I guess in that case we will have to reveal who is 
data controller - our customer. But I’d have to check.

If it comes to a spam trap where there is no actual person behind it, it’s bit 
trickier. Cause there is no person who’s information are processed by us- it’s 
a organization managing spam trap.
In that case I think I will have to protect personal data of my customer (as in 
this case I am data controller). Unless it is requested by law enforcement 
authorities.
But I’d have to check that too.

Kind Regards
Radek

 __ ___ ___ ___

*Radoslaw Kaczynski*

CEO of Bouncer
usebouncer.com ( https://www.usebouncer.com/ )
ul. Cypriana Kamila Norwida 24/1
50-374 Wrocław, Poland
💙 Become Bouncer’s Ambassador ( 
https://bouncer.partnerstack.com/?group=ambassadors )

On Sun, Sep 4 2022 at 11:28 PM, Hans-Martin Mosner < mailop@mailop.org > wrote:

> 
> 
> 
> Am 04.09.22 um 21:49 schrieb Radek Kaczynski via mailop:
> 
> 
> 
> > Those few domains with small traffic are:
> > - bringmesomejuice.com 
> > - iusedtolikeit.com 
> > - sometimeinthepast.com 
> > - mybigfluffyfriend.com 
> 
> 
> 
> You certainly realize why this marks your operation shady (just as most
> other e-mail verification businesses)?
> 
> 
> 
> Personal e-mail addresses are protected private information under european
> GDPR laws. When you process this data (and probing mail servers to see
> whether an e-mail exists is already some kind of processing) you need a
> valid reason under those laws, and of course you need to be identifiable,
> because the owner of such an e-mail address has a legal right to know who
> stores and processes their data for which purposes.
> 
> 
> 
> If you're using domain names registered through proxy services, hosted on
> a cloud provider who wouldn't reveal your identity unless we pry it from
> their cold dead hands, you're actively subverting these laws.
> 
> 
> 
> Of course, by stepping forward to participate in this discussion you're
> exposing yourself to quite some fire, that's pretty courageous and
> certainly a bit better than those cowards who prefer to stay anonymous.
> But still your business model is the same as theirs.
> 
> 
> 
> Even if you try to appear as friendly and open, would you be willing to
> reveal the names of your customers who requested an e-mail address
> verification if you were asked by the e-mail owner?
> 
> 
> 
> I had an exchange with someone from a similar service a while ago, after I
> found out that they (and some other mail validation services who didn't
> even reply to my request) have been trying to check an e-mail address on
> our server which did not exist (we reject such accesses without revealing
> whether the address exists or not). I set up the address as a spam trap
> when I noticed, and a very short time a

Re: [mailop] SMTP noise from *.bouncer.cloud

[Hans-Martin Mosner via mailop]

Am 04.09.22 um 21:49 schrieb Radek Kaczynski via mailop:

> Those few domains with small traffic are:
> - bringmesomejuice.com 
> - iusedtolikeit.com 
> - sometimeinthepast.com 
> - mybigfluffyfriend.com 

You certainly realize why this marks your operation shady (just as most other 
e-mail verification businesses)?

Personal e-mail addresses are protected private information under european GDPR laws. When you process this data (and 
probing mail servers to see whether an e-mail exists is already some kind of processing) you need a valid reason under 
those laws, and of course you need to be identifiable, because the owner of such an e-mail address has a legal right to 
know who stores and processes their data for which purposes.


If you're using domain names registered through proxy services, hosted on a cloud provider who wouldn't reveal your 
identity unless we pry it from their cold dead hands, you're actively subverting these laws.


Of course, by stepping forward to participate in this discussion you're exposing yourself to quite some fire, that's 
pretty courageous and certainly a bit better than those cowards who prefer to stay anonymous. But still your business 
model is the same as theirs.


Even if you try to appear as friendly and open, would you be willing to reveal the names of your customers who requested 
an e-mail address verification if you were asked by the e-mail owner?


I had an exchange with someone from a similar service a while ago, after I found out that they (and some other mail 
validation services who didn't even reply to my request) have been trying to check an e-mail address on our server which 
did not exist (we reject such accesses without revealing whether the address exists or not). I set up the address as a 
spam trap when I noticed, and a very short time after this it received porn and fake dating spam. I asked the validation 
service who their customer was, and they could or would not tell me (they claimed that they didn't have that data 
anymore, I can't verify or falsify that claim, of course).


As soon as a validation service is transparent about who they work for when checking an address, I may exempt them. Fat 
chance.


Cheers,
Hans-Martin

___
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop

Re: [mailop] SMTP noise from *.bouncer.cloud

[Carl Byington via mailop]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512

On Sun, 2022-09-04 at 19:49 +, Radek Kaczynski via mailop wrote:
> Regarding the list of IPs - I'd prefer to send it to the interested
> people directly.
> I'd like to have a track of record to whom I have exposed it and


You realize of course that when you connect to a mail server, we can see
the ip address you are using, and the dns naming convention that you
use. From that it is a simple script to generate the list below of
almost 1000 ip addresses.


> how they plan to act on it.

Feed the firewall, of course.

5.39.122.67 sbg5-mail-144.bouncer.cloud.
5.135.32.66 sbg5-mail-40.bouncer.cloud.
5.135.80.107 sbg5-mail-41.bouncer.cloud.
5.135.120.254 sbg5-mail-39.bouncer.cloud.
5.196.58.154 sbg5-mail-42.bouncer.cloud.
5.196.58.239 sbg5-mail-43.bouncer.cloud.
5.196.98.237 sbg5-mail-44.bouncer.cloud.
37.59.67.40 sbg5-mail-37.bouncer.cloud.
37.59.88.176 sbg5-mail-38.bouncer.cloud.
37.59.219.241 sbg5-mail-36.bouncer.cloud.
37.187.190.8 sbg5-mail-35.bouncer.cloud.
37.187.190.123 sbg5-mail-32.bouncer.cloud.
37.187.190.125 sbg5-mail-33.bouncer.cloud.
37.187.190.127 sbg5-mail-34.bouncer.cloud.
46.105.33.125 sbg5-mail-141.bouncer.cloud.
46.105.36.159 sbg5-mail-142.bouncer.cloud.
46.105.164.19 sbg5-mail-153.bouncer.cloud.
46.105.234.21 sbg5-mail-143.bouncer.cloud.
51.38.103.170 de1-mail-189.bouncer.cloud.
51.38.103.179 de1-mail-190.bouncer.cloud.
51.38.103.250 de1-mail-73.bouncer.cloud.
51.38.105.9 de1-mail-193.bouncer.cloud.
51.38.105.10 de1-mail-191.bouncer.cloud.
51.38.105.11 de1-mail-192.bouncer.cloud.
51.38.105.52 de1-mail-274.bouncer.cloud.
51.38.107.29 de1-mail-136.bouncer.cloud.
51.38.107.30 de1-mail-137.bouncer.cloud.
51.38.107.31 de1-mail-138.bouncer.cloud.
51.38.107.32 de1-mail-139.bouncer.cloud.
51.38.107.52 de1-mail-142.bouncer.cloud.
51.38.107.54 de1-mail-143.bouncer.cloud.
51.38.107.57 de1-mail-275.bouncer.cloud.
51.38.116.69 de1-mail-1.bouncer.cloud.
51.38.116.70 de1-mail-2.bouncer.cloud.
51.38.116.79 de1-mail-276.bouncer.cloud.
51.38.117.3 de1-mail-29.bouncer.cloud.
51.38.117.50 de1-mail-30.bouncer.cloud.
51.38.118.38 de1-mail-246.bouncer.cloud.
51.38.119.171 de1-mail-194.bouncer.cloud.
51.38.119.172 de1-mail-195.bouncer.cloud.
51.38.119.173 de1-mail-196.bouncer.cloud.
51.38.120.201 de1-mail-3.bouncer.cloud.
51.38.120.216 de1-mail-4.bouncer.cloud.
51.38.120.249 de1-mail-141.bouncer.cloud.
51.38.121.166 de1-mail-197.bouncer.cloud.
51.68.160.36 de1-mail-33.bouncer.cloud.
51.68.160.181 de1-mail-277.bouncer.cloud.
51.68.162.245 de1-mail-222.bouncer.cloud.
51.68.163.58 de1-mail-75.bouncer.cloud.
51.68.178.9 de1-mail-199.bouncer.cloud.
51.68.178.58 de1-mail-5.bouncer.cloud.
51.68.178.63 de1-mail-198.bouncer.cloud.
51.68.187.159 de1-mail-74.bouncer.cloud.
51.75.82.12 de1-mail-8.bouncer.cloud.
51.75.82.27 de1-mail-93.bouncer.cloud.
51.75.82.49 de1-mail-280.bouncer.cloud.
51.75.84.157 de1-mail-223.bouncer.cloud.
51.75.84.158 de1-mail-254.bouncer.cloud.
51.75.84.161 de1-mail-281.bouncer.cloud.
51.75.101.182 sbg5-mail-2.bouncer.cloud.
51.75.101.183 sbg5-mail-3.bouncer.cloud.
51.75.101.187 sbg5-mail-4.bouncer.cloud.
51.75.101.188 sbg5-mail-1.bouncer.cloud.
51.75.101.240 sbg5-mail-5.bouncer.cloud.
51.75.101.242 sbg5-mail-6.bouncer.cloud.
51.75.101.244 sbg5-mail-7.bouncer.cloud.
51.75.101.247 sbg5-mail-8.bouncer.cloud.
51.75.101.248 sbg5-mail-9.bouncer.cloud.
51.75.101.249 sbg5-mail-10.bouncer.cloud.
51.75.101.252 sbg5-mail-11.bouncer.cloud.
51.75.101.253 sbg5-mail-12.bouncer.cloud.
51.75.104.8 sbg5-mail-15.bouncer.cloud.
51.75.104.56 sbg5-mail-13.bouncer.cloud.
51.75.104.57 sbg5-mail-14.bouncer.cloud.
51.75.153.68 de1-mail-6.bouncer.cloud.
51.75.153.69 de1-mail-7.bouncer.cloud.
51.75.154.78 de1-mail-251.bouncer.cloud.
51.75.154.88 de1-mail-252.bouncer.cloud.
51.75.154.91 de1-mail-253.bouncer.cloud.
51.75.154.92 de1-mail-278.bouncer.cloud.
51.75.154.104 de1-mail-247.bouncer.cloud.
51.75.154.105 de1-mail-248.bouncer.cloud.
51.75.154.106 de1-mail-249.bouncer.cloud.
51.75.154.114 de1-mail-250.bouncer.cloud.
51.75.155.157 de1-mail-79.bouncer.cloud.
51.75.155.158 de1-mail-80.bouncer.cloud.
51.75.155.167 de1-mail-81.bouncer.cloud.
51.75.155.168 de1-mail-82.bouncer.cloud.
51.75.155.169 de1-mail-83.bouncer.cloud.
51.75.155.170 de1-mail-84.bouncer.cloud.
51.75.155.171 de1-mail-85.bouncer.cloud.
51.75.155.172 de1-mail-86.bouncer.cloud.
51.75.155.173 de1-mail-87.bouncer.cloud.
51.75.155.174 de1-mail-88.bouncer.cloud.
51.77.77.185 de1-mail-37.bouncer.cloud.
51.77.77.186 de1-mail-38.bouncer.cloud.
51.77.77.187 de1-mail-39.bouncer.cloud.
51.77.77.188 de1-mail-40.bouncer.cloud.
51.77.77.189 de1-mail-41.bouncer.cloud.
51.77.77.190 de1-mail-42.bouncer.cloud.
51.77.77.191 de1-mail-43.bouncer.cloud.
51.77.77.192 de1-mail-44.bouncer.cloud.
51.77.77.193 de1-mail-45.bouncer.cloud.
51.77.77.194 de1-mail-46.bouncer.cloud.
51.77.77.195 de1-mail-47.bouncer.cloud.
51.77.77.196 de1-mail-48.bouncer.cloud.
51.77.77.197 de1-mail-49.bouncer.cloud.
51.77.77.198 de1-mail-50.bouncer.cloud.
51.77.

Re: [mailop] SMTP noise from *.bouncer.cloud

[Radek Kaczynski via mailop]

Hi Jarland,
As I mentioned before, I'm not a fan of cold email in general and specifically 
mass cold email.

I'm also not a representative of any company supporting cold email.

But to be fair, I have to say that as far as I'm concerned, users of Woodpecker 
are not able to do the old "spray and pray" technique - as Woodpecker imposes 
some limits.

Folks there, as I've heard and seen, are trying their best to educate their 
users to go for quality not quantity.
Which:

- starts with very good, manual prospecting,

- creating templates of messages, but...
- manually crafting big blocks of messages per recipient, so it is really 
personalized.

I've learned from them that they want to provide SMBs with a tool that will 
automate some repetitive tasks so that they can focus on their relationships.

I think that mass spamming is not happening via cold-email tools.

Anyways, don't want to be devil's advocate here, just wanted to share my 
perspective.

Kind Regards

Radek

 __ ___ ___ ___

*Radoslaw Kaczynski*

CEO of Bouncer
usebouncer.com ( https://www.usebouncer.com/ )
ul. Cypriana Kamila Norwida 24/1
50-374 Wrocław, Poland
💙 Become Bouncer’s Ambassador ( 
https://bouncer.partnerstack.com/?group=ambassadors )

On Sun, Sep 04, 2022 at 01:13:27, Jarland Donnell < mailop@mailop.org > wrote:

> 
> 
> 
> I think it's fair to say that there is "some" room for nuance on cold
> email, but the reason I don't allow it on my platform and I actively work
> to block companies that do, is simply this:
> 
> 
> 
> There is absolutely no one out there looking for help to send a cold email
> that isn't sending spam.
> 
> 
> 
> I mean if I see you and what you do and I think "We could really do
> something good together" I write you a personalized email, by hand, asking
> if you'd like to do business together. Is that spam? Of course not. But
> then there's what actually happens when someone needs help from a cold
> email company:
> 
> 
> 
> I collect a list of email addresses at companies that match a specific
> filter/business type, run a script to replace a variable with their name,
> and then blast out 4,000 duplicate emails with the old "spray and pray"
> technique. It's a numbers game, I don't care if you don't get back to me
> because I don't even know who you are. You were just part of a scraped
> list.
> 
> 
> 
> While the single, hand-typed cold email is fine, the automated cold email
> blast is spam. By merely saying "we want to help you send cold email"
> you're only focusing on the latter. Because when you're personally
> hand-writing a message to someone that you want to do business with, you
> don't need a service to help you do it.
> 
> 
> 
> On 2022-09-03 17:43, Radek Kaczynski via mailop wrote:
> 
> 
>> 
>> 
>> Good evening,
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> I feel like I need to come clean on the Bouncer - Woodpecker association
>> and my perspective on cold email.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> (But please let me know if my responses are not welcome - I feel here like
>> a guest, and I don’t want to abuse your hospitality)
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Long story short - when working for Mack Trucks, we had issues when an
>> email address was passed over the counter at the dealerships. Many typos
>> were affecting not only the continuity of communication but also master
>> data management and further processes down the road. At the same time, I
>> was going through a divorce and decided to move back from the U.S. to
>> Poland.
>> When I told my friend (CEO of Woodpecker) about it, he motivated me and
>> helped me to take a big step - quitting my corporate job and starting
>> Bouncer.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> So I’m not directly associated with Woodpecker, but indeed there is some
>> connection between Bouncer and Woodpecker:
>> - Woodpecker’s CEO is my close friend from high school,
>> - He helped me establish Bouncer, when I decided to come back from the
>> U.S. to Poland,
>> - Some Woodpecker’s shareholders are also Bouncer’s shareholders,
>> - Woodpecker is one of Bouncer’s customers,
>> - We initially had offices in the same building.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> If it comes to the cold email… I think it’s not that black&white…
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> I personally am not a fan of cold email, and sometimes do get irritated by
>> the spammy one.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> But I also see it sometimes as an equalizer - giving the same chances when
>> competing with global enterprises.
>> This way, small businesses can reach out to potentially interested
>> customers - which is very costly and very difficult in other communication
>> channels.
>> Small businesses can’t usually afford sophisticated marketing funnels
>> (full of Ads, LeadMagnets, Remarketing to get opt-in, and then sharing the
>> contact in the network of affiliates). In a cold email, you don’t have to
>> have huge budgets only because your big competitors can afford high
>> Customer Acquisition Costs.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> But RESPECTFUL cold email is complicated and thus rare to see. Cause
>> respect

Re: [mailop] SMTP noise from *.bouncer.cloud

[Radek Kaczynski via mailop]

Hello,

> 
> 
> 
> Probably easier just to post it here.
> 
> 
> 

Our main domain for email verifications is *bouncer.cloud* ( 
http://bouncer.cloud/ ).

We do have some small traffic going through a few other domains that we have 
set in the initial days.

We did not mean to hide, but looking at our competitors thought it was good to 
have many domains.

Later on, we discovered that a multiple-domains set-up is aimed to hide, so we 
abandoned this strategy and stuck to bouncer.cloud ( http://bouncer.cloud/ ).

Those few domains with small traffic are:

- bringmesomejuice.com ( http://bringmesomejuice.com/ )

- iusedtolikeit.com ( http://iusedtolikeit.com/ )

- sometimeinthepast.com ( http://sometimeinthepast.com/ )

- mybigfluffyfriend.com ( http://mybigfluffyfriend.com/ )

So as you can see not much to block there ;)

Regarding the list of IPs - I'd prefer to send it to the interested people 
directly.

I'd like to have a track of record to whom I have exposed it and how they plan 
to act on it.

Anyone interested - please shoot me an email at ra...@usebouncer.com.

Kind Regards

Radek

 __ ___ ___ ___

*Radoslaw Kaczynski*

CEO of Bouncer
usebouncer.com ( https://www.usebouncer.com/ )
ul. Cypriana Kamila Norwida 24/1
50-374 Wrocław, Poland
💙 Become Bouncer’s Ambassador ( 
https://bouncer.partnerstack.com/?group=ambassadors )

On Sun, Sep 04, 2022 at 00:52:13, Carl Byington < mailop@mailop.org > wrote:

> 
> 
> 
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA512
> 
> 
> 
> On Sun, 2022-09-04 at 00:43 +0200, Radek Kaczynski via mailop wrote:
> 
> 
>> 
>> 
>> If any of you would like to get a full list of our IP addresses and
>> domains so that you can block Bouncer's requests - please feel free to
>> email me at radek@ usebouncer. com ( ra...@usebouncer.com ).
>> 
>> 
> 
> 
> 
> Probably easier just to post it here.
> 
> 
> 
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
> 
> 
> 
> iHMEAREKADMWIQSuFMepaSkjWnTxQ5QvqPuaKVMWwQUCYxPahxUcY2FybEBmaXZl
> LXRlbi1zZy5jb20ACgkQL6j7milTFsHurwCfdx61FTKS+ojFTEWYHLsTfdaFBm4A
> n2hadXNEhOVjlpeJfEt3o7TX6pf8
> =5NsA
> -END PGP SIGNATURE-
> 
> 
> 
> ___
> mailop mailing list
> mailop@ mailop. org ( mailop@mailop.org )
> https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop
> 
> 
>___
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop