Re: the strictest antispam laws?
Wesley Peng writes: > Hello > > I saw a trend that, every ESP has taken hard work on antispam policy. > For example, from my test cases: > > 1. gmail totally can't be registered from PC, only mobile client (gmail, > outlook etc) can sign up a new username. they require mobile > verification in the process. > > 2. yahoo totally can't be registered without a mobile verification, and > each telephone number can be used once. > > 3. yandex is harder to sign up, it requires mobile verification, before > every message sending, they require you to input the auth code. > > 4. A new registered outlook email require you to input mobile number > once and once. > > 5. GMX/web.de stops auto-registration, every new registration they > require you to call their service telephone for manual verification. > > 6. yahoo.co.jp stops web registration, they require mobile verification, > and use a password-less solution for login. the first new messages > sending they require you to input Japanese auth code. > > 7. others including UKR, rambler, Netease have the silimiar rules. > > Does this mean every country has taken the strictest antispam laws for > privacy protection today? Spammers very seldom use gmail, yahoo or the like to send their spam. They register their own domain, the have their own mail server. I think that the request to attach a mail account to a phone number is rather: 1) COLLECT THE MAXIMUM OF DATA possible about users ... 98) increase the security for the users 99) prevent the creation of temporary, one time, disposable mailbox Best regards, Olivier > > Thanks & Regards. > > --
Re: the strictest antispam laws?
Am 21.11.2019 um 09:01 schrieb Wesley Peng: Hello I saw a trend that, every ESP has taken hard work on antispam policy. For example, from my test cases: 1. gmail totally can't be registered from PC, only mobile client (gmail, outlook etc) can sign up a new username. they require mobile verification in the process. 2. yahoo totally can't be registered without a mobile verification, and each telephone number can be used once. 3. yandex is harder to sign up, it requires mobile verification, before every message sending, they require you to input the auth code. 4. A new registered outlook email require you to input mobile number once and once. 5. GMX/web.de stops auto-registration, every new registration they require you to call their service telephone for manual verification. 6. yahoo.co.jp stops web registration, they require mobile verification, and use a password-less solution for login. the first new messages sending they require you to input Japanese auth code. 7. others including UKR, rambler, Netease have the silimiar rules. Does this mean every country has taken the strictest antispam laws for privacy protection today? Thanks & Regards. Why should a spammer care about law ? -- [*] sys4 AG https://sys4.de, +49 (89) 30 90 46 64 Schleißheimer Straße 26/MG,80333 München Sitz der Gesellschaft: München, Amtsgericht München: HRB 199263 Vorstand: Patrick Ben Koetter, Marc Schiffbauer, Wolfgang Stief Aufsichtsratsvorsitzender: Florian Kirstein
Re: the strictest antispam laws?
Dnia 21.11.2019 o godz. 16:01:04 Wesley Peng pisze: > > 1. gmail totally can't be registered from PC, only mobile client > (gmail, outlook etc) can sign up a new username. they require mobile > verification in the process. What? Just a few weeks ago I made four new Gmail accounts from my home PC without any verification. However, I noticed I can't do the same from work, they require me to enter a phone number for verification when attempting to create a new account. Probably they monitor number of connections from a given IP and if there are hundreds or thousands of connections from the same IP (and there are, as my company uses G Suite), they block the possibility to create new accounts without verification. However, it is totally possible from a low-used home connection. > Does this mean every country has taken the strictest antispam laws > for privacy protection today? I don't know of any substantial law change in this aspect. These all seem just to be individual policies of the mentioned providers. -- Regards, Jaroslaw Rafa r...@rafa.eu.org -- "In a million years, when kids go to school, they're gonna know: once there was a Hushpuppy, and she lived with her daddy in the Bathtub."
Re: the strictest antispam laws?
Hi Wesley, see my post on risk vs reward for background. I left this out because it was getting too long, but it appears the big ESPs (Microsoft and Google for example) are curating. In other words, they are probably are working very very hard to avoid the perception of being cesspools of spam and throwaway accounts. That has uses for them (validating identity, mapping an identity to multiple devices and relationships), it is also positive for people not on those services if they maintain higher standards for identity and behavior than the internet at large; and if they don't then they run the risk of being perceived as cesspools of spam and throwaway accounts. -- Fred Morris On Thu, 21 Nov 2019, Wesley Peng wrote: [...] I saw a trend that, every ESP has taken hard work on antispam policy. [...] Does this mean every country has taken the strictest antispam laws for privacy protection today?
