Three ways spammers get your address
Paul explains 3 ways spammers get your email address.
Related Posts
Delivery lore
(Image from Bad Astronomy)
Almost every delivery consultant, delivery expert or deliverability blog offers their secrets to understanding spam filters. As a reader, though, how do you know if the author knows what they’re talking about? For instance, on one of the major delivery blogs had an article today saying that emails with a specific subject line will not get past spam filters.
This type of statement is nothing new. The lore around spam filters and what they do and do not do permeates our industry. Most of the has achieved the status of urban legend, and yet is still repeated as gospel. Proof? I sent an email with the subject line quoted in the above blog post to my aol, yahoo, gmail and hotmail accounts. Within 3 minutes of sending the email it was in the inbox of all 4 accounts
I can come up with any number of reasons why the email ended up in my inbox, rather than being caught by spam filters as the delivery expert originally claimed. But none of those reasons really matter. The expert in question is spreading delivery lore that is demonstrably false. Emails with that subject line will get through spam filters. I even added an extra 4 exclamation points in the subject line.
Not all delivery lore is true. In fact, most lore involving “always” “all” “never” or “none” is not going to be true. Just because you read it on the internet, and because it came from someone claiming to know what they’re talking about does not absolve individual senders from critically thinking about the information.
Privacy policies in court
Venkat has an analysis of a case where an individual provided a unique address to a vendor and that vendor released the address in violation of the posted privacy policy. The federal court rejected the suit due to the failure of the plaintiff to provide evidence of harm.
I posted last week about privacy policies and how often they are intentionally or unintentionally violated and when email addresses leak. Courts have consistently ruled against plaintiffs. It seems that the courts believe merely revealing information, even in contradiction to a posted privacy policy, is not actionable by the plaintiff.
As a consumer, I really don’t like the ruling. If a company is going to post a privacy policy, then they should follow it and if they don’t, I should be able to hold them responsible for their lies. Back in the land of reality, I am not surprised at the rulings. Individuals have never owned their personal information, it is the property of the people who compile and sell data
It does mean, however, that privacy polices are not worth the paper they’re written on.
Brand name spam
I’ve been getting a lot more spam advertising name brand companies. Places like FTD Flowers, Seattle Coffee Direct, Wal-Mart, Jet Blue, Gevalia and VistaPrint seem to all be working with spammers. In some cases, I am getting the same email to different email addresses from different domains and different IP addresses.
I am sure, if asked, all the advertised companies would say they have no knowledge of spamming by their vendors. I’m sure they would say that their vendors tell them I opted in to the email and must have just forgotten. I am sure that this isn’t really spam.
Except it really is spam. Real companies with real brands do use the services of spammers. When caught they loudly protest their innocence and talk about rogue affiliates. In the best cases they will “fire” the affiliate and then look the other way when the affiliate signs back up.
Spam is sending mail to people who never requested it. Hiring someone to do it for you doesn’t mean you aren’t a spammer. With the economy tanking and companies trying to maximize their bottom line, more and more name brands seem to be jumping on the spam bandwagon. It is not an unexpected development, but it will mean more aggressive spam filtering and more difficult email delivery for everyone.