Tagged Email Addresses

Sept 17, 2019: Shutting down comments on this post because we cannot help you recover any email account and I am concerned about the number of people who are providing PII (including phone numbers, credit card numbers!!! and email addresses) in the comments. 

A tagged email address is any email address that provides some additional information to the recipient when they receive email sent to that address – typically something about who they originally gave that email address to or what the email address was intended to be used for.
As a very simple example, someone may have a “real” email address provided by their ISP and a gmail address. If they only ever sign up for bulk email using their gmail account then they know that any bulk email they receive at their ISP email address is not mail they signed up for, and hence that it’s spam.
A more flexible way of having multiple email addresses is what’s known as “boxing” or “tagging” – being able to make up new variants of your email address on the fly. How that’s done varies depending on the mail system you use, but typically you’ll be able to add a string to the end of your email address, separated by a “+” or a “-“. For example, if my main email address is steve@blighty.com I can create a tagged address like steve-blogspam@blighty.com. They’ll both be delivered to my inbox by default, or I can use the tag to route the mail to another mailbox (either using the filtering rules in my mail client, or something like procmail or sieve running on the mailserver).
Because I’ve never sent mail from the email address steve-blogspam@blighty.com, nor given it to anyone, nor even mentioned it anywhere other than this blog post I know that any email I get to it was sent by a spammer who harvested it from this page or the blog rss feed. On the other end of the spectrum I have tagged email addresses that I’ve created specifically to give to one of our vendors, and so I know that if I see email sent to that tagged address it’s almost certainly mail from that vendor, and I should have it skip my spam filters and send it directly to my inbox or a mailbox specifically for mail from vendors.
I’ve talked previously about some of the implications of address tagging for ESPs, both for signup and list hygiene, and Laura has talked about tagged, disposable and temporary addresses from a recipient perspective. Today I’m going to touch on another aspect of them – they mean that if you harvest addresses, or purchase addresses, sooner or later you’re going to get caught.
Last month I got a mail from a senior account executive (aka “salesweasel”) at Cisco/WebEx:

Hello Steve,
I am the Cisco WebEx Solutions Specialist responsible for supporting your region.
Are you available this week or next for a brief discussion of your current business objectives?
I would like to share some creative ideas about how you can reduce expenses and increase productivity throughout your organization.
Please reply with the best time to reach you.
Best regards,

I don’t recall ever having any relationship with WebEx, and we swapped out all our Cisco networking gear quite some years ago. It could be that I gave them a business card at a trade show or somesuch, as I was vaguely looking at web conferencing providers a couple of years back – but it’s a bit odd that it doesn’t have my full name, nor does the salesweasel seem to know who my employer is. Sure enough, the mail wasn’t sent to either my personal or work addresses – it was sent to a tagged address. If that tagged address had been steve-webex or steve-cisco that would have told me that I probably had given it to them at some point in the distant past.
It wasn’t, though. Instead it was a tagged address that had only ever been used for one thing – it was used to register a domain that’s used primarily to host the CBL blacklist’s website. So WebEx or, more likely, the salesweasel is harvesting email addresses from whois in order to send spam to them, or is buying lists of addresses from someone who did. Given that they’d have to violate their agreement with the .org domain registry to do that, it’s clearly unethical business behaviour (and possibly even punishable by a fine or imprisonment of no more than one year).
I just caught a potential vendor playing fast and loose with privacy. At the very least, that makes it unlikely I’d use them unless I got a really good explanation as to how this happened, and how they’d prevent it happening in the future.
It’s bad marketing, and the more technically literate your target demographic is the more likely they are to catch this sort of behaviour, and the more they’ll hold it against you. If your company doesn’t have a policy against this sort of address acquisition, it’s a good time to think about one (“Don’t do that.”). And if you do have one, check that your salesweasels are aware of it, and that it applies to email addresses bought from jigsaw or appendleads or zoominfo or emailappenders just as much as it does to that CD of fifty million email addresses they bought from a guy in a bar.
Edit 1/6/2015: We do not run tagged.com or have any connection with Tagged. We cannot help you. We cannot disconnect your account. We cannot fix your address problems.

Related Posts

The psychic and the not-really-opt-in

I’ve been getting a continual stream of spam from a psychic. I blogged about it a few months ago, and even had a call with the psychic’s ESP. None of that seemed to matter. Every few days I’d get another ad for psychic candles, or recording services or whatever. It wasn’t mail I could easily filter, and every time I’d get it I’d growl and dump it in my junk folder.
Yesterday, I received another mail from her. The subject line is “list opt-in verification.” Really? Could she really be actually confirming her list? Actually asking if I want to continue receiving mail?

Read More

TWSD: Run, hide and obfuscate

Spammers and spamming companies have elevated obfuscating their corporate identities to an artform. Some of the more dedicated, but just this side of legal, spammers set up 3 or 4 different front companies: one to sell advertising, one or more to actually send mail, one to get connectivity and one as a backup for when the first three fail. Because they use rotating domain names and IP addresses all hidden behind fake names or “privacy protection services”, the actual spammer can be impossible to track without court documents.
One example of this is Ken Magill’s ongoing series of reports about EmailAppenders.
Aug 5, 2008 Ouch: A List-Purchase Nighmare
Sept 9, 2008 Umm… About EmailAppenders’ NYC Office
Sept 15, 2008 E-mail Appending Plot Thickens
Nov 11, 2008 EmailAppenders Hawking Bogus List, Claims Publisher
Dec 23, 2008 Internet Retailer Sues EmailAppenders
Feb 1, 2009 EmailAppenders Update
Mar 10, 2009 Another Bogus E-mail List Claimed
April 14, 2009 EmailAppenders a Court No-Show, Says Internet Retailer
April 21, 2009 EmailAppenders Gone? New Firm Surfaces
May 5, 2009 EmailAppenders Back with New Web Site, New Name
Their actions, chronicled in his posts, are exactly what I see list providers, list brokers and “affiliate marketers” do every day. They hide, they lie, they cheat and they obfuscate. When someone finally decides to sue, they dissolve one company and start another. Every new article demonstrates what spammers do in order to stay one step ahead of their victims.
While Ken has chronicled one example of this, there are dozens of similar scammers. Many of them don’t have a persistent reporter documenting all the company changes, so normal due diligence searches fail to turn up any of the truth. Companies looking for affiliates or list sources often fall victim to scammers and spammers, and suffer delivery and reputation problems as a result.
Companies that insist on using list sellers, lead generation companies and affilates must protect themselves from these sorts of scammers. Due diligence can be a challenge, because of the many names, domains and businesses these companies hide behind. Those tasked with investigating affiliates, address sources or or mailing partners can use some of the same investigative techniques Ken did to identify potential problems.

Read More

Did anyone actually look at this email before sending?

I received spam advertising AARP recently. Yes, AARP. Oh, of course they didn’t send me spam, they hired someone who probably hired someone who contracted with an affiliate marketer to send mail.
The affiliates, while capable of bypassing spam filters, are incapable of actually sending readable mail.

Read More