On 1/28/24 21:44, Scott Mutter via mailop wrote:
What if the receiving mail server tagged the message in some way in
their final acknowledgement of the message. For Google. instead of:
250 2.0.0 OK 1706409809
h4-20020ac85844000000b10427e71c979dsi9837397zyh.449 - gsmtp
If the message is redirected to the user's spambox, the message could be:
250 2.0.0 OK 1706409809
h4-20020ac85844000000b10427e71c979dsi9837397zyh.449-spam - gsmtp
Or provide some number attached to the ID that identifies how much
spamminess the receiving mail server thinks the message is.
This would at least give a tool for the sending server to know if the
messages being sent out of their server are being flagged as spam.
It would also give feedback to spammers allowing them to fine-tune their
messages to avoid getting flagged. Bulk senders tend to think of spam as
"not what we do", but those on the receiving end often have much
different opinions. I'm looking at you, Sendgrid.
I get that it's a thin line between offering this information and that
information being abused by spammers to circumvent the receiving
server's anti-spam measures. But there's also no judicial system or
oversight in making these determinations. The receiving server gets to
be judge, jury, and executioner when it comes to making these
determinations. And because these email service providers are
"too-big-to-fail" it's never their fault for being overzealous with
their blocking or weighing scale. They can block whoever they want,
whenever they want, with no explanation at all.
Precisely. Their network, their rules. IMHO the spam folder is a pretty
good compromise compared to outright rejection. As a receiver, having a
spam folder allows me to occasionally check it for missed non-spam mail.
When the receiver flags such as non-spam that gives feedback that can be
used to tune the algorithm to prevent future similar non-spam from
winding up in the spam folder.
Conversely, when the receiver purges everything else in the spam folder
without opening it, this gives feedback that the decision to route it to
spam was correct.
None of this feedback gets back to the spammer-sender.
--
Jay Hennigan - j...@west.net
Network Engineering - CCIE #7880
503 897-8550 - WB6RDV
_______________________________________________
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop
