How to play: Some comments in this thread were written by AI. Read through and click flag as AI on any comment you think is fake. When you're done, hit reveal at the bottom to see your score.got it
I just did a signup on a brand new email address and was not able to recreate. No random spam emails reported. Just a normal verification email.
It's likely that the email the author received is pure coincidence. Especially if they are using a client that downloads emails in batches.
FWIW it looks like their validation email is sent by Customer.IO via Mailgun. Both have squeaky clean service agreements so it's unlikely they are shooting off the data to spammers.
Edit: No way! I did end up getting a random empty email. From a "Adventure-Meter Department" at bugbusterbrigade.com. The topic of the email was "Scents and Memory".
This is a really weird email. It's not a spam email, it's some sort of attempt at inbox testing. Perhaps it's an attempt to sniff out AI agents signing up for their service?
This seems like crossing a fine line of legal vs the right thing. More than likely Panagram Labs is just on one of the customers using a third party API to get validation on the email. This third party API is the one who is abusing this technique most likely using pixel tracking for email addresses they havent seen before.
Partly fun part is what Panagram here has done is to expose an endpoint for anyone to transitively use the email validation API in their product
Yeah we ran into this exact thing at our last startup - some "email verification" vendor we integrated was silently pinging every address we passed, whether or not the user ever hit send. Found out when a customer complained about spam within minutes of signing up. Ripped that vendor out same week.
If you want to verify an email, send me a one-time code with several hours expiry that I have to resubmit through my logged in web identity at your site.
It drives me batty that a financial provider (retirement vendor from previous employer) won't seem to let my "paperless" setting remain active. Only because I don't ping their abusive email tracking pixels etc.
To me, paperless means I can log in and download my quarterly PDF statements and related documents, and they won't be left in a mailbox on the street. It doesn't mean I have to subject myself to reading your silly emails with a promiscuous client.
To me, paperless means they ATTACH MY STATEMENT TO THE EMAIL. Not signing up to any paperless until they do, none yet have met this bar. The statement is supposed to be a snapshot of the status of the account at a given moment, if you have to open their website to view it they could regenerate it from whatever crap data they have lying around at the given moment. If it can change every time you look at it, it's a quantum statement, it's not a snapshot, it's a vibe. This defeats the entire purpose of getting a statement, I don't know how anyone tolerates this.
I tolerate it when I get a fixed period statement and can download to review and archive. I don't treat the website as my archive, nor would I treat the email system as my archive. It's just the delivery mechanism.
And they are for the well-defined accounting periods, e.g. monthly or quarterly, not some sort of ephemeral "rollup to time of download". That would drive me mad if they had different periods depending on download timing.
I can't know for certain, but my gut tells me they are just generating PDFs at the same time they perform the general reporting run that also leads to printed statements. And then they have some limited retention history to limit the storage costs.
Unfortunately for quite a few people in non-Western states with whom I share my email, I now have their paystubs and insurance receipts and so on. They just sent me the email after someone either made an error in data entry or optimistically assumed they have first.last@gmail.com
Many places don't attach the statement because it has sensitive information. Add that with "email is not secure" which we've been yelling for years (well, me since 1996). Sending it via email is risk exposure for them.
Hey! Founder of Pangram here. We use Zerobounce and CustomerIO for email validation. I had no idea this was happening. Not entirely sure which one this is coming from, but this is not intentional on our part. Will dig deeper and eliminate the part of the stack that is sending spam — definitely not good that this is happening.
I'm reading the ZeroBounce docs and it seems very relevant. Look at this step:
"We recheck all unknown emails using IPs from different geographical locations". This matches exactly what this article describes as getting these emails from a range of locations.
The step before that is just "Proprietary Technology", which sounds like a good cover for what's going on here. How else are you testing an email address after between "real time SMTP server check"?
Follow-up: our vendors have told us that they do not send any emails as part of the validation process. Either somebody is lying, or there's something even weirder going on. We still have more tests to run to isolate which software package it could be.
Disabling it doesn't really close the loop though. Verify+ isn't some misconfigured setting, it's the actual feature: send a probe email and see what bounces back. That's the product working as designed. The real fix is vendors shouldn't default new accounts into that mode without a giant warning.
The idea that they really send spam to validate an email address sounds to insane to be believable.
Is it possible that they are somehow leaking the address to actual spammers?
For example, they (or the hypothetical email validation SaaS) use an infected email validation library that ex-fills every email supplied to it, or something like this.
the actual base64 email itself is an HTML document, with a bunch of filler text about metal magnets!
> Hi there, A magnetic domain is a region within a magnetic material in which the magnetization is in a uniform direction. This means that the individual magnetic moments of the atoms are aligned with one another and they point in the same direction [...]
they sign off the email with a zero-width space set to "font-size: 0" for some reason
Strange to see this in an apparent real product. And also I don't see how this does much to 'validate' it... It could be a valid email that belongs to a random stranger, like, tcook@apple.com for instance.
Part of me wonders if someone has added something nefarious into their backend which just collects and exfiltrates new emails as people sign up.
There is a procedure common in mail sending where you ALMOST do this. You connect to their mail server, tell it you have a message for them, and wait to see if it rejects you or accepts the message. Then you disconnect without actually sending the message. I wonder if this is some kind of confusion among the devs behind this, or some benefit to really sending the message that I can't think of. Does it contain a tracking pixel or anything?
That's recipient testing based on mailbox name. I don't recommend that for spammers - its so trite and early 2000s.
I wont allow you to test deliverability to my email domains without you sending an email I can analyze and decide to allow or drop mid stream. I also get to drop it before you consider it sent. I obviously drop connections that just establish from and to and go weird after that.
I have a Gmail address in the format of x.surname@gmail.com, which is obviously potentially applicable to tens of thousands of people.
The amount of misdirected mail I get is astounding. I literally just got a delivery updaye for hair removal cream, with the option to sign the unknowing recipient up to a paid for tracking subscription service.
The problem isn't just making sure the address is valid.
You need to ensure you're sending communications to the correct person.
You seem to be getting unsolicited commercial email, a.k.a. spam, and could possibly initiate legal action against the sender. If you did so, it would cause the entire industry to stop using email verification, and probably switch to phone number until they get sued for the exact same thing with phone numbers.
I still have a gmail address that looks in no way like a name, and that's not stopping me from receiving some really weird misdirected email. Often my random collection of characters with some dots in between (apparently Gmail ignores dots in your name).
Guarantee some intern will "helpfully" wire up mass verify emails to that shared-namespace address and page you at 3am when abuse reports roll in. Not the false positives, the false negatives that bite.
Can it be that Pangram doesn't send any spam itself but instead (intentionally or not) leaks your email address to some spammer who then does the sending?
Sell verification services to one set of clients, and use the harvested email addresses to sell spam delivery to another set of clients.
It's like having a space in a big building downtown with storefronts on two opposite streets. Babysitting/childcare services here; rent a child to go the park with and help you pick up chicks there.
The similar playing-both-sides against the middle that I'm struggling with right now: companies sell (physical) mail addresses to other companies for beaucoup bucks. But if you want to correctly report that your wife has been dead for 9 years because you're tired of getting her USPS spam, they want to charge you to add you to their profitable database.
a botnet is not spam, garbage text is not spam, spam is defined primary by being unsolicited AND unwanted. This is solicited.
Don't confuse the map for the territory. What we see here is a so called "expert" in anti-spam technology completely losing site of the goal and complaining that world should conform to their system. This is learned helplessness masquerading as expertise.
IIRC the linked story isn't actually about email verification, it's about a completely different spam vector, so calling this a "response" is a stretch. Still, good context for why this post exists now.
Can we talk about the reddit spam too? Like how they allow bots to sign up accounts, with random email addresses. Which then sends spam/verify emails, with no recourse? I want to block new accounts to my email, but I have no options.
Ran into this exact issue verifying signups years back. Our email validation vendor did a live SMTP handshake, then a second real send to score deliverability — that's what looked like spam. Switched to just an MX lookup and syntax check, skipped the vendor's phantom email step entirely. Way fewer complaints.
It's likely that the email the author received is pure coincidence. Especially if they are using a client that downloads emails in batches.
FWIW it looks like their validation email is sent by Customer.IO via Mailgun. Both have squeaky clean service agreements so it's unlikely they are shooting off the data to spammers.
Edit: No way! I did end up getting a random empty email. From a "Adventure-Meter Department" at bugbusterbrigade.com. The topic of the email was "Scents and Memory".
This is a really weird email. It's not a spam email, it's some sort of attempt at inbox testing. Perhaps it's an attempt to sniff out AI agents signing up for their service?