I also reached out to them on Twitter but they directed me to this form. I followed up with them on Twitter with what happened in this screenshot but they are now ignoring me.

  • @Alexstarfire@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    2511 months ago

    Actually, one of our customers found out the hard way that there is harm in sending emails to invalid addresses. Too many kickbacks and cloud services think you’re a bot. Prevented the customer from being able to send emails for 24 hours.

    This is the result of them “requiring” an email for customers but entering a fake one if they didn’t want to provide their email, and then trying to send out an email to everyone.

    Our software has an option to disable that requirement but they didn’t want to use it because they wanted their staff to remember to ask for an email address. It was not a great setup but they only had themselves to blame.

    • @jwt@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      1911 months ago

      My guess is that would also occur with valid but non-existing e-mail addresses no? The regex would not be a remedy there anyway.

      Of course you should only use the supplied e-mail address for things like mass mailings once it has been verified (i.e. the activation link from within the mail was clicked)

      • @Alexstarfire@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        211 months ago

        That’s exactly what they did. They used something like noaddress@ourbusniess.com to get around the checks we had in place. I’ve intentionally been vague but most people will give their email address to our customers and won’t give a fake one. So under normal situations the amount of bounce backs would be minimal: fat fingering, hearing them incorrectly, or people misremembering their email. Not enough to worry about. Never thought we’d come across a customer intentionally putting in bad email addresses for documentation purposes. They could have just asked us to make the functionality they wanted.