« May 2005 | Main | July 2005 »
June 30, 2005
Antispam proposals advance
An Internet standards group approved two "experimental" antispam proposals, sidestepping a controversy dividing Microsoft and its e-mail competitors.
The Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG), a division of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), said it would publish two competing and overlapping sets of documents that define ways of confirming that e-mail senders are who they say they are.
The experimental Requests for Comment (RFCs)--Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in E-Mail and Sender ID: Authenticating E-Mail--have been the subject of intense jockeying by Microsoft, America Online and others.
Critics have accused Microsoft of trying to strong-arm the industry into accepting Sender ID. Concerns over Microsoft's Sender ID-related patents have alarmed some involved in setting standards, and last year the IETF let a Sender ID working group expire.
"While many proposals for domain-based authorization have been under consideration, no consensus has yet been reached concerning a single technical approach," the IESG said in a statement. "The IESG does not endorse either of the two mechanisms documented in the experimental RFCs--their publication is intended to encourage further discussion and experimentation in order to gain experience that can be used to write future standards in this space."
Comments (0) | Posted by dylan at 10:48 PM | Permalink
Don't Shoot the Messenger
What's Your Delivery Rate?
I SPEND A GREAT DEAL of my time visiting clients and other organizations in the e-mail industry and in any discussions that I've had recently, deliverability is a red-hot topic. But there is a lot of confusion around what this term means, and some of this confusion is attributable to e-mail service providers. For example, ask any e-mail service provider to describe their delivery rates and you will get as many definitions as the number of vendors that you ask.
The truth about e-mail deliverability is that no vendor can truly measure it. That is, no vendor can provide complete accuracy in calculating precisely how many intended recipients actually received an e-mail. This is not a failure on the part of any individual e-mail service provider, but a limitation of SMTP (simple mail transfer protocol) technology.
Fundamentally, however, e-mail marketers are concerned with actual inbox delivery and any reason their mail isn't delivered. Methods to measure these vary widely and the actions a company should take to combat these challenges differ as well.
In general terms, there are direct ways and indirect ways of determining if a message goes undelivered.
In the direct way, the marketer receives a bounce-back message from the receiving server for the address. While this is commonly referred to as a delivery rate, it is really a 'non-bounced' rate. A bounce-back message generally has one of the following root causes:
1) The e-mail address is invalid, either because it was entered incorrectly at point-of-capture or because the recipient has changed their address.
2) The address is temporarily not receiving mail, either because of a full mailbox or because of receiving server issues.
3) Mail has been flagged as spam by the receiving server, either because of customer complaints, incorrectly configured mail servers, or content that is confused with spam.
E-mail service providers attempt to classify bounces into "hard" and "soft" categories, but this isn't an exact science, given the lack of consistency in classification across ISPs and their receiving inbound e-mail servers. The e-mail service provider and sender must also decide how aggressively to treat bounces. Essentially, they must walk the line between not continuing to mail known bounces, and not giving up on a customer relationship too early. This also makes comparison of bounce rates across companies somewhat meaningless because it is primarily dependent on the accuracy of addresses captured as well as business decisions such as how often to retry mailing to a bounced address.
Often, however, when an ISP is blocking or filtering messages, there is not a bounce back provided, and hence, there is no direct indication of the problem. To understand this issue (in fact this is where most companies have problems), you need to take indirect measurements of the issues. This is best accomplished through seed-list testing, which involves the creation and monitoring of sample e-mail accounts using the same ISPs as those on a marketer's customer file. By monitoring the success for these sample accounts, it is possible to estimate the level at which your e-mail may be being blocked by ISPs, which not only provides a more accurate delivery rate, but is also an opportunity to work with the ISP to learn about why your e-mail is being blocked and hopefully have that decision overturned.
Importantly, seed-list testing not only allows senders to estimate messages that were not delivered at all, but also messages that were filtered into a bulk or spam folder. In many respects, a seeded delivery rate provides the best measure of what is truly happening with a marketer's mail from a blocking or filtering perspective, whereas bounce rates are much more of a measure of list hygiene.
So, given these issues, what should marketers do? First, they should understand that a lot of confusion exists around what the term delivery rate means, and be careful in making comparisons. Secondly, they should work with a provider that can provide insights in to these different aspects of delivery. And, finally, they should dig into their data and identify whether any delivery problems that they have are driven by list hygiene or by ISP blocking and filtering. By digging down to the root causes, marketers can take corrective action and improve any delivery issues that they have - whatever way you define it!
Comments (0) | Posted by dylan at 5:50 PM | Permalink
Top Ten U.S. Unsubscribe Violators
Captain UnsubCentral and Seargent LashBack yesterday released a list of the top 10 U.S. "Unsubscribe Violators" - marketers and advertisers whose suppression lists have been misused, resulting in more email from more sources after consumers have opted out. The Can-Spam Act requires gives advertisers 10 business days to stop sending commercial email messages to consumers who opt out by unsubscribing. All advertisers on the list, including subsidiaries of Vendare Media and Experian, failed to honor opt-out requests.
Comments (0) | Posted by dylan at 6:45 AM | Permalink
June 29, 2005
Over There, Over There
U.S. Firms Sending More Email Abroad
Have we dried up all of our prospects in the US? Now it looks like many companies are embracing the global marketplace. Well seems timely as there are so many more people in the world than just those that live in the US. It's about time that we look to market in other countries. And are you up to speed on the laws of each? Better find out what they are.
U.S. companies are sending more email to customers and prospects abroad, the Direct Marketing Association reported yesterday, citing data from DMA surveys. DM News reports that 87 percent of respondents said they had increased sales because of email sent to international customers and prospects last year, and nearly one-third said electronic communications had replaced traditional mail. Approximately 28 percent of respondents to a multi-channel marketing Report said they are doing business abroad.
Comments (0) | Posted by dylan at 10:37 AM | Permalink
June 28, 2005
Spam Wars Episode III: Revenge of the Phish
Like Star Wars, "Spam Wars" is a story unfolded in a series of disjointed episodes, and with varying degrees of success. Here we are, halfway through 2005, and it appears we're witnessing the first solid victories against spam in years. Research released in March revealed a majority of consumers say they receive less spam today than they did a year ago. That's consistent with recent reports from America Online and Microsoft.
In the cosmic battle between Good and Evil, the good guys always find a way to win. Yet we can't forget how Darth Vader and his minions, no matter how defeated or gone-for-good they may seem, fester in the background and resurface in the next episode to terrify the galaxy once again.
Comments (0) | Posted by dylan at 9:43 AM | Permalink
June 27, 2005
A Hole in the Wire?
Email Delivery High in First Quarter
According to Bigfoot Interactive's 1Q 2005 benchmark analysis of email performance, released today, email delivery rates across all major vertical markets remained high. The best performances were by editorial newsletters (97.6 percent delivery) and service messaging from financial services companies (96.8 percent).
However, the rapid adoption of broadband internet access appears to be driving email address changes, accounting for the bulk of invalid addresses and bouncebacks. Together with frequent ISP and email address changes, broadband adoption will continue to have an impact on email delivery for the foreseeable future, according to the report.
More than 13 percent of all recipients with at least one email address indicate they have switched ISPs or mailbox providers in the past six months, and nine percent are considering switching in the next six months, according to Bigfoot. (Last week, DoubleClick also reported that open rates had dropped in the first quarter.)
Editorial newsletters had the highest delivery rates - 97.6 percent (an improvement from both last quarter and the same period last year) - and strong click-through rates averaging 11.6 percent. Retail and catalog marketers had overall delivery rates of 94-95 percent for the third consecutive quarter. Auto marketers improved their performance with a 21.2 percent increase in overall click-throughs compared with the first quarter of last year.
Comments (0) | Posted by dylan at 10:31 AM | Permalink
June 26, 2005
The Health of Your Troops
As you march on across the battlefield of email marketing delivery, you need to pay attention to the health and hygene of your troops (or email lists). Making sure to continually enable a way for your customer to update their profile and even ask for a second email address if one goes bad, is a good practice. If you have the ability to add a second email field, like you can in the emailROI system (User Fields) you can get a back up email address if one goes MIA.
Chances are you spent a fair amount of effort and money to build your database. If those names performed well for you in the past, keep them clean. Doing so minimizes bounces and customer defections; Increases open and click-through rates; and minimizes chances of being blacklisted.
The NCOA process typically performs the following types of hygiene on your list:
Identify e-addresses that are no longer deliverable ("dead" addresses).
Identify and correct obvious typos, such as bfoley@hotmial.com or ssmith@yaho.com.
Identify test and prank records, such as asdf@yahoo.com and test@msn.com.
Find and remove records such as abuse@hotmail.com that somehow snuck into your database.
Remove duplicates (you'd be surprised how many there are!).
Comments (0) | Posted by dylan at 10:39 PM | Permalink
June 25, 2005
The State of the Union
Authentication and Accreditation: State of the Industry
On the eve of many new weapons from ISPs hitting the fronts, we want to share with you what you need to know about the competing factions battling for control of delivery.
Ever since SPF (define) was announced, "authentication" and "accreditation" have been big buzzwords in the e-mail marketing industry. Though not silver bullets to eliminate spam, these concepts hint at how the e-mail ecosystem is evolving to become more abuse-resistant. Today, we'll detail some recent events that underscore the progress and level of adoption occurring with authentication and accreditation services.
Comments (0) | Posted by dylan at 10:36 PM | Permalink
June 24, 2005
Papers Please.. Papers Now!
Not only was is something that placed many people and companies in a bad situation, but there was no warning. Fortunately many of us already knew that this was coming down the pipe, and had our bases covered. But Millions of end users that own domains do not and will not for along time. Hope you don't have a personal domain registered somewhere that you use to email anyone with a MSN or Hotmail account, they won't see it most likely.
Get out a wet blanket, some wood and try smoke signals. You have a better chance.
Microsoft Anti-Spam Efforts Cause Hotmail Hitch for Some Emailers
After Microsoft mandated compliance with its Sender ID email verification program this week, some emails - mostly from small-to-midsize firms - sent to MSN Hotmail are being sent to junk email boxes, reports DM News. Specifically, emails from companies that have not published their Sender Policy Framework (SPF) are being flagged with a "Sender Unknown" question mark while a "safety bar" within the email reads, "The sender of this message could not be verified by Sender ID."
More than 1 million domains have published their SPF records, according to Microsoft. According to one deliverability expert, MSN is providing the sender-unknown warnings when "there is a hard fail, or in situations where the spammer is making up a domain name."
In its offensive against spam, Microsoft has released other tools for Hotmail, VNUnet writes. The software giant released a preview version of Smart Network Data Services, which offers statistics about emails being sent to Hotmail accounts - it shows the volume of email coming from single IP addresses and whether Hotmail's filters have tagged it as spam. ISPs can identify accounts used to distribute spam emails, either deliberately or because they are infected by a virus and have been turned into "zombies."
Microsoft has also launched MSN Postmaster, a website where ISPs, email service providers and legitimate senders of bulk emails can learn about spam issues.The program is intended to educate senders on how to prevent legitimate emails from getting caught in spam filters.
Comments (0) | Posted by dylan at 10:09 PM | Permalink
June 23, 2005
The Pigeons Still Get Through
Email still effective to reach customers
If that above subject line did not allow you to breathe a sigh of releif, then what will? I am come on, over night email marketing is not just going to disapear, we are actually seeing most companies thinking more clearly about what they are doing, who they are talking to and what other interference is going on around the customer/client.
We are only going to see email marketers grow and learn more with this medium as we are all even more addicted it than an SF Resident on thier Crackberry.
The new Email Trend Report just released by Doubleclick shows an increase in the click-to-purchase conversion rate, which rose 24.2% (from 3.3%) to 4.1% versus Q1 2004. On the other side we face an overall trend indicating a decline in opening rates (from 38.2% in Q1 2004 to 30.2% in Q1 2005). Good news for what concerns bounce rates which were at an all time low at 8.3%.
Commenting the Report Kevin Mabley, Senior Director and General Manager of Strategic Services at DoubleClick said: "This quarter's data demonstrate the continuing effectiveness of email for communicating with and marketing to customers".
Read more
http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/050623/nyth064.html?.v=16
Comments (0) | Posted by dylan at 9:25 PM | Permalink
June 22, 2005
Can We See your ID Card Please?
No more free passes, and if you are not compliant, by the way the conplaince site was down this AM, then your email will not be delivered. No ifs, ands or buts. These are the Rules and Bill makes them.
MSN Requires Sender ID Email Authentication
MSN today launched its Sender ID email authentication program for email sent to Hotmail users. Starting today, those emails for which the sender cannot be verified will be relegated to account-holder's junk email boxes. Yahoo has discussed a similar program but has not implemented it yet. The Direct Marketing Association alerted email marketers late last week of the program's implementation, and email delivery firms informed their customers yesterday.
"Messages that have not been authenticated will most likely be placed into a customer's junk folder or deleted altogether in conjunction with other spam filters," the June 17 DMA email stated. Microsoft announced the Sender ID program last summer but did not give an implementation date. And it has not communicated with the email marketing industry about it for several months.
The DMA and email delivery firms have urged their members to implement authentication programs for several months. "Compliance with authentication programs is a necessary step to protect both corporate brands and consumer confidence," said Jerry Cerasale, DMA senior vice-president of government relations.
"Compliance is Necessary". This is my favorite part of this news, "Required", "Deleted Altogether" and "Not Communicated"
The Great Red-mond wall is growing. Please Bill, talk to the "troops in the field" and let us know before you drop the napalm on our lives.
Comments (0) | Posted by dylan at 4:40 PM | Permalink
June 20, 2005
If We Make them Use a White Flag, We won't shoot
FTC to Congress: Spammers Won't Heed 'ADV' Label Requirement
Well tell us something we don't already know. We known that spammers and junk mailers would not place the ADV label in the subject line for some time. It is not going to ever happen. Those that run outside of the law, know the risk factor. And these people affect those that play by the Rules.
In a report required by the Can-Spam Act, the Federal Trade Commission has told Congress that an "ADV" label requirement for the subject lines of commercial emails would not help consumers or internet service providers, AdWeek reports. As it had in an earlier report on the establishment of a do-not-spam registry, the FTC said most spammers would not heed such a requirement. It said ISPs' spam filters are already more effective than a largely unheeded label would be. The FTC has preferred enforcement, education of consumers and businesses, and development of email authentication and reputation-systems to reduce spam.
Comments (0) | Posted by dylan at 4:08 PM | Permalink
June 17, 2005
The New Body Armor Works?
Return Path: Bonded Sender Works
Well being a bonded sender ourselves we are a little apprehensive of this. Really it helps a little, and just with building credibility with your clients and with some ISPs. But truly when they were spamcop/bondedsender they were a hoax. You would pay an arm and a leg to be a Bonded Sender, buy IronPort servers and then the SpamCop Sheriffs still crawl up your "a$$" and do as they please.
As excited as I was to have Return Path buy them, I am also a bit mistrustful of deliverability monitoring companies that are also selling the equiptment that "makes you safe". At least the spamcop bonded sender cartel has been broken up (at least on paper).
Return Path, the email services firm that acquired Bonded Sender a couple months ago said that using the system of guaranteeing spam policy compliance by putting up a bond that can be debited for alleged violations has been increasing mail deliverability rates by more than 20 percent. Bonded Sender users have been seeing their delivery rates exceed 95 percent, according to Return Path.
Comments (0) | Posted by dylan at 4:03 PM | Permalink
June 16, 2005
A Riddle Wrapped in an Enigma
It is not very often that we come across articles that take the stance that many of the legitimate email marketing companies, marketers and how the ISP react. This is one for the books. It is the Enigma machine that cracks the code for the lay person.
What are the reasons behind why ‘SPAMMING’ is targeted by ISP’s, Software companies and Governments, and will their efforts be effective in reducing these types of communications.
http://www.creativematch.co.uk/viewNews/?91175
Comments (0) | Posted by dylan at 2:38 AM | Permalink
June 15, 2005
The Sneak Attack
Browser-based attacks increase as viruses decrease
As the threat to IT operations by viruses and worms declines, browser-based attacks are increasing, according to a technology trade organization.
The Computing Technology Industry Association, or CompTIA, on Tuesday released its third annual report on IT security and the work force. The survey of nearly 500 organizations, found that 56.6 percent had been the victim of a browser-based attack, up from 36.8 percent a year ago and a quarter two years ago, CompTIA said.
Browser-based attacks often take advantage of security flaws in Web browsers and other components of the user's PC such as the operating system. The attacks' objective could be to sabotage a computer or steal private data and can be launched when a user visits a Web page that appears harmless but contains malicious code.
One of the ways to lure victims to a bad Web site is through spam e-mails that include a hyperlink. Phishing, a form of attack that typically includes e-mail and fraudulent Web sites resembling legitimate sites, is on the rise, CompTIA said.
Read More: http://news.com.com/Browser-based+attacks+increase+as+viruses+decrease/2100-7349_3-5747050.html?part=rss&tag=5747050&subj=news
Comments (0) | Posted by dylan at 6:20 AM | Permalink
June 14, 2005
Mother do you Think They'll Drop the Bomb?
Moms determine the majority of household spending. A study conducted by Lucid Marketing and EmailLabs identified mothers' e-mail habits, as well as tactics to reach that target audience.
Researchers say 63 percent of the mothers surveyed receive one to five newsletters or promotional e-mails from online retailers. While 33.1 percent of respondents place a relatively high (6 to 7 out of 10) rank on the importance of commercial e-mail, a majority (39.3 percent) said they only subscribe if an e-mail address is requested as part of the purchase or registration process. Only 21.8 percent look to subscribe without being prompted.
Comments (0) | Posted by dylan at 4:44 PM | Permalink
June 13, 2005
The Times They Are a Changing
AT LAST WEEK'S CAMPAIGN DIGITAL Conference in London, I started thinking about the current global market and e-mail challenges. It got me thinking about an article I had read on global warming and the changes it's creating for animal populations; seeing a parallel I wondered "Is a similar thing happening in our space? Is e-mail being affected too?"
Case in point: I encountered the site of a former client that had decided to use an in-house e-mail marketing system. The registration form had this notice: "We have been blocked by AOL from sending e-mail to AOL Customers. If you have an AOL e-mail address you will not receive the confirmation message to activate your account." This left consumers two options. They could discontinue the process or they could call the service center to get an activation code. Can you imagine the impact this has on consumer perception, company reputation and the hard costs associated with filling consumers' code requests? With AOL representing more than 22 percent of the company database, this is potentially damaging.
We recently rented a third-party list that performed better than an in-house list that had consistently yielded high response rates. I've never seen such a strong performance from such a straightforward approach. It might have been good strategy or good program design. But a third-party list doesn't generally perform that well and it was hard to explain.
I don't actually believe we are being affected by global warming, but something strange is happening. Are these odd occurrences the effect of CAN SPAM? Perhaps it is because consumers today are more aware of e-mail. Or maybe we can attribute it to the overprotection of corporations, ISPs and their consumers. Nonetheless, the anomalies can't be rationalized in many cases.
So what do these anomalies tell us as marketers? What will be the effect on our programs, our clients' interactions with our programs? How will we manage e-mail marketing responsibly?
Most e-mail marketers are watching their 20 to 40 percent open rates and five to 10 percent click-through rates, and are worried about list attrition. Meanwhile, they're hearing about deliverability issues, CAN SPAM, FCC and other proposed legislations that may affect their programs. The complexity required to run e-mail marketing has risen so dramatically in the last two years that most e-mail marketers are struggling to keep up.
I believe these changes are modifying the way we run our programs, who we work with as partners, and how we justify the cost and value of e-mail. When I think of the multi-modality of our world, I wonder if this trickle-down effect will force e-mail marketers to get smarter in how they provide device-specific communications. I wonder if they'll focus on that versus the persuasion of the low cost of e-mail.
It's hard to say. So instead I'll leave you to ponder this: With the heightened consumer awareness of e-mail marketing, what is the trickle-down effect on your organization's approach to e-mail and your customers' perception of you? And how has the role of e-mail marketing changed in your organization?
When you come up with those answers, I think you'll find the answer for the best way to invest in this channel in the future.
Comments (0) | Posted by dylan at 9:30 PM | Permalink
June 11, 2005
State of the Email Union Address
Ever since SPF (define) was announced, "authentication" and "accreditation" have been big buzzwords in the e-mail marketing industry. Though not silver bullets to eliminate spam, these concepts hint at how the e-mail ecosystem is evolving to become more abuse-resistant. Today, we'll detail some recent events that underscore the progress and level of adoption occurring with authentication and accreditation services.
Authentication and Accreditation: State of the Industry
Comments (0) | Posted by dylan at 4:43 PM | Permalink
June 10, 2005
Back to Boot Camp
EmailLabs' David Sousa provides tips for legitimate marketers to distinguish themselves from spammers.
When recently asked about best practices for legitimate marketers to distinguish themselves from spammers.
To start with, if email subscribers give affirmative consent (actively opted in, rather than unchecking a pre-checked box, for example) to a sender, then they can usually distinguish that email from an unsolicited one. For true permission marketers, the challenges come when the first email received is many weeks after the opt-in date and when it arrives into a bulk folder or inbox overloaded with unsolicited emails.
That said, here are a few best practice tips to help subscribers easily find your wanted email in their inbox.
Comments (0) | Posted by dylan at 4:40 PM | Permalink
June 9, 2005
Canada Creates New Battle Plan
Canadian Spam Taskforce Issues Report
A 10-member spam taskforce appointed by the Canadian government and comprising government and private sector members, including representatives from the Canadian Marketing Association, submitted its report to the country's Minister of Industry, ClickZ reports. The report calls for additional government legislation to prohibition spamming activities and establish appropriate penalties, enforcement mechanisms and industry standards to fight spam. It also recommends practices on business conduct, public education and awareness, and international cooperation with regard to spam. The group studied Australian and U.S. legislation, among others, to formulate its proposal. The proposal discusses bilateral initiatives to reach out to key partners, including the U.S. The task force anticipates an agreement to be signed with the U.S. government in late 2005.
Canadian Feds Ponder Spam Options
Comments (0) | Posted by dylan at 4:39 PM | Permalink
June 7, 2005
Getting the Mail to the Occupied
Email; Morning, Noon and Nighttime Too
As end users, we want our email. Even with the complaints of spam, viruses and phoshing, we want to get the messages we want from retailers, partners, friends, etc whenever they want to get them to us. So geting past the trenches, fences, barb wire, and troops put in place to protect these people at thier request the last few years.
Email is just as important as the phone and the US Mail. We need it now to communicate.
According to American Online surveys, conducted in partnership with Opinion Research Corporation, as reported by Emarketer, users rely on e-mail as much as the phone for communication, spend about an hour a day on e-mail and that 77% of them have more than one e-mail account. That translates to an essential part of everyday life, concludes the report.
The survey shows:
41% of Americans check e-mail first thing in the morning
18% check e-mail right after dinner
14% check e-mail right when they get home from work
14% check e-mail right before they go to bed
40% of e-mail users have checked their e-mail in the middle of the night
More than one in four say they can't go more than two to three days without checking e-mail.
And it's checked everywhere:
In bed (23%)
In class (12%)
In a business meeting (8%)
At a Wi-Fi hotspot (6%)
At the beach or pool (6%)
In the bathroom (4%)
While driving (4%)
In church (1%)
The survey found that 61% of e-mail users employed outside the home check their personal e-mail at work,
47% check personal e-mail at work
47% check it sporadically throughout the day
25% check it first thing when they arrive at work
18% check it at lunchtime
8% during an afternoon break
2% right before heading home
Women are more likely than men to check their personal e-mail at work throughout the day , and 60% of all e-mail users check their e-mail while on vacation.
Comments (0) | Posted by dylan at 10:52 PM | Permalink
June 6, 2005
Who Goes There? New Sentries Posted at the Gates
Email Coalition Sets Authentication Requirement
The Email Service Provider Coalition is now requiring its members to implement authentication for all email they send on behalf of clients - many of them marketers. ESPC will also mandate that members use authentication when sending their corporate email, it suggests that email senders immediately implement the IP-based Sender ID Framework, developed last year by combining Microsoft's Sender ID with the open source Sender Policy Framework (SPF).
Based on a recent survey of its membership, the ESPC found that 97 percent were authenticating outbound client email; and 73 percent were authenticating both client and corporate email. ESPC had previously required all new members to be compliant with the SPF standard and had urged existing members to become compliant.
ESPC members include Experian's CheetahMail, Constant Contact, Digital Impact, DoubleClick, ProspectivDirect, Return Path, Skylist, and StrongMail Systems. In April, it expanded membership beyond email service providers to include email infrastructure providers, mail transfer agents, internet service providers, nonprofits, anti-spam application providers and deliverability solution providers.
Comments (0) | Posted by dylan at 8:38 PM | Permalink
Have the Gaurds in the Watch Towers Changed?
Yahoo!, Cisco Launch New E-Mail Authentication Tool
WITH AN EYE TOWARD PREVENTING spam and phishing scams, Yahoo! and Cisco Systems late last week launched a technology called DomainKeys Identified Mail to verify the origins of e-mail messages.
Sending messages using a false address is a common tactic of spammers. Known as DKIM, the e-mail authentication technology uses key cryptography that allows users to verify and maintain message integrity, and identifies legitimate messages. It's useful for companies that send transactional e-mail to consumers, including banks, telecoms, and online merchants.
Being offered to the industry royalty-free, DKIM borrows elements from Yahoo!'s DomainKeys and the network equipment maker's Internet Identified Mail system. And while technical differences exist, each attaches a scrambled digital signature to a user's mail, which can then be vetted to ensure that it's actually being sent from the domain in the sender's address.
Both Yahoo!'s e-mail service and Google's Gmail e-mail have initiated DomainKeys, and a huge demand for just such a collaboration existed, according to Miles Libbey, anti-spam product manager for Yahoo! Mail.
"Yahoo! is receiving more than 350 million messages signed by DomainKeys per day," Libbey said in a statement. "By collaborating with innovative companies such as Cisco and Sendmail, we have been able to tap into industry visionaries like Sendmail's Eric Allman to help combat e-mail forgery. In doing so, we can offer a solution that increases the level of defense against fraudulent e-mails and phishing attacks."
http://publications.mediapost.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=Articles.san&s=30849&Nid=13824&p=240434
Comments (0) | Posted by dylan at 5:00 PM | Permalink
June 3, 2005
When We Invite the Enenmy Into Our Camp
Email users are starting to get comfy with the spamvertisers.
While industry watchers believe spam now makes up 75 per cent of all email, it seems people just aren't bothered by the never-ending stream of offers for pills and porn pouring into their inboxes.
According to a study by the Pew Internet and American Life Project, fewer people find spam annoying or unpleasant than a year ago. Currently 67 per cent of email users say they find spam negatively affects their online experience, compared to 77 per cent a year ago.
Email users have also recovered their trust in email, with 53 per cent of users saying spam has sapped their confidence in email, down from 62 per cent a year ago.
Comments (0) | Posted by dylan at 6:25 PM | Permalink
June 2, 2005
Do the MREs Taste Like Spam?
When is spam not spam?
Is it in the eye of the beholder - or the sender?
This is always an interesting thought. When does someone cross the line because they have access or own email addresses to send email that may have not be solicited?
Anybody involved in sending bulk email is quite aware of the risk they run of being labelled a spammer.
From the kind of pernicious spammers who bombard our inboxes daily to marketers who perhaps send a few stray emails, for whatever reason - all react badly to being linked with spam. For those at the more legit end of the scale it is easy to see why.
But who are these people to claim they aren't sending spam - even if some might think the 'spammer' label goes a little too far, suggesting as it does an habitual element to their activities? At what point does email become spam - is it the sender or the recipient who decides where the distinction lies?
In my book, it is the sender. I always like to take the stance of what would I think about getting email from you if I:
1. Don't know you
2. Have no brand recognition of your company or product
3. Ends up in my Junk Folder
Odds have it although you might have a compelling subject line, I am not going to read it, and may even report it as spam (hell I don't report anything as spam as I am in the business and just deal with the volumes of junk I get in multiple accounts).
Just think about what you would do if you got an email like the one you have and maybe, don't send it.
Comments (0) | Posted by dylan at 6:28 PM | Permalink
June 1, 2005
Are the Brittish Losing the War?
Report from the UK Front, looks as if folks are claiming that the Brittish Anti-Spam Laws are failing. And what generals do they throw into the gladiator ring to appease the masses? Right, the Marketers.
Nobody really emerges from this covered in any kind of glory...
This week silicon.com revealed the results of a Freedom of Information Act enquiry into the DTI. We wanted to know why the UK's anti-spam laws are so lame and so we asked the DTI just who it consulted with in drafting the laws.
We knew the Direct Marketing Association had been involved and we were pretty sure those who opposed tighter legislation were likely to have a vested interest in the perpetuation of email marketing but we weren't quite prepared for how fatally flawed the whole process had been.
Read More....
http://comment.silicon.com/0,39024711,39130948,00.htm
Comments (0) | Posted by dylan at 6:21 PM | Permalink
Syndicate this site (XML)
