Show HN: Please-unsubscribe.com – fwd emails to unsubscribe from marketing
please-unsubscribe.com
please-unsubscribe.com
I've attacked the problem from a different angle though - I've tried to automate the service a lot more. Automatically looking for the unsubscribe button and filling out any HTML forms that appear etc. It doesn't always work but it's been fun trying to work out ways to automate the different steps etc.
If anyone is interested in a similar product with a slightly different way of doing things, different pricing and a web UI, please check out: https://www.stopthat.email/
Hopefully you don't mind the health competition ryanmjacobs.
An automated system can't compare to an actual human, a human won't fail because the markup changed.
I tried signing up on your website but I have the following error :
An uncaught exception happened while servicing this request
link to a screenshot : https://imgur.com/a/ph8RrO1
For some reason a deployment failed due to a dependency which caused some issues. Could you please try again and let me know if it now works?
Wondering if the HN Hug Of Death strikes again... can’t sign up due to an uncaught exception. Will try again later.
I have seen companies generating an API key for the unsubscribe button, where the key can be used to perform other actions and lead to account takeover
§ 316.5 Prohibition on charging a fee or imposing other requirements on recipients who wish to opt out.
Neither a sender nor any person acting on behalf of a sender may require that any recipient pay any fee, provide any information other than the recipient's electronic mail address and opt-out preferences, or take any other steps except sending a reply electronic mail message or visiting a single Internet Web page, in order to:
(a) Use a return electronic mail address or other Internet-based mechanism, required by 15 U.S.C. 7704(a)(3), to submit a request not to receive future commercial electronic mail messages from a sender;
Personally I'm all for requiring an automation enabled unsubscribe header and double opt in (requiring a response from a subscription confirmation email to subscribe in the first place).
And yet it happens all the time. Even Apple does it. I expect Apple’s lawyers have a better understanding of the rules than most people.
You’re right that wording is clear, though you might have misunderstood or skipped over the scope of this CFR, which is “Non-solicited” messages (https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/16/316.1), and excludes transactional email (https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/16/316.3). Since the parent was explicitly talking about any email communication coming from accounts you’ve signed up for, it is important to note that the CFR you’re citing does not always apply.
You absolutely can legally require a password to change some subscription and communication settings relating directly to someone’s account, to require otherwise would be a glaring and massive security hole. It’s quite easy to spoof email addresses, and being able to unsubscribe someone else from transactional email subscriptions would be extremely dangerous.
Tell that to eBay. I cannot got them to leave me alone.
There is no unsubscribe link. Only “To change which emails you receive from eBay, go to Communication Preferences in My eBay.” But there is no such option in My eBay.
There is a “Communications Preferences” elsewhere, but there’s nothing in there to stop eBay spam. I have everything set to off, but they still keep coming.
Fortunately nobody's signed up for an account for anything I'd actually care to sign up for myself. It's usually some grocery store in Malaysia or something.
Is there a way to learn who the original list holder is and get my address off?
If you don’t want to engage them, you should mark the email as junk. This flags the email in their email provider. If their rate of junk email increases too high, they lose their ability to send email through that provider.
Let's say, you flag a mail on GMail as spam. GMail's filters will learn: both the spam filter for your inbox as well as a shared filter. If the shared filter learned that all mails from that provider are junk, then gmail may not accept any more mails from that provider.
But the provider is interested in his ability to send mails to gmail customers - because his own customers demand it. So, a good provider would just kick out that rouge customer who sends junk.
And that's where the fun begins: A big provider can deliver spam, if it's only a small percentage of his usual volume (too big to fail). And not every provider is cooperative. And the process is slow - some filter has to be fed a large amount of junk, so it finally rejects a large portion of of the valid mail.
A better way is: Get your provider to send an abuse mail to the origin. In my experience, it's still a fight against windmills, but every bit helps.
Considering how many dozens of times I’ve marked messages from Soma as spam in Gmail, yet they still keep coming, I have zero faith in Gmail’s learning ability. Either that or Soma can pay Google to bypass the spam filter. Other email providers will.
Source: I used to know a mid-sized spammer in Chicago. He saw nothing wrong with his business and was happy to answer questions.
When I receive a spam message, I get an in-message alert, I know instantly who leaked my email address, & I can shut it down with a single click.
Originally I used simple postfix virtual addresses but I since upgraded it to a SaaS with a browser extension and iOS/android app.
Email me for details if you want to beta test.
xe2g at proxyto.me
It supports masked phone numbers and credit card numbers as well.
So far none of the services I tried supported outbound mail / replies. Replying would reveal your real email address.
My service supports outbound mail and will properly rewrite the From address, etc.
Kudos to the author.
> Note: After some input, I have decided to change billing to a credit-based system. Each unsubscribe uses 1 Credit. Over time, you should need this service less and less :)
Or what about: 5 credits free, 2 free per month, XX additional credits per month through a subscription.
Then select-all and Mark as spam!
Edit: Or go through each result, some email clients will highlight the search term "unsubscribe" after search, making the unsubscribe link easier to find.
Same deal with my phone. Any private or unknown number gets the mail box which I never check and SMS trashed.
Or get another email address?
This doesn’t feel very sustainable.
In all seriousness, here’s what I do to combat Insidious Mailing List Spam. It’s kinda simple.
1. Get one email address for friends and family. Never ever post it online. Never use it for any shopping or anything. This is your email address. There is no mailbox anxiety because you get one email a day to this address and it’s from your dad and you love him.
2. Get another one for mailing lists. Crucially, using a rule, mark every new mail as read on receipt. There is no mailbox anxiety because the “read me” or “keep me unread until I’ve actioned” or whatever is gone. Totally gone. Need to do a thing with an email? Figure out a way outside your inbox to track that.
I started this accidentally about a year ago and it’s a revelation.
Also filter all emails with unsubscribe in their body to that folder. Works like a charm.
It works until someone sends an email with cat photos to your secret address and all their contact list, and forget to use bcc.
(I was probably using my Yahoo! address 25 years ago.)
The address for friends and family should be split in 2 - one for the really technologically literate ones, who will never do stupid crap with it like using it in a pinterest "Share this!" form, and one for everyone else (who must never learn you didn't give them "best" address because they're clueless).
Also, if you own a few domains, devote a whole cheap one to mailing lists, online subscription and whatever else. Create a dedicated address everytime you subscribe to a service (like mybank@myjunkmaildomain.icu, amazon@myjunkmaildomain.icu, facebook@myjunkmaildomain.icu, somedodgyonlinemerchant@myjunkmaildomain.icu etc).
This gives you the benefit of seeing who leaked your address when you see spam, of being able to disable them individually, of being able to migrate provider with no impact to your accounts (just repoint your own domain's email forwardings)
/\+[^@]*/
from your address and bypass the fingerprinting.Disclaimer: just a satisfied customer.
I tried this and don’t recommend it.
Yeah, you get the advantage of knowing who leaked your address. But I don’t care. If the ‘spam and lists’ address gets too spammy, I’ll just create another.
The disadvantage is that you have to configure a mail client to send from this address if you ever want to do that, and I found myself doing it far more often than I imagined. Need to write back to a store regarding a transaction? Frequently enough. To my health insurance company for some reason? Of course.
No, the idea is to remove as much friction as possible. This adds friction. Keep it simple.
It makes certain things more complicated, like authenticating against certain services, or if someone sends and invitation to one of your domain emails, but it works just fine 95% of the time.
I just switched to Fastmail and was pleasantly surprised with their solution. You can set up wildcard response aliases so that if you receive an email to random.onetime@mydomain.net, when you hit reply, it automatically sends from the random.onetime@mydomain.net.
I've caught places that get hacked or sold their list and can filter them readily.
I think that this approach also helps reduce the attack surface from a hack as there is little to no reuse of credentials, but at N=1 I can't verify that. Maybe there's an oversight in my approach.
I lol'ed. Also, I like your idea and you philosophy [0]. Good luck!
The 'privacy' section is a bit too vague. Sure, you aren't selling my data, but what are you doing with it? What happens to the emails you receive - are they archived or stored, or do you delete them? How secure are they kept?
These messages could have lots of private data in them, even simple things like usernames might be of value to hackers.
I think it’s still an open question because federal regulations still require either a one-click unsubscribe or at most an unsubscribe link leading directly to a form with at most a single required input being the email address to unsubscribe, i.e. no chance to verify the clicker.
Archive: https://web.archive.org/web/20171003162605/https://litmus.co...
> It turns out that all email services take your original message and conveniently wrap it in a div (with a class) or a blockquote, meaning you can use that as a CSS selector. It's so stupidly simple.
I wonder how the situation evolved from a decade ago. Time to do a bit of research!
0: https://web.archive.org/web/20160903225343/http://jonathan-k...
Good behaving email marketing services are not the problem, I would gladly pay for a service that deals with those shady ones and maybe even helps to battle spambots on a global scale, by reporting spam to appropriate authorities and even using GDPR laws to stop them. Tried using spamcop once, but most reports end up "nulled" and not actually reported.
On my google mail account, I automatically forward all emails containing the word "unsubscribe" to a spam folder and mark them as read.
Also: I have two email accounts. One for signups and one for actual communication. Works fine.
One thing I've realized having moved away from Gmail to fastmail, is the importance of owning your spam data as I had to train Fastmail's spam system.
I've actually pinged a couple of services to let them know that spamming me is a security vulnerability, because they loose their ability to contact me.
Let's say you often buy on Amazon (or any other online shop), they send you a newsletter. If you mark it as spam instead of unsubscribing, you could be losing some of their emails you'd want to see (order confirmation, response to a message you sent them, etc).
This is super convenient when you have ten or more "newsletters" you want to unsubscribe from simultaneously.
Are you saying that a substantial number of people is routinely using your _fastmail_ address with services that send _marketing_ emails to _unverified_ email addresses?
I find this highly implausible.
Edit -
Why the downvotes? If I read the OP correctly, they have such a common address that random people mindlessly type it into various subscription nags. Can you think of a such @fastmail address?
If it's not that common, then their address was just leaked and ended up on the spammers list, so tagging as spam is a proper thing to do. However it sounds like the OP also spam-tags bulk emails they don't like even if they are subscribed to those, which is as ass thing to do. It hinders delivery to others, nicks the sender reputation, etc.
I still prefer to keep my stuff away from Google's grubby hands though. Fastmail's spam filter does get better the longer you train it
I didn't mean to imply fastmail was centralised in the original comment if it came off as that :)
Even if they did need it, they wouldn't need it for more than 2-3 months.
I wanted something where I could bulk select items in my inbox and have someone else deal with it.
I just made a product I wanted :) But yeah, it's not sustainable in the sense of money -- but in my eyes, if my product becomes less necessary over time, then I did my job right
You are basically the perfect target market and have no use for it at 10$/mo.
I agree that the value isn't there for the pricing, especially as a monthly subscription. $5/month is too expensive considering most people won't even pay that to read content they actually want. All major email providers have spam/unsubscribe buttons already and I don't want to risk forwarding emails to someone else to reveal even more data.
If this was more like a global unsubscribe service that removed me from all major email lists somehow, or helped with other privacy/data cleanup then it might be worth a one-time fee.
For example with now.sh/Vercel: https://vercel.com/login?with-email=1
I'll probably create rules that sends a blacklist of emails to the trash and warns the user.
Feels great having separation on every site
Honestly with 100 sites I've maybe had to delete 1 or 2 so its very low effort
Does anyone actually enjoy those mails? How is it any better than the classic physical letterbox spam that used to be more common?
I do studies and publish them free.
I have a 0.5% spam rate, which is unacceptable according to the guardians of email.
Using Facebook/twitter/YouTube to notify people of updates is at danger of getting blocked/censored.
Personally, I'd be really uncomfortable opening up a service like this with underage family members involved. Why not MTurk?
Also, implement as a gmail plugin if that's possible.
My email is my hn@gmail so I get all kinds of random receipts, confirmations, etc m. Because these companies consider them valid communications with a customer it is impossible to unsubscribe
For several reasons:
1. If you subscribe to a list then please please please take the time to locate the very clearly marked unsubscribe link, or use the one that gmail or your other email client shows. I spend a lot of time making sure it’s suuuper easy to unsubscribe. 2. Spammers know how to get around spam protections when they want to. They can switch domains and do other shady stuff a legit company can’t, so by marking my email as spam because it’s “easier” you’re not helping the fight against spam but rather hurting a legitimate email sender.
Now, if you can’t unsubscribe (because there’s no link, it’s broken, or simply doesn’t actually unsubscribe), and this is a legit company, please please please let them know.
If after all of this you still can’t unsubscribe, hit that spam button twice!
You mean the one word link in font 6 hidden maybe somewhere at the bottom of the email if it's there at all?
I have never seen an easy clearly marked unsubscribe in my life.
When at look at my friends and parents who are not as computer savvy and often don't see things put in front of them, there is no way they would ever manage to unsubscribe from any newsletter. The spam button is a godsend.
It should only take one click on the unsubscribe link in the email for the sender to actually do the unsubscribe. If after processing it the sender is determined to try and stuff a sales and marketing survey on the landing page, I suppose it's hard to stop them, but I won't play "20 questions" just to get the sender to accept that I don't want any more of their emails.
Executive summary: if I can't unsubscribe from your email newsletter with one click, you get the spam filter treatment <sigh>
Just a few easy to find unsub links from emails on the first page of RGE.
https://reallygoodemails.com/emails/stay-cool-during-summer-... https://reallygoodemails.com/emails/find-your-perfect-fit https://reallygoodemails.com/emails/download-the-new-sonos-a... https://reallygoodemails.com/emails/dad-approved
Not including the list-unsubscribe headers all these will have which are trivial to click in most modern email clients.
Tried to spend another 20 seconds in good faith, still couldn't find it. I honestly don't understand what is the strange layouts of these pages and where is the newsletter even supposed to be.
Spam that is.
P.S. If you're wondering, the news seems to be the left column, then go to the bottom. I don't think having to scroll through 3 screens of texts and pictures to find a button is easy. My not tech savvy parents and friends wouldn't be able to find it.
Punish those who abuse it, not everyone. That’s all I’m saying.
Those were fun helpdesk tickets to get.
If you're receiving unsolicited marketing emails, that is the literal definition of spam.
Random emails are... random.
Companies employ a tremendous range of dark patterns to get my consent for email, then flood me with spam. Time after time I have unsubscribed from the "best products of the week"-newsletter, just to receive a "weekly product highlights"-newsletter the next day. According to the logic of the sending company, this is a completely different newsletter that I also have to unsubscribe from.
I mark all of them as spam. I'm sorry the 99% make life more challenging for you.
Elsewhere, Wikipedia describes spam as ‘unsolicited or unwanted’.
And vs. Or. Of course spam’s definition should use ‘and’.
When you sign up for a newsletter, and later decide you don’t want it, to call it ‘spam’ is merely metaphorical.
It does not matter whether you were tricked into subscribing to some newsletter or whether you checked a "receive interesting emails from us" box while paying for something.
If the email you just received is unsolicited and/or unwanted, then it's spam by definition.
That's why there usually needs to be some direct or indirect commercial gain involved too.
But in the context of social media, what does spam mean? It isn't email. And an awful lot of it is simply self-promotion or commercial promotion.
And many FB groups and the like are permissive when it comes to posts that are really advertisements, or are just one person's definition of "off topic." And there are mechanisms for reporting content as "spam", but what does that even mean when it isn't an email?
I've found that many people have redefined the term "spam" as repetitive content, not unwanted/unsolicited content. I guess this comes from gamer/chat culture where there is talk of "spamming the jump button" or "spamming the chat" where it isn't the content that is remarkable, it is the repetition. You can kind of see where it comes from as most email spammers are quite repetitive and indiscriminate. But a spam email can be just one, and that definition doesn't seem to fly in the inherently noisy social media context.
I was just struck by this evolution of the term spam when I tried reporting some (unwanted by me) commercial self-promotion on social media, only to be told that it wasn't spam at all because the poster only posted it once. I guess a lot of it comes down to how territorial and defensive people are about their email inbox vs. social media feed.
I said please three times because laziness on your part is really really bad for us who do it right.
It is up to the sender (1) not to gaud people into subscribing to their newsletters in the first place, and (2) to send actually useful and interesting content to their subscribers.
I mostly agree with you, but this point only works if the company is contactable. There are some companies sending stuff from no reply addresses.
Those I just spam. At that scale companies need to be testing, if they’ve left no way to be reached.
I send with my name on it, reply to everyone who hits the reply button, and have a live chat (manned by humans) as well as a contact us form.
If someone can’t get in touch with me after all of that... That’s a different problem.
The good news is that if you improve your process and send less unwanted emails, they'll be less flagged as spam and you'll keep a good spam rating. The system works basically.
The system that you’re talking about is heavily weighted towards sending more stuff to spam than not.
Keeping a good spam rating is an extreme challenge for legit senders, especially when so many people click the spam button for reasons that have to do with laziness and carelessness.
Keep this in mind if you run a list and are ever tempted to mass block traffic from your site.
We don’t do any of that, but that’s also something I’ve never thought about.
Can’t you email them?
And if you're not, those users aren't marking your email as spam.
Teaching people to click unsubscribe links in spam emails is horrible security practice. I know you said “if you subscribed to a list” but it’s hard for me to verify that the sender of the email is the original company I subscribed to.
You mean to say you signed up for a service or subscribed to a newsletter, then see an email from the service or newsletter and don’t know if it’s really that company/person?
Did you check the “to”? Do you look at the url of the unsubscribe link? (Harder when click tracking is on, I know)
And you would rather hurt that company or person because you don’t feel like taking the time?
This makes no sense to me, and I hope I’m not in the minority here.
It can be difficult to tell if it's a fake UniversalBankCo email or a real one, even if you are a UniversalBankCo customer.
Divorce yourself from this notion that it's sometimes okay to send it. It's not just a newsletter. It don't care that you now offer free delivery. If the recipient didn't explicitly ask you for marketing communications, you're just as bad as the people offering penis enlargement pills. That's why you get treated the same.
If it is something I asked for, I will click the unsubscribe link.
"Unsubscribe" is a smokescreen for the above purpose. Most people believe that "Unsubscribe" makes these companies go away, but in reality it just hides the fact that they still own some of your data. And if it is companies like Google, Facebook, Pinterest, Twitter, they tend to follow you around the web, even if you haven't logged on to their service at the time (this has been discussed plenty).
I am in EU, so GDPR applies. I prefer to (instead) take a few mins and either respond and/or respond and include their "privacy@example.com" asking them as per GDPR to delete me from their records, which they (most) claim to have done so.
In some extreme cases, I filter to auto-delete their crap. I understand the grandfather of this post claiming that we should make the effort to do things clean and neat (which I honestly do and urge friends and family to also do), but there is an imbalance here. Some companies act in a very unethical way. They take the (beneficial to them) gamble that most people will prefer to flag as spam, than go through the multiple hoops of "Unsubscribing". The fact that he/she acts ethically, caring for the marketing effectiveness of his/her efforts makes him the minority (imho).
I don't hate advertisements or advertisers. They are people too. I just dislike the practices of the majority of marketers.
Right, but that's not an unsubscribe issue. You're not trying to unsubscribe from someone's mailing list, you're trying to be removed entirely from their database. They're entirely separate things.
So I reached out to a few of my users to figure out why they were flagging their receipt as spam... turns out they don’t differentiate between the “spam” button and the “delete” button. So really they just didn’t care to have their receipt (perfectly legit) and are clicking whatever button removes it.
The button could say “Launch Nukes” and if removes the message from their immediate view they’ll push it.
You have to accept the reality that in very few cases people want these emails, so you are asking them to expend the effort in deciphering origin, purpose and viability of unsubscribing for the few where it will work.
If you are in the legitimate email business, you should design around this reality.
I appreciate the pragmatism here!
Do you know of any articles or useful content around this?
I’m not talking about those at all. Nor the ones where you sign up for one thing and then their “sister company” starts sending you email.
> Now, if you can’t unsubscribe (because there’s no link, it’s broken, or simply doesn’t actually unsubscribe), and this is a legit company, please please please let them know.
No chance I'm taking the time to do that. 99.99% they already know that it's broken and either made it that way intentionally or intentionally refuse to fix it to boost some kind of performance metrics. Why take the time to contact them? To the spam-filter it rightly goes.
The vast majority of spam I receive is marketing emails from legitimate companies I bought something from, and who mistakenly think this means I want their marketing emails. I never deliberately subscribe to marketing emails, so if I get one then either:
1) They sent me marketing email without asking, therefore they deserve to be marked as spammers and get the associated hassle.
2) They had some pre-ticked "send me spam" tickybox on a web page designed to distract attention from it, therefore they deserve to be marked as spammers and get the associated hassle.
This all assumes that the newsletter unsubscription process is using the email based method instead of the link based method (which is a good assumption email-based is more common).
It's also possible that you're talking about a 'link' (a href) in the email body that goes to the newsletter provider's site and ask them a bunch of questions (why are you unsubscribing etc.). That's a different concept entirely.
From what I've seen, the email-based way is the primary unsubscription method in use today. Even when you use the gmail feature "Mark this as spam", depending on what you click, it will just send an email on your behalf to the to whatever is specified in the List-Unsubscribe: mailto: header.
It's not. Most people unsubscribe by clicking a link in the email.
What you're referring to is the list-unsub header which is again a different concept to what the person above you is saying regarding replying to an email and asking to be opted out.
The original question remains though: How does the stated service here work when there is only a List-Unsubscribe: header and no web form?
If you're receiving email without one you're better off marking it as the spam it is.
However, personally I would not use it as I find it easy to unsubscribe via gmail already.
https://www.consumer.ftc.gov/articles/0148-prescreened-credi...
So, you promise to click on any link called "unsubscribe" in any email we forward to you?
Somehow this sounds dangerous. I do hope you are doing that in a proper sandbox or virtual machine.
Services which spam users in such a fashion are malicious.
A really cool service would be to trawl your inbox and unsubscribe from everything!
While I can’t avoid Google completely, I don’t use their web or mobile apps. Same goes for other services, though the issue with google connecting the dots on my online interactions is probably higher than with a small service. There on the other hand security is a higher issue than with Google with many SREs on call if something happens, so at the end of the day I prefer an offline service/program to parse my emails for the inscribe button.
Absolutely outrageous.
Oh, but it's only the price of three latés /s
Is it maybe supposed to be a joke? Went past me in that case.
From my and my friends personal experience.
It's possible there's less than there would otherwise be (impossible to know), and it's a really good idea to disable either way. Same with read receipts - I'm not sure if they're used for spam, but their mere existence is just obnoxious and rude.
They've made it a lot easier, because now you're not required to sign-in -- which is why this product works.
I just pay my high-school sister $15/hour to manually dig through the links and check unsubscribe for each mailing list for you.
As a tech worker, throwing $5/month to saving me frustration is worth it. Sure, you're exposing your email -- but I'm also exposing my email on my personal website, and literally any company I register on.