E-mail accreditation isn't taken all that seriously as a method of spam control. I'm baffled as to why. It appears to be an effective means of helping ensure that spam filters don't accidently block e-mail that the recipient actually wants to get. . . .
E-mail accreditation isn't taken all that seriously as a method of spam control. I'm baffled as to why. It appears to be an effective means of helping ensure that spam filters don't accidently block e-mail that the recipient actually wants to get.

These legitimate messages wrongly blocked by spam and virus filters are known as "false positives," and they're as big a problem as spam itself.

E-mail marketers and bulk mailers - like us here at Security Pipeline - are putting up the loudest squawk about the problem. I've seen estimates that 10-15 percent of legitimate bulk mail fails to reach its recipients, because messages are blocked by overzealous spam and virus filters. That includes the very newsletter you're reading now; industry statistics tell me that one subscriber in seven or eight will simply not receive this message. (Let me know if you're not reading this. Ha ha. I make ze joke, yes?)

We e-mail publishers are looking to improve the delivery rate, and e-mail accreditation has emerged as one technique. The idea is this: Companies like Bonded Sender and Habeas, Inc., sign up bulk e-mailers to agree to terms of service designed to keep e-mailers from sending spam. (Some anti-spam advocates say the terms of service aren't strict enough, but at least the accreditation programs are trying to put SOME controls in place.) The e-mail publishers pay to use the service.


(This is a bit down the page, but worth reading)

The link for this article located at securitypipeline.com is no longer available.