Close
  • Latest News
  • Big Data and Analytics
  • Cloud
  • Networking
  • Cybersecurity
  • Applications
  • IT Management
  • Storage
  • Sponsored
  • Mobile
  • Small Business
  • Development
  • Database
  • Servers
  • Android
  • Apple
  • Innovation
  • Blogs
  • PC Hardware
  • Reviews
  • Search Engines
  • Virtualization
Read Down
Sign in
Close
Welcome!Log into your account
Forgot your password?
Read Down
Password recovery
Recover your password
Close
Search
Menu
Search
  • Latest News
  • Big Data and Analytics
  • Cloud
  • Networking
  • Cybersecurity
  • Applications
  • IT Management
  • Storage
  • Sponsored
  • Mobile
  • Small Business
  • Development
  • Database
  • Servers
  • Android
  • Apple
  • Innovation
  • Blogs
  • PC Hardware
  • Reviews
  • Search Engines
  • Virtualization
More
    Home Applications
    • Applications
    • Cybersecurity

    Goodmail Is a Much Misunderstood Solution

    By
    Larry Seltzer
    -
    February 8, 2006
    Share
    Facebook
    Twitter
    Linkedin

      Im incredulous at some of the criticism Im hearing of AOL and Yahoos decision to replace some of their whitelist with Goodmails service. Most of it reflects simple misunderstanding and a naive desire to believe the worst of big companies.

      Goodmail is an accreditation service, in other words a service that vouches for the sender of the message, certifying that they are who they say they are and that their practices conform to a set of standards for good behavior.

      Encrypted tokens are included with the message, and custom software in the mail client confirms the validity of the tokens and the message, thus confirming that the messages are valid CertifiedEmail.

      Goodmail is not the first accreditation service; BondedSender has been around for years; it works on a bond principle rather than on per-message fees, and lacks the visual cue for the recipient that Goodmail has.

      Misinformation abounds: Recipients of “CertifiedEmail,” the messages in question, pay nothing for receiving them. The cost is borne by the sender.

      Users who wish to send mail to systems, such as AOL, that support Goodmail dont have to use Goodmail to send it.

      Such mail will go through conventional filtering software, user blacklists; there is a chance that it will get blocked for the wrong reasons (for example, it will generate a false positive), but that was true in the pre-Goodmail days, so nothing has been lost.

      Heres another important point: CertifiedEmail is not supposed to diminish the amount of spam. Saying that it wont is like saying it wont solve global warming; its not supposed to.

      What its supposed to do is to get a senders mail through to the user without impediments from anti-spam infrastructure and with an enhanced degree of confidence for the recipient. Its an anti-spam solution for senders, not for recipients.

      /zimages/6/28571.gifFor advice on how to secure your network and applications, as well as the latest security news, visit Ziff Davis Internets Security IT Hub.

      The confidence thing is not just Goodmail marketing-speak. As a user, I would view CertifiedEmail in a different light than other mail. I absolutely would trust it more, not that I would necessarily want to receive it.

      If I got a certified e-mail from a vendor I didnt want to deal with, I would feel OK about clicking the unsubscribe link.

      In fact, Goodmail is planning a CertifiedUnsubscribe feature whereby they would act as an intermediary for recipients to remove them from lists. Whats not to like?

      Next page: Whats so good about Goodmail senders?

      Whats So Good About


      Goodmail Senders?”>

      What kind of confidence can you have in a sender that sends CertifiedMail?

      Goodmail doesnt just take your money and send your mail; you have to qualify:

      • You must have been in business for at least one year
      • You must have a business headquarters in the United States or Canada
      • You must send your e-mails from a dedicated IP address, even if sending them through a third-party service provider, and you must have at least a six-month history of sending mail from that address
      • Your sending IP addresses must have a low complaint rate relative to senders in general to Goodmails ISP partners (Clearly Goodmail works with its ISP partners to keep up to date.)
      • You must comply with Goodmails Acceptable Use and Security Policy (here in PDF form) and agree to the Token Purchase Agreement.

      Goodmail actually confirms all these claims. And it tracks the complaint levels to make sure senders are living up to their obligations, or at least they claim they will; well see what actually happens.

      Theres nothing (that I can see) in Goodmails rules that prohibit the content that we find offensive in spam, like pornography.

      But Goodmail would eliminate unsolicited porn-spam (which, for most of us, is all porn-spam).

      In fact, its hard to see any of the senders of the low-brow bulk of spam getting qualified through Goodmail, and its hard to imagine them being willing to pay the cost of sending the mail.

      How much does it actually cost? Goodmail says it has no final rate card, but we can expect the cost to be in the neighborhood of one-fourth of a cent per message.

      /zimages/6/28571.gifRead more here about the themes at Demo 2006, including service-based computing.

      Because phishing is the hot scare these days, Goodmail also is anxious to mention that banks and other phishing targets are good candidates, but its only a partial solution for them.

      Its true that a recipient of a CertifiedEmail from a bank can act on it with confidence. But when the phishing message comes in, the user needs to notice that its not a CertifiedEmail, and thats another matter. Phishing is really a separate problem with different solutions.

      There is a theoretical next level to this; if sender policies to certify all mail to a particular class of recipient were known, then filters could look for any uncertified messages apparently from that sender and block it. This could be a difficult task, and Im not sure anyones actually trying it now.

      Once again, Goodmail is not really supposed to address the spam problem.

      The only real hope for fighting spam and other mail-based abuse, including phishing, is a global system of SMTP authentication—something I used to be excited about.

      While Ive gotten pessimistic about it, work continues on it. SMTP authentication isnt a complete solution; one of the ways to address the holes in authentication is with accreditation systems, which tell recipients that the sender is not only who they say they are but are vouched for by someone with a reputation of their own at stake.

      Far from being something to regret, cost for sending messages is a desirable thing. In fact, if it could be made universal we would all be better off, although it would require a robust user authentication system.

      If doing so means abandoning the ideal early days of a free Internet open to abuse by the most amoral people out there, then I say bring on the unfree future.

      Security Center Editor Larry Seltzer has worked in and written about the computer industry since 1983. He can be reached at [email protected]

      /zimages/6/28571.gifCheck out eWEEK.coms for the latest security news, reviews and analysis. And for insights on security coverage around the Web, take a look at eWEEK.com Security Center Editor Larry Seltzers Weblog.

      Larry Seltzer
      Larry Seltzer has been writing software for and English about computers ever since—,much to his own amazement—,he graduated from the University of Pennsylvania in 1983.He was one of the authors of NPL and NPL-R, fourth-generation languages for microcomputers by the now-defunct DeskTop Software Corporation. (Larry is sad to find absolutely no hits on any of these +products on Google.) His work at Desktop Software included programming the UCSD p-System, a virtual machine-based operating system with portable binaries that pre-dated Java by more than 10 years.For several years, he wrote corporate software for Mathematica Policy Research (they're still in business!) and Chase Econometrics (not so lucky) before being forcibly thrown into the consulting market. He bummed around the Philadelphia consulting and contract-programming scenes for a year or two before taking a job at NSTL (National Software Testing Labs) developing product tests and managing contract testing for the computer industry, governments and publication.In 1991 Larry moved to Massachusetts to become Technical Director of PC Week Labs (now eWeek Labs). He moved within Ziff Davis to New York in 1994 to run testing at Windows Sources. In 1995, he became Technical Director for Internet product testing at PC Magazine and stayed there till 1998.Since then, he has been writing for numerous other publications, including Fortune Small Business, Windows 2000 Magazine (now Windows and .NET Magazine), ZDNet and Sam Whitmore's Media Survey.

      MOST POPULAR ARTICLES

      Android

      Samsung Galaxy XCover Pro: Durability for Tough...

      Chris Preimesberger - December 5, 2020 0
      Have you ever dropped your phone, winced and felt the pain as it hit the sidewalk? Either the screen splintered like a windshield being...
      Read more
      Cloud

      Why Data Security Will Face Even Harsher...

      Chris Preimesberger - December 1, 2020 0
      Who would know more about details of the hacking process than an actual former career hacker? And who wants to understand all they can...
      Read more
      Cybersecurity

      How Veritas Is Shining a Light Into...

      eWEEK EDITORS - September 25, 2020 0
      Protecting data has always been one of the most important tasks in all of IT, yet as more companies become data companies at the...
      Read more
      Big Data and Analytics

      How NVIDIA A100 Station Brings Data Center...

      Zeus Kerravala - November 18, 2020 0
      There’s little debate that graphics processor unit manufacturer NVIDIA is the de facto standard when it comes to providing silicon to power machine learning...
      Read more
      Apple

      Why iPhone 12 Pro Makes Sense for...

      Wayne Rash - November 26, 2020 0
      If you’ve been watching the Apple commercials for the past three weeks, you already know what the company thinks will happen if you buy...
      Read more

      eWeek has the latest technology news and analysis, buying guides, and product reviews for IT professionals and technology buyers. The site’s focus is on innovative solutions and covering in-depth technical content. eWeek stays on the cutting edge of technology news and IT trends through interviews and expert analysis. Gain insight from top innovators and thought leaders in the fields of IT, business, enterprise software, startups, and more.

      Facebook
      Linkedin
      RSS
      Twitter
      Youtube

      Advertisers

      Advertise with TechnologyAdvice on eWeek and our other IT-focused platforms.

      Advertise with Us

      Menu

      • About eWeek
      • Subscribe to our Newsletter
      • Latest News

      Our Brands

      • Privacy Policy
      • Terms
      • About
      • Contact
      • Advertise
      • Sitemap
      • California – Do Not Sell My Information

      Property of TechnologyAdvice.
      © 2021 TechnologyAdvice. All Rights Reserved

      Advertiser Disclosure: Some of the products that appear on this site are from companies from which TechnologyAdvice receives compensation. This compensation may impact how and where products appear on this site including, for example, the order in which they appear. TechnologyAdvice does not include all companies or all types of products available in the marketplace.

      ×