Remix.run Logo
NikolaNovak 9 hours ago

Oh man. The infinite loops of impossible verification by large companies that should know better are massive pain peeve of mine.

This goes right to the top for me, along the ubiquitous "please verify your account" emails with NO OPTION to click "that's NOT me, somebody misused my email". Either people who do this for a living have no clue how to do their job, or, depressingly more likely, their goals are just completely misaligned to mine as a consumer and it's all about "removing friction" (for them).

duxup 5 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Oh man we had a person leave unexpectedly who controls our Apple organization for our dev accounts. I'm several months into me making requests, getting responses at least a week later for each email where the responder ... didn't really read my message. Then they ask for documents ... but they forgot to send me the secure link ... another week+ for them to do what they said they were going to do. Now one of my documents didn't include a sentence they needed ...

One of the requests was for a business card ... I haven't had a business card made with my name on it in 20 years.

The amazing thing is that I bet scammers working this system can get through this faster than I can.

At this point they should just give me control because no way would some scammer fail this much at this ungodly process.

praestigiare an hour ago | parent [-]

Scammers can definitely get through it faster than you can. Whenever you attempt to address abuse in a system by increasing the complexity of that system, you implicitly bias it towards those with the time and inclination to study it, which always includes those with intent to abuse it, and generally does not include your users.

MereInterest 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> Oh man. The infinite loops of impossible verification by large companies that should know better are massive pain peeve of mine.

I got hit by this from google.

1. Gmail added requirement for 2FA on my primary email address. Since I had no phone number on file, it instead used my recovery email address. Thankfully, I still had the password for my recovery email address, and could continue to (2).

2. Gmail added requirement for 2FA on my recovery email address. Since I had no phone number on file, it instead used by recovery's recovery email address. Thankfully, I still had the password for my recovery's recovery email address, and could continue to (3).

3. SBC Communications no longer exists, as it merged with AT&T in 2005. Email addresses at `sbcglobal.net` were maintained up until around 2021-ish, when they started purging any mailboxes that had been idle for more than 12 months.

Fundamentally, this was google's fault for misusing a recovery email for 2FA. Unfortunately, the only way to fix it would be to contact AT&T, asking them to pretty please update the email settings for somebody who hadn't been a paying customer for two decades.

fencepost an hour ago | parent | next [-]

Google made it very clear years ago that they shouldn't be trusted with anything irreplaceable/that would cause major problems if you lost access.

Once it became clear that they'd shifted from "crappy customer service" to (IMNSHO) "we fetishize the complete absence of customer service" it became dangerous to depend on them. Really, what's the worst that could happen? Maybe someone spams emojis in live chat on a game livestream at the request of the streamer on a personal account, it gets banned for abuse, Google recognizes that it's linked to other services and locks down everything? But that's so unrealistic I'm sure it could never happen.

It's not like they also have the ability to identify links between multiple accounts accessed by the same person and have automated processes that might stomp the associated accounts as well. Why, that would probably require something like allowing poorly-understood automated agents to take actions on their own!

deepsun 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

> Fundamentally, this was google's fault

Or yours, for not caring about 2FA. It's been a common practice for many years, and strongly recommended by most identity services, as well as OWASP and NIST recommendations.

What would you do in Google's place?

wl 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

I have the same issue. At the time I created the account that I'm locked out of, Google said nothing about these "recovery" email addresses as 2FA. Years passed without any notice that maybe they were going to lock me out of an account I have the password for. No notice that I had better have access to that "recovery" email address that I hadn't bothered to keep up to date because I never thought I'd need to "recover" the account from Google. (In my case, it's an old .edu email address that I was promised "for life".)

If Google wanted to lock me out of my account for my own good until I enabled 2FA, fine. But as GP stated, they abused the recovery email addresses to force 2FA on people and ended up locking some people out of their accounts.

Telaneo 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Not add 2fa automatically, but instead prompt with options to add it.

This probably doesn't comply with the relevant recommendations, but cutting a user of from their email is worse in my opinion.

deepsun 2 hours ago | parent [-]

I'm sure Google prompted author for years begging to turn the 2FA on, as well as warning that they will enforce it on day X. Author ignored them all.

saidnooneever 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

nonsense. any feature should have acceptable failure modes. blaming the customer for a fault they have no control over is not acceptable. many people know nothing about 2FA. it is not their responsibility. 2FA is a symptom of shitty designed systems which are inherently insecure and companies who dont give a shit about that and let their customers shoulder the burden by shoving complexity down their throats.

if you make an app it is not your customers responsibility to secure it with additional actions from their side..if it is, you need to make it mandatory and guide them step by step.

you cant after a while enable some toggle.and tell people to fuck off and its the fault of their ignorance to not know some technical details.

most consumers of these services dont know shit about IT and they should not be burdened with it..any product that demands it is either only meant for tech savy people or more likely lazily and badly engineered by money hungry people who see opportunity to make more money in user's issues.

deepsun 2 hours ago | parent [-]

> many people know nothing about 2FA

That's why Google sent them multiple emails explaining what it is and recommending to turn it on. What else could Google do?

mindslight 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Not force nonconsensual authentication methods onto users.

Google is one of the rare places I actually see positive value to 2FA. Compare with say banks, where it being demanded actually decreases my security. But regardless, it should not be forced.

deepsun 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

As for the banks I doubt it decreases security. Even SMS 2FA actually reduces fraud by 90%+ percent.

Yes, some banks implement it silly, like SVB requiring biometric login in order to scan one-time QR 2FA code from their app (biometric login is less secure), but you don't have to use the QR code, can use regular 2FA without biometrics.

But even then having 2FA is 42 times better than not having it.

deepsun 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

But then millions of users would stay unprotected from password sealing (see https://haveibeenpwned.com/).

They certainly did a proper thing forcing people to use 2FA AFTER multiple emails over the years recommending to turn it on, and warning that they will enforce it, which they did.

rationalist 9 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Someone constantly adds my Gmail address as their Gmail account's backup address.

I constantly remove it whenever Gmail sends me the notification.

I can't help but think there is some method for the other person to steal my Gmail account if I never remove my email as their backup.

ChrisMarshallNY 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

I have an "OG" mac.com account (got it about five minutes after Steve announced it). My wife actually has her first name.

We both get hit with "OG Hell," where people are constantly entering our emails. I think most time, it is accidental (maybe they meant "XXX1234", and forgot the number).

What makes it worse, is that Apple aliases mac.com, icloud.com, and me.com together, and there's no way to turn off one of the aliases.

mac.com is really in retirement. No one sets up new ones, but the miscreants typo icloud.com, which gets routed to me.

I have a rule, where I shitcan every mail to icloud.com, but I wish I could simply turn off the forwarder.

Romario77 9 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I logged in several times to other people's accounts and reset their passwords. But it's too tiring, people keep adding my email.

I hope it's because I have small simple email and not because they want to steal it.

delecti 8 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Have you tried sending them emails asking/telling them to stop?

kstrauser 8 hours ago | parent | next [-]

I’m a different person, but this happens to me, too. I have the kstrauser@yahoo.com email address because I signed up for it like 25 years ago. I log in every 6 months to see what the few other kstrausers in the world have signed me up for.

Not jsmith, but kstrauser. Not Gmail, but Yahoo. And I still get banking docs, and HOA meeting minutes, and birthday party invitations, and Facebook logins, and other bizarre random stuff.

I have so many questions. I’ve typoed my address before and had to correct it. That’s understandable. But to wholly invent one and say, yep, that looks good even though I’ve never used it before, I’m sure it’ll be fine! I just don’t get it.

lawrencejgd 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

>You write an email that says "Hey, can you please stop using my email address?"

>You send it to johnsmith@gmail.com

>You receive a new message, it says "Hey, can you please stop using my email address?"

>You're johnsmith@gmail.com, you only know that's the address that's being used

PD: I know that if he resets the password he can get the other address, but this scenario was funny in my head.

Mordisquitos 7 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

That may be what they're hoping for, using a similar modus operandi as those WhatsApp/IM messages from strangers who text you with things in the vein of ‘Hey, it was great meeting you at the conference’ or ‘Did Martha like your flowers?’ etc.

They may well be looking for targets.

tracker1 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

There are times where you just can't... someone uses my email address in person at tractor supply co. and I'm getting a ton of marketing email I can't usnsub to.

I've had this happen several times... There's a lawyer I used for a dispute a few years ago, and they now have another "First Last" name that matches mine, and he keeps emailing me... my reply, "Wrong Michael, again..."

It's kind of annoying all around... I need to get off my butt and get a few things shifted, then just start relying on my own MTA again, instead of forwarding *@mydomain to my gmail to. I'll still wildcard the domain, but to a single mailbox on my own mta.

I'm not sure how bad the spam might get though... I've had a test account on my mta for a couple years and it hasn't really recived any... my wildcard accounts either... I use the wildcard so I can do things like walmart@mydomain, to see if/where an email address is sold/leaked from regarding spam.

nativeit 8 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

You’re confessing to several actual felonies here, may want to change strategies.

NikolaNovak 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Right. Techies are always quick to suggest I do something naughty or funny with this "great power" I've unwittingly gained, but in reality it's just a liability. If I ignore it and they do something nasty and implicate me, it's a pain. If I touch it with a 10 ft pole, now I'm even more actively involved.

Just include "not me!" In the verification email, dam it

kstrauser 8 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

“…and so I made him the owner of my account, and he used that to remove himself from it!”

“We’ll be right over.”

tracker1 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

You give someone ownership of something and they used that ownership...

ntoskrnl_exe 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I'm curious if this would really be considered unlawful access, since only pure idiocy and no hacking/scamming/etc were involved.

jama211 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

No harm done no one is gonna prosecute this

cft 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

In what jurisdiction? He's in Russia

tecleandor 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

My Gmail account is a funny word in Spanish that I got when there was still plenty of names available.

I get TONS of emails of people trying to join services that use my address as a "fake email".

parable 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

This happens to me several times a month. I'm more concerned about account termination, in that if their Gmail account is terminated for some reason, mine would be as well due to it being the backup email address.

pocksuppet an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

You could try stealing theirs. Surely, one of the forgot-password flows must use the recovery email.

-Fu 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

[dead]

jacekm 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

A couple of years ago someone associated my email with their bank account in Santander UK. I tried to get in touch with Santander but turned out that the only way to do so is to either make an international call (I don't live in UK) or send them a paper letter. I gave up and just routed these emails to separate folder.

subscribed 3 hours ago | parent [-]

I meticulously report every single of emails like this as spam. Every single one. If it _could_ be read as a phishing attempt, I report them as phishing.

Etc.

oooyay an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

It's entirely on us as citizens to leaving them as pet peeves instead of crafting them into strategic law that makes them not only illegal but shunned. A little bit of structure goes a long way here.

Arrowmaster 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I'm currently in the endless email loop because someone named Raymond used one of my Gmail names to register with State Farm. One of their agents even emails me directly when he gets really behind on his payments but won't do anything when I tell them it's the wrong email.

In the past when this happens I usually reset the password and change the email to some anon throwaway but I can't do that without Raymonds DOB (don't quote me on that, been a while since I tried).

integralid 9 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

No need to look for malicious intentions, this is just a feature that costs money so it's very low (or zero) priority for profit driven organisations.

I wonder if finding people responsible and spamming then with their own service emails would make the team care enough to fix this. But of course that's mostly dubious, probably illegal, and shouldn't be a responsibility of some vigilante hacker

justinclift 9 hours ago | parent | next [-]

> No need to look for malicious intentions, this is just a feature that costs money so it's very low (or zero) priority for profit driven organisations.

Malicious in-attention then, by the profit driven org? :)

b112 9 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

If bartenders are legally (including criminally!) liable in some jurisdictions for their customers, then certainly a chain of legal liability can exist in other industries.

CydeWeys 5 hours ago | parent | next [-]

What are you envisioning exactly?

Pxtl 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Yes but bartenders overserving is a crime done by a working-class person and not a wealthy business.

wat10000 9 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

What is the word for harming other people in order to make more money for yourself, if not "malicious"?

loloquwowndueo 9 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

With AI these days it’d cost almost zero money. /s

duped 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

A chronic problem is the idea that if something can't be automated with a human in the loop then it simply can't be done at scale. Technologists will do anything except employ humans to solve social problems.

jagged-chisel 5 hours ago | parent [-]

s/technologists/venture capitalists/

plagiarist 9 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I prefer "please verify your account" to "thanks for joining" by a lot. The former presumably does not verify when I ignore it. The latter should be illegal but somehow isn't.

I do wish there was a requirement for some sort of "no" button that would stop sending sign up requests entirely.

Aachen 7 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Any idea what the incentive is for them to put in an email address they can't access?

I run a few websites that accept an email address (all noncommercial, I have no interest in spamming anyone). One of them is the "contact me" feature on my personal website. To prevent spam, I had people just put in their email address and it'll automatically email them my email address. This works perfectly to this day, haven't got a single spam email on any of the addresses I've handed out, but the ratio of emails sent out to received is probably 50 to 1. Why would anyone put an email address in there if not to contact me? I've been wondering if it's used by mail bombing services, idk if that's a thing but I know of the concept of annoying someone by signing them up for a hundred newsletters. My site doesn't send recurring emails, though, and it doesn't allow putting more than two email addresses per month in, per /24 IPv4 block (and even more strict on v6). It's useless for mail bombing services but the (presumed) bots keep submitting a steady rate of maybe 2 new email addresses per day, each time from a new ISP in a random country. No email addresses is ever submitted twice. No rhyme or reason to it. If anyone can make sense of this, that might help me in stopping the abuse

plagiarist 22 minutes ago | parent [-]

One way to do phishing attacks is to inject some payload in an automated mailing so malicious content comes from a valid email address. I wonder if they're testing whatever mail entry they can find with addresses they have access to in attempt to find something usable?

prmoustache 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

> The former presumably does not verify when I ignore it.

That doesn't prevent a huge majority of them from sending you notification emails all the time even if you never verify.

Pxtl 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Ah the old "reverse identity theft".

Relevant xkcd:

https://xkcd.com/1279/

Yeah, I get the same regularly.

thesuitonym 4 hours ago | parent [-]

Smartly, I got firstnamemiddleinitiallastname@gmail.com. I never get anybody else' details.

On the other hand... Occasionally someone gets my info because some careless person entered my email address into their system incorrectly. You'd think this problem would be solved by moving to a custom domain, but I still once in a while find someone completely ignore what I put into the form and sign me up as firstnamelastname@gmail.com.

AtreidesTyrant 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

happens with apple products all the time

cucumber3732842 8 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

The point of the system is what it does.

They can't just say "we don't want to deal with small timers who will not pay us big bucks doing nonstandard things" without pushback but they can write the policy so that a huge fraction of those use cases fall into some crack that can only be got out of by incurring the kind of expense that's a non-starter for those users. Your municipal code is rife with examples of this.

db48x 3 hours ago | parent [-]

This is a catchy aphorism, but not really true. Things can be badly implemented so that they fail to achieve their purpose.

praestigiare 25 minutes ago | parent [-]

People often have trouble with this saying, and that trouble often boils down to the difference between intent and purpose.

The people who create a system have some intent for it. The system may or may not effectively achieve that intent, may or may not outlive the initial conditions that surrounded its creation, and may or may not have side effects.

Purpose is something humans assign. It is sometimes linked to intent. A carpenter's hammer is intended to drive and pull nails, and that is often also its purpose. The purpose of the hammer I keep in my basement is breaking open walnuts.

The phrase is stating that the purpose we should assign to systems when judging them is their outcome, and not the intent behind them.

squeefers 7 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

> Either people who do this for a living have no clue how to do their job,

how naive. most of the world work to survive, not because its their dream vocation. they probably dont care as much as you do