[HN Gopher] Yahoo admits mangling e-mail (2002)
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Yahoo admits mangling e-mail (2002)
        
       Author : Andoryuuta
       Score  : 174 points
       Date   : 2022-07-02 15:33 UTC (7 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (news.bbc.co.uk)
 (TXT) w3m dump (news.bbc.co.uk)
        
       | iso1631 wrote:
       | Obligatory Tom Scott video on the Scunthorpe problem
       | 
       | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CcZdwX4noCE
        
       | Mo3 wrote:
       | Simpler times.. sometimes I miss them.
        
       | uudecoded wrote:
       | This literally caused me to have a bad taste in my mouth when I
       | was in high school:
       | 
       | My yearbook advisor sent yahoo mail and asked what I would like
       | to be picked up at Starbucks for an early morning meeting the
       | next day.
       | 
       | "Caramel Mocha, thank you!", I replied.
       | 
       | The next morning, I was surprised with an undrinkable "Caramel
       | espresso" - an espresso with a pump of caramel syrup. I thought
       | she had made an innocent mistake and was shocked to see there was
       | in fact a difference between my sent text and her received text.
       | I had no explanation.
       | 
       | After some years in web dev, and encountering this article, I
       | realized that, as the precursor to javascript - the script type
       | "mocha" was valid, so yahoo just went ahead and replaced all
       | references to mocha with something that probably seemed innocuous
       | to a junior developer - except it wasn't.
        
         | meltyness wrote:
         | This concoction is "the regular" for me.
        
           | sdwr wrote:
           | When I worked at starbucks I loved that shit! 2 shots of
           | blonde espresso, a pump of caramel and a liiittle bit of
           | steamed half+half. Thinking about it now makes me feel sick
           | though.
        
           | iamtheworstdev wrote:
           | are you aware that it's undrinkable? ;-)
        
       | starik36 wrote:
       | They are still mangling it. If you are setting up IMAP, they only
       | allow you to download the latest 10,000 messages.
        
       | mr-ron wrote:
       | Tangent related to this. I had an old yahoo mail address from
       | late 90s till mid 00s before I switched to gmail. Lots of family
       | / high school / college / early professional emails were there.
       | 
       | The other month I logged in to view them as I do every so often
       | and yahoo had purged the entire archive. Like 20MB worth of
       | emails gone.
       | 
       | Apparently they have a policy if you do not log in in a year of
       | time they will delete everything with no way to recover.
       | 
       | I can't imagine the decision making to put this policy in nor
       | could I ever imagine using yahoo email again for any purpose
       | whatsoever.
        
         | sethammons wrote:
         | You can't imagine paying for storage of things that appear to
         | not be used when you are giving it away free?
        
           | interestica wrote:
           | How are they giving it away for free?
        
             | melvinram wrote:
             | When they don't charge money for it and you're not using it
             | (so no views for ads), they aren't getting paid and it's
             | costing them storage money. How is it hard to see that they
             | are giving it away for free?
        
               | Firmwarrior wrote:
               | Because if they didn't treat their customers like crap,
               | they might still theoretically have had customers at some
               | point in the future
        
               | bombcar wrote:
               | Someone who doesn't login and doesn't pay is not much of
               | a customer.
        
               | cratermoon wrote:
               | Someone who uses an ad-supported service for free is not
               | a customer.
        
         | criddell wrote:
         | I surprised you could even log in. I thought Yahoo was going to
         | start recycling email addresses (which seems like a terrible
         | idea).
        
         | tyrfing wrote:
         | Microsoft has had a similar policy, although they entirely
         | delete the account instead. Same for smaller companies like
         | GMX.
         | 
         | Definitely a contributor to sticking with Gmail.
        
         | alar44 wrote:
         | You don't store important information in free email services.
        
         | unixbane wrote:
         | Wow we should all use only Google because they are the only
         | good and trustworthy email provider. Why do we even need email
         | at all? There should just be a simplified protocol or webapp
         | that stores everything on Google and manages all your
         | authentication tokens for every website you use.
         | 
         | </sarcasm> yup that was the end game for email as we knew
         | already 20 years ago
        
         | reid wrote:
         | Full disclosure: I work on Yahoo Mail, but I'm not speaking for
         | my employer.
         | 
         | Yes, this can happen after 12 months of inactivity for free
         | accounts. Policy: https://help.yahoo.com/kb/SLN2018.html
         | 
         | For context, Gmail has a policy which allows for deletion after
         | 2 years of inactivity:
         | https://www.google.com/gmail/about/policy/
         | 
         | I'm sorry the service didn't meet your expectation, but for
         | others here who are curious, there are some options for keeping
         | email storage active! These days there are paid Yahoo Mail
         | accounts available which retain email for as long as you have
         | the subscription active. (Or you can log in once a year with a
         | free account.)
         | 
         | You can also use a IMAP app to save a local archive of all of
         | your email. This works for all accounts, even free ones! More:
         | https://help.yahoo.com/kb/SLN5033.html
        
           | enlyth wrote:
           | Gmail definitely does not enact this policy. Me and a friend
           | managed to log into a shared gmail account recently we had
           | from high school, to which no one logged in for more than a
           | decade.
        
             | londons_explore wrote:
             | To my knowledge gmail has never purged unused accounts.
             | 
             | It would be a security nightmare to let anyone else
             | register and reuse an email address anyway. So the only
             | benefit is saving a little disk space.
             | 
             | But disk space for highly compressible text that will
             | probably never be accessed is super cheap.
        
             | eastbound wrote:
             | If someone had IMAP and sync with their mobile enabled,
             | would it count as a login?
        
           | iforgotpassword wrote:
           | What totally enraged me about this is that the policy was
           | apparently introduced long after I created my account. At
           | some point when I switched to Gmail, I set up yahoo to
           | forward to it. This worked for years. Then this policy kicked
           | in and from one day to the other, the Yahoo account was
           | deleted. No warning was sent to the Gmail address beforehand.
           | There wasn't much going on on the Yahoo account anyways, so I
           | only noticed it much later. I have an old YouTube account
           | that I signed up to with that yahoo address that I can't
           | access anymore, and not do the recovery process because
           | email.
           | 
           | Easy, just recreate that Yahoo account right? Wrong, to suck
           | even more, yahoo now only offers new Email accounts on their
           | .com domain. Mine wasn't on the .com domain. But existing
           | accounts on the other domains still work fine, so they need
           | to keep up that infra anyways.
        
           | geoduck14 wrote:
           | >Full disclosure: I work on Yahoo Mail, but I'm not speaking
           | for my employer.
           | 
           | I've worked for large corporations before, and I have had
           | training g that _explicitly_ told me not to  "go on social
           | media, disclose my affiliation, and then run text support".
           | 
           | I'm not going to tell you how to post on HN - cause I _love_
           | hearing true tech stories, but you might consider caution
        
             | robin_reala wrote:
             | I work for a large corp and I've explicitly OKed it with
             | the social media team that it's OK for me to engage with
             | customer complaints online to get them resolved if
             | necessary. There are a few guidelines, but they're easy to
             | meet.
        
               | cratermoon wrote:
               | In my experience, this cuts two ways. Some companies hire
               | what about to PR flacks to respond to complaints with
               | bland, vague apologies and company hype. The _good_
               | companies have real support people tasked specifically
               | with engaging on social media to help users fix issues,
               | especially common ones. As you might expect, I tend to
               | prefer to do business with the latter, and I suspect I 'm
               | not alone.
        
             | PyWoody wrote:
             | One of the things that makes HN special is getting
             | frontline insights like what OP gave. Almost any thread
             | with a major issue/outage will have such a comment. Most of
             | the time, it will come directly from a CTO/CEO.
        
           | jrimbault wrote:
           | Just this afternoon I was with my father looking for a way to
           | backup all of his emails on his yahoo account.
           | 
           | I was looking "naively" for the button to request all of his
           | personal data. I didn't find one and there's probably one
           | somewhere I'm guessing.
           | 
           | I resigned myself to set up Outlook on his computer and make
           | a manual backup.
        
             | reid wrote:
             | Yes, I believe a local IMAP backup is the way to go.
        
             | idorosen wrote:
             | I use getmail (similar to fetchmail) to routinely archive
             | (i.e., sync without deleting + reindex) all of my emails
             | from various free accounts, just in case. It can save to
             | mbox, Maildir, mh, and other formats that are easy to
             | import to any MUA/LDA. This is worth doing for all e-mail,
             | and I have a patch to make it support OAuth. I don't think
             | it supports JMAP, but it's great for IMAP, Gmail, and Yahoo
             | mail and deduplicates messages by ID and content, etc.
             | while preserving tags/mailboxes (if saved as Maildir). I
             | highly recommend running something like that in a cron job
             | somewhere once a week to sync locally with some sanity
             | checks (e.g., did it save any new messages? did the folder
             | grow? Etc.)
             | 
             | I also use it to save Spam/Junk folders, which then comes
             | in very handy to train my local spam classifier for my
             | self-hosted mail servers with lots of data. (Over 3TB of
             | spam saved so far and about 20GB of ham.)
             | 
             | Gmail's spam filter has had a higher false positive rate
             | than usual for me lately, so I have a little report emailed
             | to me once a week of likely ham in my gmail spam box, which
             | has found at least 3 messages per week that I missed.
        
             | davchana wrote:
             | I use a mix of google email labels, apps script,
             | spreadsheet & drive folder to download every email (older
             | than 15 days, so that I have enough time to delete it) as
             | .eml files in Google drive folder, which by turn downloads
             | it to my local disk.
             | 
             | The spreadsheet keeps log of each msg in a thread.
             | 
             | Labels marks the downloaded emails.
             | 
             | Apps script run on a trigger & does the heavy lifting of
             | actually downloading the .eml.
        
         | katzgrau wrote:
         | Yeah well when `df` tells you the disk is at 100%, gotta start
         | somewhere
        
         | rybosome wrote:
         | I discovered that recently as well and was very disappointed. I
         | understand why this happened from Yahoo's perspective, but it
         | sucks nonetheless.
        
         | plasma_beam wrote:
         | Same here, though I still login from time to time, mostly
         | because my apple id is still tied to the account. My emails are
         | still there too.
        
         | dm319 wrote:
         | I remember this was standard back in the day, and I think the
         | time period was even shorter. Think it happened to me on
         | Hotmail at 3 months.
        
       | d4a wrote:
       | It's the Sc**horpe problem all over again
        
       | kstrauser wrote:
       | Clbuttic problem with content filtering.
        
         | sqlacid wrote:
         | Classic comment
        
           | kevin_thibedeau wrote:
           | Easy there. HN doesn't like harsh language.
        
           | dredmorbius wrote:
           | Scunthorpe approved!
        
       | Andoryuuta wrote:
       | Came across this and thought it was an... amusing filter.
        
       | lbriner wrote:
       | Yahoo's latest tactic is just to insist on complete DMARC
       | alignment to even stand a chance of being delivered. We have no
       | problems with pretty much any other provider apart from them. And
       | of course, they won't help you understand what is wrong with a
       | particular message and how to avoid spam traps because "that
       | would help phishing", which of course is patently nonsense since
       | GMail pretty much tell you how to keep you mail acceptable.
        
         | cmeacham98 wrote:
         | I have 100% compliance with DMARC, DKIM, SPF, reverse DNS
         | records set, a valid SSL cert - and Yahoo still drops half my
         | mail. Works at basically every other major provider: Gmail,
         | AOL, iCloud, Outlook, Yandex, etc.
         | 
         | My conclusion is that Yahoo's spam filters just suck in
         | general.
        
           | reid wrote:
           | Full disclosure: I work on Yahoo Mail, but I'm not speaking
           | for my employer.
           | 
           | Have you checked out CFL? If users mark sender's messages as
           | spam, it can impact that sender's deliverability. The CFL can
           | help avoid these recipients by understanding spam reports.
           | 
           | More best practices for deliverability:
           | https://senders.yahooinc.com/best-practices/
        
           | guilamu wrote:
           | Same here, most of mine are just delayed though.
        
           | kstrauser wrote:
           | And yet, during my annual login to the Yahoo account I keep
           | around out of morbid curiosity, it's full of spam. It seems
           | like refusing to accept inbound mail would be an improvement
           | in their filtering.
        
           | ec109685 wrote:
           | AOL and Yahoo mail have very similar backends given they are
           | owned by same company.
        
         | guilamu wrote:
         | I'm managing an email serveur sending around 1 million emails a
         | month.
         | 
         | Since a while now, yahoo are delaying emails for 12 h to 48 h.
         | I have 0 issue anywhere else than yahoo.
         | 
         | Not a single email sent by this server has been flagged has
         | spam according to their own support staff.
         | 
         | I have no idea what to do to fix those delays and it seems they
         | have no idea either...
        
       | billpg wrote:
       | I get not wanting to forward JS in email messages onto your
       | customers whose browsers will run it and forward your login
       | cookies to criminals.
       | 
       | I do not get thinking that replacing the word "eval" with
       | "review" is a solution to that problem.
        
       | unixbane wrote:
       | Content modification usually leads to vulns (e.g, XSS filters,
       | possible bitsquatting enabled here if they change URLs or
       | breaking array bounds checks in programs). Classic 90s security.
       | Too bad 90s security never went away.
        
       | haunter wrote:
       | Why the Archive.org link?
       | 
       | http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/2138014.stm
        
         | Andoryuuta wrote:
         | Oh! To be entirely honest, I got the link directly from a
         | reference on a Wikipedia page, so I assumed the old link must
         | be down since it was using archive.org.
         | 
         | With that being said, the archive.org link is probably better
         | in case anyone comes across this HN discussion in the future.
        
           | dang wrote:
           | We ask people not to do that because it's important for
           | readers to see the original provenance of the article, e.g.
           | in the site name displayed to the right of the title.
           | 
           | " _Please submit the original source. If a post reports on
           | something found on another site, submit the latter._ "
           | 
           | https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
           | 
           | If the original article is really not available anywhere else
           | on the web and is interesting enough for a good HN thread,
           | posting archive.org is ok.
        
             | Andoryuuta wrote:
             | Noted. Thanks for updating the link!
        
           | VoidWhisperer wrote:
           | I think Wikipedia references are encouraged to use archive
           | links because it will show the page at the time that they
           | used it as a reference as opposed to linking to the live page
           | which can change at any time.
        
             | gbear605 wrote:
             | Wikipedia references should include both the live url and
             | the archive url, and then set the "dead" flag to either
             | true or false to choose which url to link to. Probably
             | either an automated process or an inattentive user falsely
             | marked the url as dead.
        
             | runlevel1 wrote:
             | Wikipedia has been around long enough that many of the
             | citation links pointing to other websites are broken. So
             | there are several wiki bots that go around replacing direct
             | links with links to the archived pages.
        
             | jwilk wrote:
             | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scunthorpe_problem links both
             | to the live page and to the archived copy (in that order).
             | 
             | Linking _only_ to an archived copy when the original is
             | still live would be unusual.
        
         | benbristow wrote:
         | Not often I give props to the BBC, but impressive how they've
         | managed to keep that page/article working for so long. Even
         | most of the links on the page still take you to somewhere
         | relevant and the search box still works.
         | 
         | Surprised they haven't bothered to try and migrate the old
         | articles to their newer systems though!
        
           | dmw_ng wrote:
           | The genius is exactly that they haven't bothered. Can you
           | imagine the flow of layout bugs over the past 20 years, or
           | the managers calling to scrap old content because it's
           | generating so much workload?
           | 
           | That's very much a successful case of avoiding needless
           | technology
        
             | benbristow wrote:
             | Serving up unsecure HTTP pages isn't ideal though.
        
               | [deleted]
        
           | mgdlbp wrote:
           | CNN still has its very first pages from 1995
           | http://www.cnn.com/EVENTS/timeline/
           | 
           | Its site design in the early 2000s was much like the BBC's ht
           | tp://www.cnn.com/2000/TECH/computing/08/11/email.hoaxes/in...
           | 
           | Past headlines remain relentlessly interesting... https://web
           | .archive.org/web/20000815060311/http://www.cnn.co...
        
           | londons_explore wrote:
           | I guess it's still running on the original server... the page
           | took about 30 seconds to load for me!
        
             | endorphine wrote:
             | It took less than 1sec for me, on mobile w/ 4G.
        
         | dang wrote:
         | We've changed to that now from https://web.archive.org/web/2021
         | 0126143212/http://news.bbc.c.... Thanks!
        
         | onionisafruit wrote:
         | Interesting that this is in the Science/Nature section. I
         | wonder why not Technology.
        
       | bcraven wrote:
       | Here's a contemporary site where the users discuss their
       | confusion.
       | 
       | "When did "Medireview" = Medieval???"
       | 
       | https://www.enworld.org/threads/when-did-medireview-medieval...
        
         | doodlesdev wrote:
         | > Actually, it appears to be a real term and not a mistake. I'm
         | finding "medireview" in a lot of places on the web in place of
         | the more traditional "medieval," even in university and college
         | catalogs. > Interesting.
         | 
         | This is the funniest forum thread I've seen in ages
        
         | re wrote:
         | Another humorous example from the second page of that thread:
         | 
         | > speaking of which, did anyone else who owns the 2e Wizard's
         | Spell Compendium notice that the term "dawizard" appeared
         | wherever "damage" should have been?
        
           | iggldiggl wrote:
           | "It was as if a light had been Nookd..."
           | (https://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?p=3994)
        
         | jeanlucas wrote:
         | That's some nice collateral effect
        
       | yvoschaap wrote:
       | I remember sending fake Yahoo login forms as html attachments.
       | eval() & alert() fix:
       | 
       | `const ev = 'ev', al = 'al', ert = 'ert'; window[ev +
       | al](window[al + ert]('hi'))`
        
         | londons_explore wrote:
         | block the word 'window' and I don't think your approach is
         | possible?
        
           | kragen wrote:
           | Just use 'this'.
        
       | robinhouston wrote:
       | This is very funny. At least one of the resulting words is
       | sufficiently attested to have been recorded by Wiktionary.
       | 
       | https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/medireview
       | 
       | > Etymology: Coined accidentally by Yahoo! Mail in 2001, from
       | medieval by automated string substitution of review for eval, a
       | Javascript command short for evaluate.
        
         | re wrote:
         | medireview =~ s/review/eval/
         | 
         | Medieval is one of those words that I have never been able to
         | remember how to spell, maybe this will be a mnemonic that
         | sticks.
        
           | somebodynew wrote:
           | I had the same problem and eventually settled on "medical
           | evaluation" as a mnemonic.
        
           | IncRnd wrote:
           | A mnemonic that suits more cases is, "i before e, except
           | after c."
        
             | cratermoon wrote:
             | That rule has so many exceptions that there's another
             | mnemonic for remembering the exceptions.
             | 
             | 1 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I_before_E_except_after_C#E
             | xce...
        
       | cratermoon wrote:
       | %s/eval/review/g
        
       | annexrichmond wrote:
       | Interesting that the article is filed under `Science/Nature`
       | instead of `Technology`
        
       | JohnJamesRambo wrote:
       | I feel like my IQ increased 20 points just looking at a page laid
       | out like this.
        
         | mushufasa wrote:
         | if you viewed it on an 800 x 600 screen, it would look
         | appropriate
        
           | alberth wrote:
           | I think you mean, "if you viewed this on a screen 13+ inches"
           | because nearly all displays now are way more than 800x600
           | resolution.
        
             | mushufasa wrote:
             | no I don't; this is hardcoded to a specific pixel width
        
             | kube-system wrote:
             | Looks great on my Apple Watch.
        
         | alberth wrote:
         | Information hierarchy is extremely underrated.
         | 
         | It's surprisingly hard to do which is why these days so few do
         | it, plus screen real estate on mobile adds additional
         | challenges.
        
         | ape4 wrote:
         | Dates like "03 Jan 01" knocked it back down a bit
        
           | lucakiebel wrote:
           | Yes. ISO-8601 all the things
        
       | 1vuio0pswjnm7 wrote:
       | Dumb user question: Why is this URL redirecting to https:// from
       | http://
        
         | cratermoon wrote:
         | You should always use SSL and secure encryption when possible.
         | In fact, sticking with http is such a bad idea that most
         | websites are now using https by default.
         | 
         | The real question is: why did the OP provide a bare http link?
         | Something sitting around in a bookmarks file from 2002?
        
       | brrrrrm wrote:
       | Some of the phrasing is quite fascinating! E.g. "kidnap personal
       | information"
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2022-07-02 23:00 UTC)