lwc wrote:I know you tried to help, but I strongly suggest to avoid that
I have the same advice for you. You're trying to help but your advice only could only proliferate the problem.
lwc wrote:You will need mail servers at both sides to respect what is a completely fake from address.
The sender's side is trivial. There are a variety of ways to stand-up your own server, or to use an email provider that supports external sending addresses.
And BTW, when you call a legit SG address used by that addresses user as a "fake address", you're using the nomenclature of SG adversaries.
lwc wrote:Pretty much every public free server will at the best case scenario block you from sending
Not even close. Some malconfigured servers will block messages with a differing sender address domain and reverse lookup IP, but I've found that a majority do not.
lwc wrote: and at the worst case scenario simply ignore it and revert back to the real from without even telling you![/b]
This is science fiction. The receiving server cannot know your real address if it's not in your headers. Perhaps they could keep past records that can cross-reference IP and address, but that's borderline conspiracy theory.
lwc wrote:Last time I tried Gmail did the latter...(unless maybe you manually define it in your account as an allowable from).
Sure the
sending server can do that if it's controlled by a third party. It's your choice what sending server you use. Gmail is sneaky in this regard. It doesn't change your "From:" header, but it embeds your real address in another header. It's stated in their policy that they do it, but still sneaky nonetheless. I strongly suggest not using Gmail. If not for this reason, for all the ethical problems with Google Inc.
lwc wrote:But even if your privately paid server lets you do this, we live in the era of SPF, DKIM and DMARC.
Receiving servers will likely at the best case scenario warn your recipients that your messages are fake and unsafe.
Warnings are fair enough. Recipients naturally must become accustomed to the quality and accuracy of their email provider's filters (as they should). If the quality is bad and the system is untrainable, it's in the recipients interest to change providers.
lwc wrote:At the worst case scenario they'll even put your mail in the recipients' spam folder, possibly mark them as phishing and risk the usage of Spamgourmet for all of us.
Now you're being absurd. When you dance around bad filters it empowers the bad filters and makes you part of the problem. Broken filters need to be identified and either corrected or abandoned. Asking everyone to not send email with an SG address is precisely how you ensure that SG addresses get treated as malicious, if ppl were to take this bad advice. Legitimate users sending legitimate RFC-compliant email, and recipients who correct their filters (e.g. use the "not spam" button) is how you ensure SG addresses get properly treated.
Some receiving side servers are malconfigured and beyond help. In such cases you can choose between dancing for them, or refusing to send mail to them. If you dance for them, you empower them. Both options are lousy but that's reality. I generally tell the recipient to get an email service that works in such cases.