by VanguardLH » Thu May 20, 2021 6:15 pm
Same effect happened here in my SG account. I doled out an SG alias to Menards. They spammed it (a month later) despite configuring not to have them send me anything other than alerts for deliveries (to store for me to pickup). I wanted to kill the alias (since they cannot be deleted) by setting the remaining count to zero. However, I cannot find the alias when I search on it, even with "Show hidden addresses" selected (in case I had previously marked it hidden, but forgot to set the remaining count to zero). As others have noted, this is a new defect encountered since the software update. If the update was incremental, the code delta that made the change is likely minimal (i.e., not a full-blown major version change), and finding the miscreant code change should be easy. This defect was reported 12 days ago while the update was performed 15 days ago (notice was posted here on May 5). Hopefully it gets addressed soon. Be interesting to know just what features or behaviors were changed by the update.
The point of using SG aliases is they can be killed/nullified. If that feature is gone (deliberately or accidentally without a fix), I would have to define server-side filters to kill off specific SG aliases coming to my true e-mail account, and that means too many filters, and which would have to get defined retroactively as e-mails came through SG aliases I could no longer manage. If this defect is not fixed soon, I would have to abandon use of Spamgourmet. While I can, for example, specify a required prefix to kill any further aliases, adding a prefix does not affect previously used aliases. That means without a means to manage the aliases in my SG account that I have no means of disabling them, and I would have to define a global filter in my true e-mail account that rejects all e-mails where any SG alias was used, including the SG aliases that I still want active. Management at the SG site of alias is crucial to its viability.
While Josiah posted notice of his update back on May 5, I've not seen him yet respond to subsequent defect reports. If the bug is not repairable within the near future (a week or two), Josiah should back out the code change and revert to the prior version of the software. Whatever new features or behaviors the new code added are definitely nowhere near as important as the listing of used aliases and allowing management of them.
Does anyone here have direct contact with Josiah to ensure he actually knows there is a problem, or do we PM him? Might someone have already PM'ed him? Also, although Josiah reported the software update, does he actually code the software (is he a developer), or did he get the code delta from someone else?