Blocked email providers

[8396820158]

Has Nexus explicitly blocked email providers or does the site have a whitelist instead when creating an account? I generally use throwaway mail addresses with websites. I tried creating an account using 10 Minute Mail and always received an error when activating (I tried both activation links). Tutanota is blocked, Openmailbox finally worked and I've also used Outlook in the past (lost access to the account).

[Dark0ne]

Several throw away account providers are blocked as they were being regularly used by spammers and/or malicious users to make multiple accounts more quickly and easily. We do enjoy making it harder for them.

 

The error with activation links happens when your mail provider changes the activation link on the fly.

[Zaldir]

...Tutanota is blocked...

 

I use Tutanota myself, and it is not blocked.

[8396820158]

 

...Tutanota is blocked...

 

I use Tutanota myself, and it is not blocked.

 

I made a mistake, I must have used that email address in the past.

[8396820158]

Several throw away account providers are blocked as they were being regularly used by spammers and/or malicious users to make multiple accounts more quickly and easily. We do enjoy making it harder for them.

 

The error with activation links happens when your mail provider changes the activation link on the fly.

 

I think you should tell that to users. I'm not sure if 10 Minute Mail is blocked or not, or if it "changes the activation link on the fly". I changed my main account's email address to the same throwaway mail and I'm now locked out of an account with over 200 posts and 50 endorsements. The activation link arrived but never worked.

[DrakeTheDragon]

If it's the same email provider link obfuscating issue that's already known, you should be able to fix the link by exchanging the wrongfully unencoded parameter "§ion" back into "&section" again.

 

Those mail providers seem to turn "&sect" into "§" although it's not standard-conform to do so when the ";" at the end is missing. (For reference, the standard says "§" is url-encoded as "§" and decoded vice-versa. Thus if they do what they do now, they have an error in their detection algorithm.)