[HN Gopher] Someone at BrowserStack is leaking users' email addr...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Someone at BrowserStack is leaking users' email addresses
        
       Author : m_km
       Score  : 355 points
       Date   : 2026-04-05 13:14 UTC (9 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (shkspr.mobi)
 (TXT) w3m dump (shkspr.mobi)
        
       | wood_spirit wrote:
       | Or the company data has been compromised. That's a really common
       | way for emails to 'leak'.
        
         | jmount wrote:
         | And BrowserStack either doesn't know this or knows this and
         | isn't telling. Still bad, in my opinion.
        
           | brookst wrote:
           | Accuracy matters. Pizzas and tires are both round, but you do
           | different things with them.
        
       | jofzar wrote:
       | > BrowserStack routinely sell or give away their users' data.
       | 
       | > A third-party service used by BrowserStack siphons off
       | information to send to others.
       | 
       | > An employee or contractor at BrowserStack is exfiltrating user
       | data and transferring it elsewhere.
       | 
       | Or the simpler answer, their db/email list has been compromised.
        
         | jen20 wrote:
         | The simplest answer is they are voluntarily being scum and
         | selling user data to make a quick buck. It's almost universally
         | true.
        
           | gruez wrote:
           | >and selling user data to make a quick buck
           | 
           | Are there actually companies that will pay you $$$ for a list
           | of emails?
        
             | jen20 wrote:
             | Not exactly, but plenty will just sell everything to data
             | brokers.
        
               | gruez wrote:
               | >but plenty will just sell everything to data brokers.
               | 
               | Again, "sell" implies that there's some company where
               | they'll accept data from anyone and pay them for it,
               | which so far as I can tell doesn't exist. That's not to
               | say there's no selling going on. The fact that data
               | brokers exist means they do, but that doesn't mean every
               | business is in a position to "sell" data.
        
             | renewiltord wrote:
             | It's worth nothing. This is an online myth that marks out
             | the user the way the sentence "Expert in JAVA, AWS, GCP,
             | Oracle, and GIT" on a resume marks out the candidate.
        
               | alt227 wrote:
               | My boss has paid many people for lists of email addresses
               | in the past.
               | 
               | Im pretty sure he is not a mythical being!
        
           | JimDabell wrote:
           | > It's almost universally true.
           | 
           | It's not. I give a unique email address to every service I
           | register with, which means I can see who is leaking my email
           | address. Very few of them leak my email address at all, and
           | those that do tend to do so involuntarily through data
           | breaches.
           | 
           | The other main factors in spam are the sleazeballs at Apollo,
           | ZoomInfo, et al., services that use my email address
           | internally for more than I consented (if I use my email
           | address to register for a service, this does _not_ permit
           | that service to add me to their product mailing list), and
           | the spammers who guess email addresses based on LinkedIn info
           | (e.g. name + company domain).
           | 
           | The number of services who appear to take an email address I
           | have given them and sell it appear to be extremely rare.
        
             | jen20 wrote:
             | I do the same, and seem to have a much higher hit rate (or
             | a much lower acceptable baseline!)
        
             | alt227 wrote:
             | If you dont mind, What kind of unique email address do you
             | use and how do you manage all the aliases?
        
         | michaelcampbell wrote:
         | > > BrowserStack routinely sell or give away their users' data.
         | 
         | > Or the simpler answer, their db/email list has been
         | compromised.
         | 
         | I find the first option far simpler.
        
       | jstanley wrote:
       | BrightData is another company offering hosted browsers who has
       | also recently leaked private data, although they did email
       | customers to warn them.
       | 
       | I wonder if both of these companies were compromised by a shared
       | vulnerability in headless Chrome? Or else just a coincidence that
       | 2 headless browser companies got hacked at the same time?
       | 
       | I run a headless browser fingerprinting project and have found
       | that URLs that I only fetched via BrightData have subsequently
       | had fetches by Anthropic's Claudebot.
       | 
       | I think most likely an attacker who has the customer data is
       | using Claude to analyse it.
        
         | nurettin wrote:
         | Brightdata? Isn't that the israeli firm formerly called
         | luminati that sells you shady "high quality residential IPs"
         | that you can rotate to scrape the web?
        
           | timpera wrote:
           | Yes, that's the one. Their residential IPs service is one of
           | the best ones, but their "ethically sourced proxies" claim
           | seems dubious at best.
        
             | bright2026 wrote:
             | Historically, their residential proxies came from
             | backdoored proxies of HolaVPN users.
        
             | preinheimer wrote:
             | There was a research paper several years ago showing that
             | the "residential IP" stuff is powered by botnets and
             | compromised devices. Luminati is specifically called out.
             | 
             | Paper: https://xianghang.me/files/resi_paper.pdf Medium
             | Article: https://medium.com/@xianghangmi/resident-evil-
             | understanding-...
        
           | jstanley wrote:
           | Yes. Their hosted browser service is one of the best ones out
           | there.
        
           | ikidd wrote:
           | Now I remember these scumbags. Hijacked HolaVPN I think.
        
       | Macha wrote:
       | Is the _very big_ company Amazon, I wonder.
        
         | edent wrote:
         | (OP here) Nope! For all their faults, Amazon don't seem to have
         | leaked anything of mine. Yet.
        
           | zephen wrote:
           | > For all their faults, Amazon don't seem to have leaked
           | anything of mine.
           | 
           | Selling email lists is business. _Not_ selling email lists
           | is, in some cases, much smarter, much more hard-nosed
           | business, and is exactly what you would expect from Amazon.
           | 
           | When your only product is email addresses, you will sell them
           | to anybody trying to sell other shit.
           | 
           | When you sell all the possible kinds of shit in the world,
           | why on earth would you enable your competitors by giving them
           | any form of access to your customer list?
        
       | khalic wrote:
       | This is beyond outrageous. And the data leak angle they're
       | pushing doesn't make sense either.
        
       | streblo wrote:
       | Everyone in this thread suggesting a "data leak" or "compromise"
       | is totally missing the fact that this is how Apollo works. This
       | is often times overlooked by Apollo customers themselves. You
       | have to opt out of customer data sharing (and in doing so lose
       | out on the value of the product):
       | https://knowledge.apollo.io/hc/en-us/articles/20727684184589...
       | 
       | Not commenting on whether this is good or ethical (or even
       | totally legal), but this is what is happening behind the scenes.
        
         | fontain wrote:
         | For a little more color for people unfamiliar with modern
         | sales/marketing:
         | 
         | 1. A user signs up to BrowserStack
         | 
         | 2. BrowserStack (automatically) upload the submitted user's
         | information to Apollo
         | 
         | 3. Apollo "enrich" the user's details using information they
         | already have about the person, e.g: company revenue, LinkedIn
         | profile
         | 
         | 4. Sales reps at BrowserStack use the enriched information to
         | identify leads, bucket for marketing etc.
         | 
         | Apollo's customer data sharing adds any information
         | BrowserStack send to Apollo to the person's profile with
         | Apollo, accessible to all Apollo customers.
         | 
         | For example, any other Apollo customer can search something
         | like "email addresses for decision makers at Example, Inc." and
         | get back a list including your email address (if you told
         | BrowserStack you are a decision maker at Example, Inc.)
         | 
         | Every single marketing team is doing all of this, the only
         | reason it was obvious in this case is that the OP used a unique
         | email address for BrowserStack. If you sign up for any business
         | product online, you surely have a profile in Apollo filled with
         | details about you gathered from around the web (and details you
         | submitted).
         | 
         | edit: https://www.apollo.io/privacy-policy/remove opt out link
         | but Apollo are just one of many companies offering this service
        
           | tgsovlerkhgsel wrote:
           | Hopefully in the soon future:
           | 
           | 5. BrowserStack gets hit by a massive GDPR fine.
        
             | gib444 wrote:
             | 6. BrowserStack contests the fine for a couple of years,
             | not paying a euro cent
             | 
             | 7. People just remember 'BrowserStack got hit by a massive
             | fine'
             | 
             | 8. Everyone carries on with business as usual
        
           | saxonww wrote:
           | So I'm not disputing this, but I set up a similar scheme to
           | the author almost 8 years ago and conduct 90+% of my online
           | business through the custom emails. Everything from Amazon to
           | small local business.
           | 
           | In that time I have had 'leaks' twice: my State's Fish and
           | Wildlife licensing organ, and GitHub. In both cases I assume
           | it's more that the email ends up being public, not because of
           | something like Apollo.
           | 
           | I guess it's possible that spam is getting filtered before it
           | ever hits my inbox.
           | 
           | Edit: I was responding to the idea of it leading to spam, not
           | that Apollo wasn't collecting information on me.
           | 
           | For those curious: I signed up with Apollo and looked at what
           | they had on me (via the link in the flagged/dead post by
           | fontain). The email address they have is technically correct,
           | but it's a non-current work email. It's still active and I do
           | get a lot of senseless/bizarre business sales inquiries on
           | that address. The phone number they have is wrong and I don't
           | recognize it. They have my LinkedIn byline; it's likely how I
           | was 'found' so quickly, as my username is the same there. I'm
           | listed as cold.
        
             | simonjgreen wrote:
             | As far as you know
        
             | suzzer99 wrote:
             | I used to do the same until I got tired of it. The only two
             | leaks I found were United Airlines and Gary Johnson, the
             | Libertarian presidential candidate, who sold my email to
             | the Scott Walker campaign (strongly confirming my
             | suspicions that Republicans use libertarianism as a gateway
             | drug).
        
           | alt227 wrote:
           | I had never heard of Apollo, but I was interested so I
           | followed your link to opt out.
           | 
           | I have had the same work email address for 13 years. I have
           | done lots of hardware and software purchasing in that time,
           | and I am never shy of using my work email to sign up for
           | things and give to account managers etc. It is used on my
           | microsoft SSO, my Dell business account, my slack account etc
           | etc.
           | 
           | After I jumped through all their hoops to opt out, I got this
           | email from them:
           | 
           |  _" We searched our records with your email: xxx@xxxxxx but
           | could not find any information associated to it in our
           | databases. We will keep your email: xxx@xxxxxx in our
           | suppression list in order not to create any data associated
           | with your email. "_
           | 
           | So I guess they might not be as ubiquitous in their data
           | capture as you may have thought? Or they are straight up
           | lying.
        
           | nivea3066 wrote:
           | Maybe you'd have insight into something that happened to me
           | recently:
           | 
           | I did a search (DDG, Chromium) for an Anker product line that
           | I've been following. Clicked the link to Anker, skimmed,
           | nothing new.
           | 
           | Then shortly I get an email from "Checkmate" with a promo
           | offer.
           | 
           | I don't have an Anker account or whatever, don't recall
           | signing in. I figure it's fingerprinting or cookies, but so
           | far it's never been so overt.
           | 
           | I feel like this is an indicator of something, some sea
           | change. Of needing to squeeze more water from the stone. My
           | phone's been blowing up with spam calls since. I've been
           | mysteriously added to email lists. I'm getting short-code
           | text spam in addition to the regular spam, which when I
           | report to 7726, AT&T basically tells me it's fine, it's paid
           | for.
           | 
           | This may be a ploy to get me to turn the AI features back on
           | in Gmail, but it feels like somewhere, lines have been
           | crossed.
        
             | bluefirebrand wrote:
             | > This may be a ploy to get me to turn the AI features back
             | on in Gmail, but it feels like somewhere, lines have been
             | crossed
             | 
             | Lines have absolutely been crossed and there is no going
             | back without a lot of political will
             | 
             | There are no rules anymore. The internet started it, and AI
             | companies proved it. We're much worse of for it. The social
             | contract is extremely flimsy nowadays
        
         | simonjgreen wrote:
         | And the sad thing is, I can guarantee this thread alone will be
         | great marketing for Apollo and they will gain a pile of new
         | enquiries Monday morning.
        
         | x0x0 wrote:
         | Another way these companies get data is they have credits. It
         | costs a credit for a salesperson to enrich the data of someone
         | they're trying to contact. There are 2 ways to gain credits: 1
         | - cash; 2 - the salesperson installs a plugin in their inbox
         | and it scrapes all contact info in the inbox.
         | 
         | ZoomInfo is the most aggressive about this.
         | 
         | re apollo: inbox scraping is what they're describing here [1]
         | 
         | > _Apollo does leverage its large network of over 2 million
         | contributors to improve the scope and accuracy of its database
         | of business contact information and run verification checks
         | that result in a better user experience for its entire customer
         | base. Most of the data we collect from our Apollo users simply
         | forms part of our verification system to check and confirm
         | existing information in the Apollo database._
         | 
         | [1] https://knowledge.apollo.io/hc/en-
         | us/articles/20727684184589...
        
       | gruez wrote:
       | >After a brief discussion, the emailer told me they got my
       | details from Apollo.io
       | 
       | The landing page for Apollo.io says it's a "AI sales platform".
       | In other words, a CRM. My guess is that someone on the sales team
       | uploaded the entire customer list for sales purposes, not
       | realizing the privacy implications.
        
         | michaelcampbell wrote:
         | > not realizing the privacy implications.
         | 
         | If only.
        
           | gruez wrote:
           | Linkedin got users to unwittingly to share their entire
           | contact list by signing into gmail. What makes you think
           | something similar wouldn't happen to some non-technical
           | person on the sales team?
        
             | michaelcampbell wrote:
             | My point is I don't think one bit of this is accidental.
        
               | gruez wrote:
               | And my point is that it's pretty easy for people to
               | accidentally do it, and this is corroborated by the
               | available evidence, so we should apply hanlon's razor
               | rather than assuming someone at browserstack was laughing
               | maniacally while uploading the email list.
        
               | michaelcampbell wrote:
               | I made no such assertion. Only that businesses do things
               | in the business's interest more frequently than
               | databreaches.
        
               | gruez wrote:
               | > Only that businesses do things in the business's
               | interest
               | 
               | That's not mutually exclusive with "someone on the sales
               | team uploaded the entire customer list for sales
               | purposes, not realizing the privacy implications".
               | 
               | >more frequently than databreaches.
               | 
               | You're fighting against both hanlon's razor and occam's
               | razor here. The OP states the leak came from Apollo, and
               | as other commenters have noted, Apollo specifically has a
               | "Contributor Network" that shares email lists with other
               | companies, and isn't well documented. It's not hard to
               | imagine how this was done unintentionally. On the other
               | hand there's no evidence to suggest this was done
               | intentionally, other generic cynicism of "businesses do
               | things in the business's interest" or whatever.
        
               | zelphirkalt wrote:
               | On the other hand it is always convenient to hide behind
               | the "We big, careless, silly org, we no knows how to
               | handle data.". If we apply too many razors, then they are
               | just gonna cut our freedom away. At some size of
               | organizations negligence becomes malicious, since they
               | ought to have people knowing how stuff should be handled
               | and they most likely ignore it.
               | 
               | What is more likely? Everyone at an organization's IT,
               | sales and data protection department is incapable of
               | doing their job, or someone doesn't give a damn,
               | calculating, that preventing such things from happening
               | costs too much?
        
               | luckylion wrote:
               | Hanlon's razor suggests that browserstack has made the
               | conscious decision to use a vendor and share data with
               | them. Companies of that size don't YOLO those things,
               | that relationship and the data-sharing has passed through
               | legal, they have a contract in place.
               | 
               | Don't assume businesses operate the same way some job-
               | hunting person on monday morning is.
        
         | zelphirkalt wrote:
         | Working in sales but not being able to handle customer data
         | responsibly (for whatever reason). Not a good look.
        
           | senordevnyc wrote:
           | You say this like it's unusual. In my experience, sales is
           | incentivized to only really care about closing deals.
           | Everything else is often just a speed bump to them.
        
       | petcat wrote:
       | > Like all good nerds, I generate a unique email address for
       | every service I sign up to. This has several advantages - it
       | allows me to see if a message is legitimately from a service, if
       | a service is hacked the hackers can't go credential stuffing, and
       | I instantly know who leaked my address.
       | 
       | I think a lot of services will "de-alias" the email addresses
       | from these tricks to prevent alts, account spam, and to still
       | target the "real" account holder email. So the old tricks like
       | "<name>+<website>@<host.com>" is not considered a unique email
       | from "<name>@<host.com>". Unless your site-specific emails are
       | completely new inbox aliases, then I don't think this is as
       | effective as people think it is anymore.
        
         | gruez wrote:
         | > So unless your site-specific emails are completely new inbox
         | aliases, then I don't think this is as effective as people
         | think it is anymore.
         | 
         | Even if it's a "new" alias, I often see people[1] using simple
         | schemes to derive the address, eg. facebook@mydomain.example.
         | With cheap LLMs it's not hard to automatically guess what the
         | underlying pattern is.
         | 
         | edit:
         | 
         | [1] ie. in this very thread
        
         | Jaxan wrote:
         | I just do <website>@<myhost.tld>. It is sometimes confusing by
         | when interacting with customer support ;-)
        
           | OptionOfT wrote:
           | Yes ma'am, my email address really is
           | bofa.com@<optionoft's-lastname>.com
           | 
           | No I'm not trying to hack you.
           | 
           | Which in hindsight is also what a hacker would say. I can't
           | win...
        
             | noAnswer wrote:
             | There are some big brain companies who will block you if
             | their name appears in the email address. Like Discord. You
             | can create an account, with discrod@example.com. But a
             | seconde later you will get an email that your account got
             | band.
             | 
             | They know their way around IT security! /s
        
               | anonymousiam wrote:
               | What you say is often true, but in the case of Discord,
               | at least in my case, you are wrong. My Discord email
               | address is discord@xxx.com, and I am still receiving
               | emails from them.
        
               | noAnswer wrote:
               | It happend to me when i created my account in 2025.
               | Within seconds of verifying the address I got a email
               | that my account was band for TOS violation. I than
               | created a seconds account (within minutes from the same
               | IP) only writing "dc" instead of "discord" and that
               | worked. -\\_(tsu)_/-
        
               | anonymousiam wrote:
               | Apparently they (unlike other entities I've dealt with)
               | did not go back and review all of the existing, valid
               | email addresses in their user database.
               | 
               | It's always an unpleasant surprise when some company
               | terminates a years-old, active and valid account because
               | of a stupid policy change on their part.
        
             | zephen wrote:
             | Where, of course, 'bofa' is merely short for 'bofetada.'
        
             | jnettome wrote:
             | On top of it my email address is .me so is very common to
             | when I finish spelling my e-mail, people waiting for .com
        
           | phyzome wrote:
           | I often get asked whether I'm a fellow employee.
        
           | Semaphor wrote:
           | I had one website forward my mail to their legal department
           | who asked me why I'm impersonating them :D Only required a
           | short explanation though.
        
           | theandrewbailey wrote:
           | I have an account just like that at Best Buy with my domain.
           | The teenage cashier I gave it to thought it was cool.
        
         | nick-sta wrote:
         | I personally do x@mydomain.com. It makes it very obvious when
         | you start getting spam (I'm looking at you dji).
        
         | overlordalex wrote:
         | The way that this is done these days (and likely what the
         | author did/does) is that you use a custom domain to receive
         | mail; you provide an email like service@custom.com, and that
         | way when service@ starts receiving spam you know exactly where
         | it comes from
        
           | ValentineC wrote:
           | ^ I've been doing this with catchalls since before Google
           | Apps for Domain was even a thing.
           | 
           | Sometimes customer support staff bring up "oh, do you work at
           | <company> too"? I just tell them that I created an email
           | address just for their company, in case they spam me.
        
             | anonymousiam wrote:
             | I've got a few dozen domains, and primarily use two of them
             | for business interactions. One is a catchall, while the
             | other requires me to create explicit email addresses (or
             | aliases).
             | 
             | Aside from issues such as the business entity (sometimes
             | silently) prohibiting their name in my email address, I
             | have sometimes encountered cases where part of the email
             | validation process checks to see if the email server is a
             | catchall, and rejects the email address if it is. It takes
             | a little extra effort on my part to make a new alias, but
             | sometimes it's required.
             | 
             | Lots of organizations (such as PoS system providers) will
             | associate an email I provided with credit card number, and
             | when I use the card at a completely different place,
             | they'll automatically populate my email with the (totally
             | unrelated) one that they have. Same goes for telephone
             | numbers.
             | 
             | I've had many incidents similar to the author. More often
             | than not, it's a rouge employee or a compromised computer,
             | but sometimes it is as nefarious as the author's story.
        
               | fmajid wrote:
               | Wildcard email addresses will subject you to a torrent of
               | spam when spammers try dictionary attacks against your
               | domain. It's better to explicitly create aliases, I built
               | a web UI for Postfix to do this for myself and family
               | (https://GitHub.com/fazalmajid/postmapweb)
        
               | aendruk wrote:
               | > checks to see if the email server is a catchall
               | 
               | How is this possible? Do they test sending to a few
               | random addresses?
        
             | fmajid wrote:
             | I am more specific: if I start receiving pornographic spam
             | like I did to the address I gave Dell, I will know they
             | have been hacked.
             | 
             | I will also not hold my breath waiting for the legally
             | required breach notification they are supposed to send.
        
             | tamimio wrote:
             | > up "oh, do you work at <company> too"?
             | 
             | Oh boy, I had many of these conversations and especially
             | non technical people never grasp the concept, I had some
             | cases where they demanded to change it and use a "real
             | email like gmail!!", one time I bought shoes and the store
             | guy asked me the email to signup for whatever, so I read
             | the shoe's name and added the custom domain, gave me the
             | the look as if I am bullshitting him. Another at a
             | government connected agency and she thought "I work there
             | because I have the agency email" despite it is the alias
             | not the domain.
             | 
             | But similar to OP, few times I found the service is leaking
             | my email, or they got compromised who knew.
        
           | aaomidi wrote:
           | Take it a step further and do uuid@
        
           | fragmede wrote:
           | yes, but service is too guessable, so append a randomly
           | generated nonce as well, eg service_rjfh34@example.com. It
           | doesn't need to be cryptographically random, just non
           | trivially guessable to prove the service is leaking email
           | addresses.
        
         | QuantumNomad_ wrote:
         | iCloud has a great feature that allows you to generate unique
         | aliases on the fly quickly and easily. For example when signing
         | up for new services via the web browser on iOS, you can
         | generate a new address with the click of a button.
         | 
         | Many years ago, before I started using iCloud Mail, I was
         | running my own email server and had it set up to forward
         | everything sent to any address on my domain to my inbox. The
         | advantage was that I could invent random aliases any time I
         | wanted and didn't even need to do anything on the server for
         | those emails to get delivered to my main inbox. The very big
         | drawback as I soon experienced was that spammers would email a
         | lot of different email addresses on my domain that never
         | existed but because I was going catch-all, would also get
         | delivered to my main inbox. They'd be all kinds of email
         | addresses like joe@ or sales@ or what have you. So apparently
         | they were guessing common addresses and because I was accepting
         | everything I'd also get tons of spam.
        
           | sdevonoes wrote:
           | The downside of such iCloud aliases is that you cannot send
           | emails from there (you can only reply to emails, and ofc
           | receive emails)
        
             | QuantumNomad_ wrote:
             | True, and there has been a time or two where that has been
             | inconvenient for me as well.
             | 
             | Initial account creation confirmation email, and maybe even
             | some newsletters, were sent from noreply@ some domain.
             | Responding to such an email address directly will likely
             | either bounce or be silently dropped on their side, as
             | indicated by them using noreply as the sender address.
             | 
             | The website might say to email support@ their domain. But
             | because like you point out iCloud alias addresses cannot be
             | used as sender when composing a new message, and I don't
             | have any past received emails from that address, I can't
             | email them using the same alias email address that I used
             | to create an account.
             | 
             | And of course if the account belongs to
             | jumping.carrot-1j@icloud.com and I instead send an email to
             | them from a different sender address, then they will be
             | sceptical about whether it really is the account owner
             | trying to get in touch or some impostor. Assuming they
             | don't completely ignore the email on that grounds, you
             | might eventually get support if you are able to either
             | answer questions from them about past invoice amounts and
             | dates or similar, or if they are willing to email the
             | original account owner address from their support address.
             | But it's extra hassle, if they even bother to respond at
             | all.
             | 
             | Fortunately most websites have a contact form or similar to
             | get in touch with their support, but there are a few sites
             | that have an email address as the only way to contact their
             | support.
        
         | mjlee wrote:
         | I use Fastmail with my own domain and 1Password. Together they
         | give me a "masked email" button for forms that generates a
         | random enough email address (two common words and four digits)
         | and records the domain it was for. You can also create them ad-
         | hoc from Fastmail's interface.
         | 
         | As well as simply attributing leaks, it's most valuable as a
         | phishing filter. Why would my bank ever email an address I only
         | used to trial dog food delivery?
        
           | garciansmith wrote:
           | Yeah, Fastmail's aliases are great. I used to do things
           | described by some other commenters, like
           | myemail+nameofservice@ and whatnot, but this way the email is
           | automatically generated and you don't have to put any thought
           | into it.
        
         | tvbusy wrote:
         | I use DuckDuckGo Email and it generates unique addresses that I
         | can both receive emails (obviously) and reply to from that
         | email. There's also an option to shutdown that address and
         | never receive spam again.
        
         | fg137 wrote:
         | Of course. I use Firefox Relay to generate a unique email
         | address for every site where I have to use an email. That
         | method hasn't failed me so far.
        
       | villgax wrote:
       | Email needs a consent revocation system effectively like how
       | Blackberry had PINs for BBM
        
         | reddalo wrote:
         | Hey.com works that way. You have to approve new senders before
         | they can reach your inbox. And you can always revoke their
         | permission to message you.
         | 
         | I'd like to see that concept replicated to other email
         | services. I don't particularly like all the other opinionated
         | choices of Hey.com (especially the fact that you can't use
         | IMAP).
        
           | alt227 wrote:
           | This sounds to me like a normal black/white list, but
           | everything is on the blacklist by default.
           | 
           | I imagine this can be achieved with most mailboxes with a
           | simple deny all rule and then cherry picking email addresses
           | to whitelist.
        
       | Razengan wrote:
       | Thanks to iCloud I haven't used my actual email addresses
       | anywhere in a decade (even without Hide My Email their aliases
       | were very handy)
        
       | ohhman11 wrote:
       | Just wait till OP learns about Accurint!
        
       | Razengan wrote:
       | Thanks to iCloud I haven't used my actual email addresses
       | anywhere in a decade (even without Hide My Email their aliases
       | were very handy)
       | 
       | Caught quite a few leakers that way, by using specific addresses
       | for specific sites or categories of sites
       | 
       | (Last time I tried, Gmail's aliases were useless; they included
       | your real address in the alias!)
        
       | nashashmi wrote:
       | Guys at seamless io do the same thing. I found a very personal
       | email address on the system. I figured someone at work was
       | leaking their address book to seamless.
       | 
       | I don't know how to stop it
        
       | andrewaylett wrote:
       | Selected quotes from Apollo's GDPR page:
       | 
       | > Consent must be "freely given, specific, informed, and
       | unambiguous."
       | 
       | and
       | 
       | > Apollo notifies them when their data is added to Apollo's
       | database of business contact information and provides them with
       | instructions on how to opt out.
       | 
       | https://knowledge.apollo.io/hc/en-us/articles/4409141087757-...
       | 
       | Now, their claim appears to be that they're processing business
       | contact data under the legal basis of "Legitimate Interests". But
       | as much as I am a big fan of not doing things that require a
       | legal basis of "Consent", I'm unconvinced that they ensure their
       | customers are sticking as tightly to their basis as they ought to
       | be if they wish to claim it.
       | 
       | In other words: yes, if you have a CRM in then you might derive
       | legitimate interests in sharing with Apollo. But you need to make
       | sure you actually have the right legal basis for putting customer
       | details into your CRM, and your support database almost certainly
       | does not hold appropriate data!
       | 
       | So ultimately I think this is on both Browserstack (for
       | connecting and sharing data other than in accordance with a legal
       | basis) _and_ Apollo (for making it too easy for their customers
       | to send them data without a sound legal basis and then for
       | sharing that data without suitably validating they had the legal
       | basis to).
       | 
       | Apollo's privacy centre makes all the right claims about how they
       | comply with GDPR, but the OP's story demonstrates that they're
       | not as scrupulous in their verification as they claim to be. And
       | strictly, both should be reporting the breach and taking steps to
       | ensure it doesn't recur.
        
       | freedomben wrote:
       | Meta comment on the blog itself: Those theme options are really
       | neat. Such a great touch for a personal blog!
        
         | edent wrote:
         | Cheers mate, I appreciate it.
        
       | sph wrote:
       | Thank you for naming and shaming the company.
        
       | sammy2255 wrote:
       | Browserstack is Indian I believe. They will do anything for
       | money, so ofcourse they will sell it to email spam lists.
        
       | theandrewbailey wrote:
       | Having your own domain and giving a unique email address to
       | everyone... Is it correct to call this canary trapping email
       | addresses?
       | 
       | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canary_trap
        
         | ikidd wrote:
         | Sounds about right. Yes, I've been doing it for decades now and
         | besides telling you who's selling email lists, it makes
         | filtering much easier. Filtering by To: is pretty low effort
         | compared to Bayesian spam filters etc. They get tossed in a
         | Sieve filter as soon as they become a problem, and I'll send a
         | bitch letter to the leaker with another random email address to
         | see how dedicated they are to screwing me.
        
         | alt227 wrote:
         | How is this possible for any normal person with a work provided
         | 365 account?
        
           | Terretta wrote:
           | You can use the +label method on M365 work accounts, like
           | first.last+label@workdomain.com
           | 
           | Outlook rules match on them too, for rules.
        
       | dwedge wrote:
       | I had the same thing happen with Compare The Market in the UK. I
       | used two unique email addresses with them on two different
       | domains and the same day both started receiving spam. I reported
       | it to them and they don't care, because how do you prove it?
        
       | xkcd1963 wrote:
       | We need anonymous phone numbers
        
       | dfir-lab wrote:
       | Canary addresses are actually useful for triage: if only your
       | BrowserStack alias fires, it's data-broker re-sharing; if
       | multiple unrelated aliases fire together, that's more consistent
       | with a credential list circulating underground. Scope is the
       | differentiator.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2026-04-05 23:01 UTC)