FSF trying to contact Google about spammer sending 10k+ mails from Gmail account
A case where the Free Software Foundation says a spammer is sending over 10,000 emails a week from a Gmail account has reignited concerns about Google’s role in the email ecosystem. Commenters describe weak abuse handling, poor support even for paying customers, and perverse incentives that favor engagement and ad revenue over policing spam and fraud. Many argue that Gmail’s dominance and strict filtering of small providers, combined with lax enforcement on its own outbound traffic, effectively centralize control over email while making independent hosting increasingly unworkable.
Google’s incentives and (lack of) support
- Many argue Google has little incentive to prioritize abuse handling or user support, especially for free Gmail; staff promotions are tied to revenue-impacting work, not fixing edge-case abuse.
- Some say even paid Google Workspace support is weak unless spending is very high, though a few report getting human support in some regions.
- A recurring theme: to get action, people resort to extreme routes (e.g., legal letters, police reports, certified mail to Google’s legal department).
Market power, monopoly debate, and infrastructure dependence
- Strong disagreement over whether Gmail is a “monopoly”: some see it as dominant enough to dictate email behavior; others cite multiple providers and call monopoly claims exaggerated.
- Several note that even without classic monopoly status, concentrated “market power” lets Google effectively set de‑facto standards (deliverability, anti‑spam, account linking).
- Concern that “free but essential” services (email, IDs tied to phones, etc.) form a trap where users are locked in with no meaningful recourse.
Spam patterns and Google as sender
- Multiple admins report that a large share of spam now originates from Google infrastructure: gmail.com, Workspace tenants, Google Cloud IPs, googleusercontent.com, AppSheet, Google Groups, Calendar invites, and storage.googleapis.com links.
- Others say Microsoft/Outlook, Salesforce, Mailchimp, and Sendgrid are comparable or worse; views differ by individual spam corpus.
- Some note Google does suspend accounts after enough spam reports, but overall enforcement is seen as slow or inconsistent.
Abuse reporting and technical mechanisms
- External spam reporting to Google is described as painful: abuse@ redirects to web forms that often require Google accounts; many say reports are ignored.
- Some point to standardized mechanisms (Abuse Reporting Format, feedback loops) and third‑party tools (SpamCop, phish.report), but effectiveness is debated.
- Debate over what constitutes “spam”: unsolicited bulk vs any unwanted marketing. Many mark marketing emails as spam even from “legit” companies and services like Mailchimp.
Self‑hosting email and ecosystem side effects
- Running independent mail servers is reported as feasible but increasingly complex: SPF, DKIM, DMARC, IP reputation, RBLs, throttling by big providers.
- Google and Microsoft are accused of making life hard for small senders (legit mail going to spam or being throttled) while still leaking substantial spam.
- Some propose hard responses (blocking Google/Salesforce/Mailchimp entirely, new alliances/blacklists), but acknowledge “too big to block” economic and social realities.