Is UCEPROTECT L3 a blacklist worth worrying about for email deliverability?

Email marketer from EmailDrip.com shares that UCEPROTECT Level 3 is controversial because it lists entire IP ranges, potentially affecting senders with good practices. They suggest monitoring but not panicking unless deliverability issues arise.

Marketer from Email Geeks mentions that all of their SparkPost IPs were recently listed on UCEPROTECT L2 and L3 but they saw no effect, however they don't send to Germany/Austria/etc.

Email marketer from Stackoverflow user 'MailAdmin' responds that being listed on UCEPROTECT L3 alone shouldn't cause major deliverability issues to big providers like Gmail or Yahoo. However, some smaller ISPs or companies might use the list, so it's good to monitor your sending reputation and bounce rates.

Email marketer from GlockApps answers that while UCEPROTECT can affect deliverability, its impact varies depending on the recipient server. They recommend monitoring your deliverability rates to identify any potential issues caused by the blacklist.

Email marketer from Spamhaus Forum explains that UCEPROTECT's Level 3 listing policy blocks entire netblocks based on the behavior of a few bad actors, which is considered overly aggressive by many in the email community.

Email marketer from Mailjet answers that UCEPROTECT's levels 2 and 3 are very aggressive, blacklisting entire IP ranges and even ASNs. They say that although being listed there doesn't automatically mean delivery failure, it's something to be aware of and monitor.

Marketer from Email Geeks explains that UCEPROTECT level 3 targets entire ASNs, and provides an example where SendGrid ASN was listed during Black Friday 2018.

Email marketer from Reddit user 'EmailGuru' shares that while a UCEPROTECT listing can be concerning, it's important to monitor your email deliverability metrics. A sudden drop in deliverability to specific regions might indicate an issue, but if overall deliverability remains stable, the impact may be minimal.

Email marketer from Gmass shares that UCEPROTECT is an anti-spam organization that maintains several blacklists, with Level 3 being the most controversial because it lists entire IP ranges. Being listed can potentially impact deliverability, especially to smaller ISPs.

Email marketer from Quora user 'DeliverabilityExpert' shares that you should assess the importance of UCEPROTECT to your specific audience. If a significant portion of your recipients are with ISPs that use UCEPROTECT, then it's a concern. Otherwise, it might not be a top priority.

Marketer from Email Geeks shares that being on UCEPROTECT L3 is like saying you have an IP address that may or may not send email. They also state that L1 is marginally useful, and L2 and L3 should never be used on a production system.

Experts from Email Geeks, Steve Atkins (WttW) says to pay no attention to UCEPROTECT. Laura Atkins (she/her) adds that she doesn't want to reinforce their bad behavior by mentioning it, also Steve adds no one sees any impact on deliverability from this blocklist.

Expert from Word to the Wise explains that UCEPROTECT level 3 might be a concern for smaller businesses that don't have dedicated deliverability experts. The listings themselves aren't necessarily critical, but if a small business lacks the resources to investigate, they may overreact and make unnecessary changes.

Expert from Word to the Wise says that UCEPROTECT Level 3 is overly aggressive due to its practice of listing entire network blocks. He says it's more important to focus on reputation-based filters and engagement metrics.

Expert from Word to the Wise shares that UCEPROTECT Level 3 is more of a data point than a definitive blocklist. She suggests that it's a sign to investigate further and see what's triggering the listing, as it may indicate underlying issues with your sending practices or infrastructure.

Documentation from Spamhaus suggests that while UCEPROTECT listings can impact deliverability, the actual impact depends on the recipient mail server's policies. Many larger providers ignore UCEPROTECT Level 3 due to its broad-stroke approach.

Documentation from Microsoft responds that the effectiveness of a blacklist like UCEPROTECT depends on various factors, including the specific policies of the receiving mail server. Some servers may give more weight to certain lists than others, and Microsoft uses a variety of signals to determine email delivery, not solely relying on third-party blacklists.

Documentation from UCEPROTECT explains that Level 3 aims to protect mail servers from spam originating from entire networks by listing the ASN. The goal is to encourage ISPs to take responsibility for spam originating from their networks.

Documentation from RFC explains that the effectiveness of any blocklist depends entirely on the mail server's configuration and policies. RFC specifications don't mandate the use of any particular blocklist, and mail server administrators have the freedom to choose which lists, if any, to use.

Documentation from Google Postmaster Tools explains that Google primarily uses its own internal metrics to assess sender reputation. While external blacklists can play a small role, Google's algorithms focus on factors like user engagement, spam complaints, and authentication practices.