Why should you not use public lists of spam trap domains?

Email marketer from Spamhaus mentions that anyone publishing or using such lists may be considered an abuser, since they're likely targeting specific IP ranges and can damage legitimate email streams. These ranges are often dynamic.

Email marketer from Email Geeks questions what list scrubbing services find when they claim to identify spam traps, hinting at potential inaccuracies and ethical concerns.

Email marketer from Kickbox recommends that maintaining a healthy email list is critical to avoid spam traps and maintain a good sender reputation. They emphasize validating email addresses to remove invalid or risky addresses, improving deliverability. This makes clear why lists of spamtraps are not helpful as validation techniques are needed instead.

Email marketer from Email Geeks explains that using public spam trap lists defeats the entire purpose of spam traps, which are meant to identify issues with address collection practices, not be circumvented through public lists.

Email marketer from Postmastery states hitting spam traps usually results in reputation and deliverability problems. This is a problem, because a public spam trap list would compromise their effectiveness in identifying poor sending practices.

Marketer from Email Geeks explains that public spamtrap lists defeat the purpose of spamtraps. Spamtraps highlight issues in sending and collection practices. Identifying and fixing the issues is more effective than trying to remove spamtraps.

Marketer from Email Geeks agrees with Skyler and adds that most services lack sufficient data to effectively mitigate serious problems related to spam traps.

Marketer from Email Geeks shares that scrubbing services often identify spam trap addresses as "catch-all". He cautions that services claiming to specifically identify spam traps may not have ethical practices, potentially targeting newbie or abusive marketers.

Marketer from Email Geeks explains that with a large data pool, one can use analytical methods to identify potential spam trap addresses with varying degrees of certainty. While not foolproof, this is generally how those services operate.

Email marketer from Email Geeks emphasizes that most services providing spam trap lists lack sufficient data to significantly mitigate spam problems.

Email marketer from SparkPost emphasizes the importance of obtaining explicit permission before sending emails to protect against spam traps. Obtaining lists with permission avoids hitting spam traps to begin with.

Email marketer from Email vendor forum discusses that public blacklists become ineffective as spammers are already aware of them and suggests using them as only one layer in a defense approach. This can be also translated to spamtrap lists.

Expert from Word to the Wise recommends building a permission-based list from opt-in subscribers and avoiding purchased lists. Using legitimate data collection methods minimizes the risk of hitting spam traps, making public lists obsolete.

Expert from Spam Resource explains that recycled addresses, a type of spamtrap, are closely guarded secrets, making public lists unreliable and dangerous. Using such lists increases the risk of hitting real spam traps, damaging sender reputation.

Documentation from RFC Editor mentions how to avoid open relays which can be detected as spamtrap sources. This means avoiding any system that allows unauthorized parties to send mail. This helps maintain the integrity and security of email systems.

Documentation from Project Honey Pot explains that they use a distributed system of honeypot pages that record information about IP addresses that access those pages. This is about tracking malicious behavior, not providing lists of spam traps, but their approach underscores the importance of data integrity.

Documentation from Microsoft mentions that maintaining list hygiene is important to avoid spam traps. They suggest using a double opt-in process and regularly removing inactive subscribers. Public spam trap lists aren't mentioned, but the focus on clean lists is relevant.

Documentation from Spamhaus explains that spam traps are confidential by design, because public lists would compromise their effectiveness, as spammers would simply remove those addresses. Spamhaus uses them to identify and block spammers.