[foresto]

It's really a shame when online services make overly broad generalizations like this. I use disposable email addresses for all of my services, because they are the most effective way I've found to manage spam. (They also have the side benefit of a little added security when someone hacks Site A's account database and tries to use the email addresses to log in to Site B.) When a potential provider tries to coerce me in to exposing my keeper address, it signals to me that they (a) put their own convenience before my security, and (b) don't have a particularly good understanding of the internet. For both those reasons, I take my business elsewhere.

Even worse are the sites that happily accept disposable email addresses and claim to send a verification message, but never actually send it. This wastes my time with rummaging through spam filters and polling my inbox, wastes their time when I contact support to find out wtf is going on, and is generally just (c) a terrible experience.

[Fnoord]

In my opinion, you're doing things backwards.

Your modus operandus means you cannot share your e-mail address whereas my spam filter is so good that the amount of false positives and false negatives is negligible.

> (They also have the side benefit of a little added security when someone hacks Site A's account database and tries to use the email addresses to log in to Site

Using a password manager plus randomly generated, complex passwords mitigates that problem entirely insofar that your accounts can be used on different websites.

Both our solutions do not mitigate the doxing issue. A way to deal with that is removing your personal details whenever they're unnecessary (e.g. changing/removing them after you ordered something). Artifacts might still remain though, and faking them is probably illegal. It can lead to issues as well. My mother always gives a fake DOB akin to her own when she doesn't trust it, or gives a slight variant of her name. Then she knows something is wrong. Pretty clever, esp before this century.

[foresto]

> Your modus operandus means you cannot share your e-mail address

Of course I can. I don't know what you're getting at.

> Using a password manager

Doesn't solve the spam problem (which is what we're discussing here and the focus of my comment), and introduces its own problems.

[Fnoord]

> Of course I can. I don't know what you're getting at.

I was referring to it as an adaptation of the way I do it.

Your way of doing it is introducing another hop/point of failure and either adds a subscription, or having your addressed e-mail public.

> Doesn't solve the spam problem (which is what we're discussing here and the focus of my comment), and introduces its own problems.

I don't have a spam problem. Get an ISP or mail provider with some decent filters. Mine's been stopping spam since the '00 or something. Sometimes the spammers caught up, but only very temporary. I don't have a spam problem. I use the + to figure out how people (ie. marketeers/bots) got my e-mail address.

Also, a password manager does not introduce any meaningful problems.