[sillysaurus3]

I don't know... Mistakes happen. There seems to be little to gain from faulting SendGrid, but faulting SendGrid would force them to take some kind of action such as terminating the rep. I think I'd prefer the rep remain employed, because I trust they'd never make this mistake again. Also, now all the other reps know to avoid it.

EDIT: May I ask what can be gained from faulting SendGrid in this case?

[cjbprime]

I agree with you that terminating the rep is not interesting, and I think you're mistaken if you feel like that's what anyone thinks will solve this problem.

Actions SendGrid could take:

* Make it impossible for their front-line support staff to change the email address on file. If you want that -- which should be extremely rare! -- you talk to a high-level manager who is competent at authenticating you.

* Send the email that says "hey, we're going to change your email address now" with a lead time to allow for the possibility that, even after your authentication, you've been conned.

* Make a phone call to the phone number on record, too.

You ask what's gained by faulting SendGrid, because you take it as a given that they will make these changes. But that's not how blame works. The blame serves a function of ensuring those changes by holding them accountable for their current problems.

[chris_wot]

Given the contact email address is so important, perhaps SendGrid should have a way of confirming it before they allow it to be changed?

Or perhaps they should allow customers to require that they contact a secondary authority to confirm the change should be made?