From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/88365 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: =?utf-8?Q?Adam_Sj=C3=B8gren?= Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general Subject: Re: undisclosed-recipients Date: Sun, 10 Feb 2019 20:09:54 +0100 Organization: koldfront - analysis & revolution, Copenhagen, Denmark Message-ID: <878syn8np9.fsf@tullinup.koldfront.dk> References: <87sgwyv2gv.fsf@mat.ucm.es> <87pns0hld8.fsf@portable.galex-713.eu> <87va1sfdho.fsf@ericabrahamsen.net> <87pnrzlegr.fsf@mat.ucm.es> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Info: blaine.gmane.org; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:195.159.176.226"; logging-data="117416"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@blaine.gmane.org" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.0.50 (gnu/linux) To: ding@gnus.org Original-X-From: ding-owner+M36574@lists.math.uh.edu Sun Feb 10 20:10:58 2019 Return-path: Envelope-to: ding-account@gmane.org Original-Received: from lists1.math.uh.edu ([129.7.128.208]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1gsuVG-000UPu-7N for ding-account@gmane.org; Sun, 10 Feb 2019 20:10:58 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.math.uh.edu) by lists1.math.uh.edu with smtp (Exim 4.91) (envelope-from ) id 1gsuUY-0003xV-3y; Sun, 10 Feb 2019 13:10:14 -0600 Original-Received: from mx1.math.uh.edu ([129.7.128.32]) by lists1.math.uh.edu with esmtps (TLSv1.3:TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.91) (envelope-from ) id 1gsuUR-0003uS-Ki for ding@lists.math.uh.edu; Sun, 10 Feb 2019 13:10:07 -0600 Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.231.51]) by mx1.math.uh.edu with esmtps (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) (Exim 4.91) (envelope-from ) id 1gsuUP-0003b6-Dy for ding@lists.math.uh.edu; Sun, 10 Feb 2019 13:10:07 -0600 Original-Received: from [195.159.176.226] (helo=blaine.gmane.org) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1gsuUK-0008Np-Pr for ding@gnus.org; Sun, 10 Feb 2019 20:10:02 +0100 Original-Received: from list by blaine.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1gsuUK-000TLH-5b for ding@gnus.org; Sun, 10 Feb 2019 20:10:00 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ OpenPGP: id=476630590A231909B0A0961A49D0746121BDE416; url=https://asjo.koldfront.dk/gpg.asc Mail-Follow-Up-To: never X-Now-Playing: DR P1 X-Face: )qY&CseJ?.:=8F#^~GcSA?F=9eu'{KAFfL1C3/A&:nE?PW\i65"ba0NS)97,Q(^@xk}n4Ou rPuR#V8I(J_@~H($[ym:`K_+]*kjvW>xH5jbgLBVFGXY:(#4P>zVBklLbdL&XxL\M)%T}3S/IS9lMJ ^St'=VZBR Precedence: bulk Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.gnus.general:88365 Archived-At: Uwe writes: >> I always thought it was added automatically by a MTA somewhere if you >> left the To: field blank. I don't think anyone types it in there manually. > > Well not gnus. Like Eric Abrahamsen, I think that this bogus value "undisclosed-recipients" is inserted by Microsoft Exchange, Gmail or similar, when there is no To: field. To test this, I tried composing an email in the Gmail web-interface with two recipients in Bcc: and nowhere else. The resulting emails arrived with: From: Adam Sjøgren <[redacted]@gmail.com> Subject: Test Bcc only from Gmail To: undisclosed-recipients:; Date: Sun, 10 Feb 2019 19:06:20 +0100 From: Adam Sjøgren <[redacted]@gmail.com> Subject: Test Bcc only from Gmail To: undisclosed-recipients:; Date: Sun, 10 Feb 2019 19:06:20 +0100 So Gmail inserts the bogus value "undisclosed-recipients:;" in To: when you only put recipients in the Bcc field and leave To and Cc empty. Let's try the same from outlook.com: From: Adam Sjøgren <[redacted]@outlook.com> Subject: This is a test of Bcc only from Outlook.com Date: Sun, 10 Feb 2019 18:17:07 +0000 From: Adam Sjøgren <[redacted]@outlook.com> Subject: This is a test of Bcc only from Outlook.com Date: Sun, 10 Feb 2019 18:17:07 +0000 So at least one part of Microsoft doesn't. Let's try from some smaller players; Tutanota: From: <[redacted]@tutanota.com> Subject: Bcc only from Tutanota Date: Sun, 10 Feb 2019 19:22:59 +0100 (CET) From: <[redacted]@tutanota.com> Subject: Bcc only from Tutanota Date: Sun, 10 Feb 2019 19:22:59 +0100 (CET) (10 minutes, 42 seconds ago) nope; but Protonmail does, emulating Google: From: Adam Sjøgren <[redacted]@protonmail.com> Subject: Bcc only from ProtonMail To: undisclosed-recipients:; Date: Sun, 10 Feb 2019 18:27:28 +0000 Reply-To: Adam Sjøgren <[redacted]@protonmail.com> From: Adam Sjøgren <[redacted]@protonmail.com> Subject: Bcc only from ProtonMail To: undisclosed-recipients:; Date: Sun, 10 Feb 2019 18:27:28 +0000 Reply-To: Adam Sjøgren <[redacted]@protonmail.com> Yahoo! Mail doesn't: From: Adam Sjøgren <[redacted]@yahoo.com> Subject: Bcc only from Yahoo! Mail Date: Sun, 10 Feb 2019 18:28:54 +0000 (UTC) Reply-To: Adam Sjøgren <[redacted]@yahoo.com> From: Adam Sjøgren <[redacted]@yahoo.com> Subject: Bcc only from Yahoo! Mail Date: Sun, 10 Feb 2019 18:28:54 +0000 (UTC) Reply-To: Adam Sjøgren <[redacted]@yahoo.com> And neither does Aol Mail (guess they are the same these days, at least the email sent from Aol Mail was delivered by a yahoo.com-host): From: <[redacted]@mcom.com> Subject: Bcc only from Aol Mail. Date: Sun, 10 Feb 2019 18:31:17 +0000 (UTC) (I'm too lazy to wait for the other one to arrive; I've got greylisting on.) Why do you find it attractive to have this value in To:‽ Best regards, Adam -- "I pragmatically turn my whims into principles!" Adam Sjøgren asjo@koldfront.dk