From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/87411 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: David Engster Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general Subject: Re: Bcc Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2017 19:21:36 +0100 Message-ID: <87fuj4g43z.fsf@randomsample.de> References: <87y3wy8hd0.fsf@mat.ucm.es> <87o9xu6nz0.fsf@mat.ucm.es> <87k28hfiyf.fsf@randomsample.de> <87o9xt2tab.fsf_-_@tullinup.koldfront.dk> NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1487874138 15916 195.159.176.226 (23 Feb 2017 18:22:18 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2017 18:22:18 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.1 (gnu/linux) Cc: ding@gnus.org To: asjo@koldfront.dk (Adam =?iso-8859-1?Q?Sj=F8gren?=) Original-X-From: ding-owner+m35632@lists.math.uh.edu Thu Feb 23 19:22:09 2017 Return-path: Envelope-to: ding-account@gmane.org Original-Received: from mxfilter-048035.atla03.us.yomura.com ([107.189.48.35]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1cgy1m-0002yZ-NM for ding-account@gmane.org; Thu, 23 Feb 2017 19:22:06 +0100 X-Yomura-MXScrub: 1.0 Original-Received: from lists1.math.uh.edu (unknown [129.7.128.208]) by mxfilter-048035.atla03.us.yomura.com (Halon) with ESMTPS id fd373096-f9f4-11e6-b156-b499baabecb2; Thu, 23 Feb 2017 18:22:09 +0000 (UTC) Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.math.uh.edu) by lists1.math.uh.edu with smtp (Exim 4.87) (envelope-from ) id 1cgy1V-0003rx-Q9; Thu, 23 Feb 2017 12:21:49 -0600 Original-Received: from mx1.math.uh.edu ([129.7.128.32]) by lists1.math.uh.edu with esmtps (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) (Exim 4.87) (envelope-from ) id 1cgy1U-0003rO-9N for ding@lists.math.uh.edu; Thu, 23 Feb 2017 12:21:48 -0600 Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.231.51]) by mx1.math.uh.edu with esmtps (TLSv1.2:DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA:128) (Exim 4.87) (envelope-from ) id 1cgy1S-0003oS-Lo for ding@lists.math.uh.edu; Thu, 23 Feb 2017 12:21:48 -0600 Original-Received: from randomsample.de ([5.45.97.173]) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:DHE_RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1cgy1R-0007qa-74 for ding@gnus.org; Thu, 23 Feb 2017 19:21:45 +0100 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=randomsample.de; s=a; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:MIME-Version:Message-ID:Date:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:Cc:To:From; bh=Jjr5svpTqnAoe5s4U1Nm5h50TKioC4EJVMZPdXhHiKA=; b=BVLvXcMVHhv94yiQlHH8Vy64lCeRwtAcyRwPdxk6oRKMoyLJp17TCOSnYXxxJ3s4xwqSAS95xqa5j1jpd83zFDoalPvhRNWyF9d1as8cShGFNf3ECRJ42Hns6fRGzF0S; Original-Received: from ip4d16b353.dynamic.kabel-deutschland.de ([77.22.179.83] helo=isaac) by randomsample.de with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1cgy1M-0007gi-BA; Thu, 23 Feb 2017 19:21:40 +0100 In-Reply-To: <87o9xt2tab.fsf_-_@tullinup.koldfront.dk> ("Adam \=\?iso-8859-1\?Q\?Sj\=F8gren\=22's\?\= message of "Thu, 23 Feb 2017 09:41:32 +0100") List-ID: Precedence: bulk Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.gnus.general:87411 Archived-At: Adam Sj=F8gren writes: > David writes: > >> Some MUAs send a separate mail for the people in the Bcc > > Which MUAs do not do this? > > Isn't that the definition of what Bcc does? To my knowledge, there's no definition how BCC is actually implemented. RFC822 only states that the BCC header must not reach the primary/secondary recipients (and it explicitly does not say whether the BCC header should be seen by the tertiary recipients, as I've written to Uwe). I'm gone from system administration quite a while, so things might have changed, but I remember that there were long discussions who is actually responsible for *implementing* the BCC behavior: the MUA or the MTA. Many MTAs take it upon themselves to handle BCC: they strip the BCC header and then forwarded the mails to all recipients. I remember that Exim did *not* do that by default, which a quick search shows still surprises people: https://www.bentasker.co.uk/documentation/linux/301-avoiding-bcc-leaks-with= -exim Now that might not be a proper MUA, but I'm pretty sure I've seen MUAs back in the day that delegated BCC handling to the MTA. They probably changed that when Exim became popular. -David