From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/87963 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Uwe Brauer Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general Subject: Re: warn about a BCC field Date: Sat, 14 Apr 2018 00:23:58 +0200 Message-ID: <87y3hq924h.fsf@mat.ucm.es> References: <87d1eaa0q2.fsf@mat.ucm.es> <87d0z51px0.fsf@mouse.gnus.org> <87vacualzc.fsf@mat.ucm.es> <87k1tasuz9.fsf@mouse.gnus.org> <87lgdqakkw.fsf@mat.ucm.es> <87woxayfj8.fsf@mouse.gnus.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1523658198 26032 195.159.176.226 (13 Apr 2018 22:23:18 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 13 Apr 2018 22:23:18 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.0.50 (gnu/linux) To: ding@gnus.org Original-X-From: ding-owner+m36177@lists.math.uh.edu Sat Apr 14 00:23:14 2018 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 1f7767-0006a1-Rw for ding-account@gmane.org; Sat, 14 Apr 2018 00:23:11 +0200 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 80a133fc-3f69-11e8-a660-b499baabecb2; Fri, 13 Apr 2018 22:24:59 +0000 (UTC) Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.math.uh.edu) by lists1.math.uh.edu with smtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1f777C-0004qC-Oq; Fri, 13 Apr 2018 17:24:18 -0500 Original-Received: from mx2.math.uh.edu ([129.7.128.33]) by lists1.math.uh.edu with esmtps (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1f7778-0004pM-Ho for ding@lists.math.uh.edu; Fri, 13 Apr 2018 17:24:14 -0500 Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.231.51]) by mx2.math.uh.edu with esmtps (TLSv1.2:DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1f7774-0004Rc-Eu for ding@lists.math.uh.edu; Fri, 13 Apr 2018 17:24:14 -0500 Original-Received: from [195.159.176.226] (helo=blaine.gmane.org) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1f7773-0007xp-5c for ding@gnus.org; Sat, 14 Apr 2018 00:24:09 +0200 Original-Received: from list by blaine.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1f774t-00053C-Ph for ding@gnus.org; Sat, 14 Apr 2018 00:21:55 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Mail-Followup-To: ding@gnus.org Original-Lines: 52 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org Mail-Copies-To: never Cancel-Lock: sha1:CYr9FxzBcy2gYU22t36Aq6K0JEE= X-Spam-Score: -0.9 (/) List-ID: Precedence: bulk Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.gnus.general:87963 Archived-At: >>> "Lars" == Lars Ingebrigtsen writes: > Uwe Brauer writes: >> Did I explain my problem now better? > Oh, I see. You were Bcc'd on a message, but then did a wide reply that > revealed to the other people in the conversation that you were party to > the conversation, and you didn't want to do that. > Well, first of all: Mail agents are supposed to strip the Bcc header > before sending the mail, so you shouldn't have gotten that Bcc header. > So that's a bug in the software that sent you the mail. Well well. I just sent myself with gnus the following message From: Uwe Brauer Subject: this To: Uwe Brauer Cc: Uwe Brauer Date: Sat, 14 Apr 2018 00:14:28 +0200 (48 seconds ago) Bcc: oub.oub.oub@gmail.com As you can see that is a BCC field. Now when I open in my oub.oub.oubGmail.com account the message and indeed the BCC field is gone. I did the same with thunderbird and the same behavior. Odd no? > But the question is: If you're not listed in To/Cc in a mail, and > you do a wide reply, should Gnus warn you about what you're doing? > I don't think so: It's a very common situation, especially with > mailing lists. I see your point concerning mailing list, but what's about the other use case I just mentioned? What would you do in such a situation? However I just realized that my code is not failsafe. As it seems I can't trust that such a mail (where I am not in the TO/CC) would include a bcc field, and then my hack would fail. Couldn't we set a variable (gnus-for-the-careless-repliers) but then it is not clear to me what to search for? Any ideas how to deal with that? It seems that most people are either not very often in such a situation or are just more careful then I am. > So I don't really think there's anything here to be done on the Gnus > side, but your my-check-bcc sounds nice for your specific use case, > though.