Paranoia – Spam and CC vs. BCC

User avatar
ChrisGreaves
PlutoniumLounger
Posts: 11695
Joined: 24 Jan 2010, 23:23
Location: paused.undefined.exposed

Paranoia – Spam and CC vs. BCC

Post by ChrisGreaves »

CCvsBCC.png
I am a tad paranoid about received emails which sport lengthy lists on the TO or the CC line, much preferring that senders use BCC.
Am I over-reacting?

My reaction is based on the days when I ran email off my private domain and a lengthy CC list meant a flood of spam in the following days.
Back then it seemed to me that if any one of the addressees had an infected machine, that was enough to spread to other infected machines unrelated to the mailing group at hand.
And so all it took was for ONE of the addressees to be indulging in Porn, Online Gambling, or Free Prizes and we were all in for a bash of spam.

Today is different.

Today I use GMail and I think that GMail is pretty good at shielding me from spam. Truth is I don’t get a lot of spam at all, perhaps one spam every two weeks or so. There again, my email burden is way down Lo these past four years.

Perhaps MSoft & Co. are better than I had thought at weeding out malware automatically with default updates and runs of Windows Defender and the ilk.
So for myself I probably should not bother about these visible TO and CC lists.

But perhaps it is still worthwhile pointing it out for the sake of other users?
(Please see also an associated thread “No BCC option?!!”)
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
More than the minimum is less than enough

User avatar
John Gray
PlatinumLounger
Posts: 4786
Joined: 24 Jan 2010, 08:33
Location: A cathedral city in England

Re: Paranoia – Spam and CC vs. BCC

Post by John Gray »

I invariably complain to the originator should my email address be displayed in a long list of such addresses in the To or CC fields.

It is bad practice so to do, and arguably contravenes the UK's Data Protection Act.
John Gray

However far you try to push the envelope it'll always be stationery.

User avatar
HansV
Administrator
Posts: 69807
Joined: 16 Jan 2010, 00:14
Status: Microsoft MVP
Location: Wageningen, The Netherlands

Re: Paranoia – Spam and CC vs. BCC

Post by HansV »

I know that Canada is still part of the Commonweatlh of Nations, but does that imply that the UK Data Protection Act applies to Canada too?
Regards,
Hans

User avatar
John Gray
PlatinumLounger
Posts: 4786
Joined: 24 Jan 2010, 08:33
Location: A cathedral city in England

Re: Paranoia – Spam and CC vs. BCC

Post by John Gray »

No - Canada has its own laws, I presume!
Probably something equivalent?
John Gray

However far you try to push the envelope it'll always be stationery.

User avatar
DaveA
GoldLounger
Posts: 2505
Joined: 24 Jan 2010, 15:26
Location: Olympia, WA

Re: Paranoia – Spam and CC vs. BCC

Post by DaveA »

Yes, it is still good to use BCC, as the addresses can still be sold to the spammers lists.
If not displayed they can not be captured and sold.
I am so far behind, I think I am First :evilgrin:
Genealogy....confusing the dead and annoying the living

User avatar
BobH
UraniumLounger
Posts: 8030
Joined: 13 Feb 2010, 01:27
Location: Temple - Deep in the Heart of Texas

Re: Paranoia – Spam and CC vs. BCC

Post by BobH »

I would like to disable CC in Thunderbird because I accidentally click it when trying to click BCC.

I wonder if it is possible to do so.
Bob's yer Uncle!
Story of my life: I knew better but did it anyway!
Intel Core i5, 3570K, 3.40 GHz, 16 GB RAM, ECS Z77 H2-A3 Mobo, Windows 7 >HPE 64-bit, MS Office 2016

User avatar
HansV
Administrator
Posts: 69807
Joined: 16 Jan 2010, 00:14
Status: Microsoft MVP
Location: Wageningen, The Netherlands

Re: Paranoia – Spam and CC vs. BCC

Post by HansV »

I don't think that's possible, but I'm not a Thunderbird expert.
Regards,
Hans

User avatar
viking33
PlatinumLounger
Posts: 5678
Joined: 24 Jan 2010, 19:16
Location: Cape Cod, Massachusetts,USA

Re: Paranoia – Spam and CC vs. BCC

Post by viking33 »

BobH wrote:I would like to disable CC in Thunderbird because I accidentally click it when trying to click BCC.

I wonder if it is possible to do so.
I found this one in the Mozilla Forums and seems like the only one that doesn't involve hacking the code like a hunter and his machete in the jungle. Give it a try?
----------------------------------


On the tools menu (alt+T) > open account settings
select copies and folders. and make sure CC and BCC these addresses is not set. ( checked )

Also restart with addons disabled from the help menu and see if that stops the automatic insert, as I assure you it does not do that for me.

While the number of to boxes can be forced to one, it is not a good idea as that whole header turns into a squeeze if you click reply all to a mail with more than one recipient.
BOB
:massachusetts: :usa:
______________________________________

If I agreed with you we'd both be wrong.

User avatar
BobH
UraniumLounger
Posts: 8030
Joined: 13 Feb 2010, 01:27
Location: Temple - Deep in the Heart of Texas

Re: Paranoia – Spam and CC vs. BCC

Post by BobH »

I posted a query on the Mozilla Forums. While I did not receive instructions for modifying Thunderbird, I did learn that there is an extension called Use Bcc Instead that allows one to have better control over what fields to use.

Here is the option panel for it (the settings are mine, not defaults):
Use Bcc Instead Options Panel.png
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Bob's yer Uncle!
Story of my life: I knew better but did it anyway!
Intel Core i5, 3570K, 3.40 GHz, 16 GB RAM, ECS Z77 H2-A3 Mobo, Windows 7 >HPE 64-bit, MS Office 2016

User avatar
ChrisGreaves
PlutoniumLounger
Posts: 11695
Joined: 24 Jan 2010, 23:23
Location: paused.undefined.exposed

Re: Paranoia – Spam and CC vs. BCC

Post by ChrisGreaves »

John Gray wrote:I invariably complain to the originator
Thanks John. I was trying not to complain to the Offender as much as alert him, to educate him, perhaps. As you might have gathered, I appear to have been unsuccessful (unless he crawls abjectly on his hands and knees next Tuesday evening ...)
It is bad practice so to do, and arguably contravenes the UK's Data Protection Act.
Thanks too for this. I shall look up the act.
More than the minimum is less than enough

User avatar
ChrisGreaves
PlutoniumLounger
Posts: 11695
Joined: 24 Jan 2010, 23:23
Location: paused.undefined.exposed

Re: Paranoia – Spam and CC vs. BCC

Post by ChrisGreaves »

HansV wrote:I know that Canada is still part of the Commonweatlh of Nations, but does that imply that the UK Data Protection Act applies to Canada too?
Probably not; I think Canada is now well-and-truly separated from the UK in terms of law - excepting that we follow the same principles. I doubt that there is a UK law that can be applied in Canada. I suspect that even Treason is a Canadian offence (as it is an Australian offence, which Leonard George Casley got around by swearing allegiance to "Elizabeth Windsor".)
But I digress (as usual)

Canada does have pretty strict anti-spam laws, and Michael Geist has written many articles in the past about the CRTC and various bodies growing teeth.
Only a month or so ago I read an article in The Toronto Star about serious fines (not your $100 variety either) being slapped on offending companies.

Cheers
Chris
More than the minimum is less than enough