Community Discussions and Support
Anyone experiencing BCC problems?
BCC

Brian Fluet, I have more than just "considered" using Pegasus's excellent Distribution List facility: I have used it a great deal over the course of the last three decades! I haven't however used the facility much in the last 12 months, owing to my withdrawal from the most recent community campaign with which I have been involved. But I seem to remember that when I did last use it, within the last 12 months, I received a vexing error message, and so because I was busy I turned to my Linux laptop and its email program and simply BCCed all the members of the group from it, without problem. However, in the last week, during my attempts to solve the BCC problem, I have created and used an experimental Distribution List and it worked without any problem, so it was clear the answer to the BCC problem lay elsewhere. But, yes, your suggested solution of using a Distribution List in the BCC field deserves investigation. I'll give it a go! Just out of interest.


Brian Fluet, I have more than just "considered" using Pegasus's excellent Distribution List facility: I have used it a great deal over the course of the last three decades! I haven't however used the facility much in the last 12 months, owing to my withdrawal from the most recent community campaign with which I have been involved. But I seem to remember that when I did last use it, within the last 12 months, I received a vexing error message, and so because I was busy I turned to my Linux laptop and its email program and simply BCCed all the members of the group from it, without problem. However, in the last week, during my attempts to solve the BCC problem, I have created and used an experimental Distribution List and it worked without any problem, so it was clear the answer to the BCC problem lay elsewhere. But, yes, your suggested solution of using a Distribution List in the BCC field deserves investigation. I'll give it a go! Just out of interest.

An FYI... after experimenting a little, confirming the following:


The problem only seems to occur with the Suppress BCC turned ON


With Suppress turned off, bot the TO: & BCC addresees receive the email


The received TO: email does not have any reference to either to the BCC address nor could I find any reference to BCC at all - this all looking at the Raw view.


An FYI... after experimenting a little, confirming the following: The problem only seems to occur with the Suppress BCC turned ON With Suppress turned off, bot the TO: & BCC addresees receive the email The received TO: email does not have any reference to either to the BCC address nor could I find any reference to BCC at all - this all looking at the Raw view.

The received TO: email does not have any reference to either to the BCC address nor could I find any reference to BCC at all - this all looking at the Raw view.


Correct. The TO: recipient does not see the BCC but the message received by the BCC recipients contains a BCC: header.


[quote="pid:54179, uid:35493"]The received TO: email does not have any reference to either to the BCC address nor could I find any reference to BCC at all - this all looking at the Raw view.[/quote] Correct. The TO: recipient does not see the BCC but the message received by the BCC recipients contains a BCC: header.

Brian, curiously and as an FYI, when entering one or multiple BCC recipients we do not find any BCC reference in any of the recipients received messages - this is with the Suppress BCC listiing field turned off (not checked)


Brian, curiously and as an FYI, when entering one or multiple BCC recipients we do not find any BCC reference in any of the recipients received messages - this is with the Suppress BCC listiing field turned off (not checked)

Joshua,
Are the recipients using Pegasus Mail?
If so, have they dragged the Header block in the reader down enough to show all the headers?
(Note the vertical scrollbar on the right of the Header pane)


In the Raw view, it should be immediately after "Reply To" and before "Message ID"


Joshua, Are the recipients using Pegasus Mail? If so, have they dragged the Header block in the reader down enough to show all the headers? (Note the vertical scrollbar on the right of the Header pane) In the Raw view, it should be immediately after "Reply To" and before "Message ID"
edited Jul 30 at 4:01 am

Stuart, whether BCC recipient is using PMail or other (Yahoo-biz), there is no Reply To: in the raw view of the message.
FYI, the "permanent BCC address" is blank.


Stuart, whether BCC recipient is using PMail or other (Yahoo-biz), there is no Reply To: in the raw view of the message. FYI, the "permanent BCC address" is blank.

Joshua,
If there is no Reply-To: or the BCC: field is blank in the raw message, it is being stripped out by a mail server somewhere. This is not a Pegasms Mail issue.


Joshua, If there is no Reply-To: or the BCC: field is blank in the raw message, it is being stripped out by a mail server somewhere. This is not a Pegasms Mail issue.

I agree Stuart. It is not surprising that there is no Reply-To: header but the norm for the BCC: header is that it exists in the message to each BCC recipient. If it is not there it is being suppressed or something is stripping it out.


I agree Stuart. It is not surprising that there is no Reply-To: header but the norm for the BCC: header is that it exists in the message to each BCC recipient. If it is not there it is being suppressed or something is stripping it out.

Posting this as further info for "my" problem... as earlier, a message sent w/ TO: & BCC: and suppress BCC field listing OFF works for my purposes... pretty much.
As a further note, adding a REPLYTO: entry below the BBC: entry creates a




550 Request failed; Mailbox unavailable<cr><lf>




and so it goes...
Looking for a new email provider... haven't seen a review summary on the Community or Listserv groups... did we miss something? Probably should start a new Topic, yeah....


Posting this as further info for &quot;my&quot; problem... as earlier, a message sent w/ TO: &amp; BCC: and suppress BCC field listing OFF works for my purposes... pretty much. As a further note, adding a REPLYTO: entry below the BBC: entry creates a &gt;&gt; 550 Request failed; Mailbox unavailable&lt;cr&gt;&lt;lf&gt; and so it goes... Looking for a new email provider... haven&#039;t seen a review summary on the Community or Listserv groups... did we miss something? Probably should start a new Topic, yeah....
edited Aug 1 at 4:33 pm

Brian Fluet, I have tested your suggestion of putting the addresses of BCC recipients into a Distribution List and then only posting that Distribution List's code into Pegasus's BCC box.


The email then went out without a hitch.


Then while inspecting the received email in "Raw Data" there was no sign of a Distribution List having been used nor any sign of the email address which was contained in the Distribution List.


So this is a better method of sending a BCC from "Pegasus Mail". By this method one can be certain that the BCC is truly "blind", i.e. undetectable even to people who might use something akin to Pegasus's "Raw Data" viewer.


Thanks for the suggestion.


Brian Fluet, I have tested your suggestion of putting the addresses of BCC recipients into a Distribution List and then only posting that Distribution List&#039;s code into Pegasus&#039;s BCC box. The email then went out without a hitch. Then while inspecting the received email in &quot;Raw Data&quot; there was no sign of a Distribution List having been used nor any sign of the email address which was contained in the Distribution List. So this is a better method of sending a BCC from &quot;Pegasus Mail&quot;. By this method one can be certain that the BCC is truly &quot;blind&quot;, i.e. undetectable even to people who might use something akin to Pegasus&#039;s &quot;Raw Data&quot; viewer. Thanks for the suggestion.

Then while inspecting the received email in "Raw Data" there was no sign of a Distribution List having been used nor any sign of the email address which was contained in the Distribution List.


The key to this is the existence of data in the "To: field" setting of the distribution list settings. Details about this are in Help.


[quote=&quot;pid:54210, uid:33578&quot;]Then while inspecting the received email in &quot;Raw Data&quot; there was no sign of a Distribution List having been used nor any sign of the email address which was contained in the Distribution List.[/quote] The key to this is the existence of data in the &quot;To: field&quot; setting of the distribution list settings. Details about this are in Help.

My last comment is applicable to sending to a distribution list. I don't understand the reasoning behind BCCing to a dlist considering that suppression capability is built into dlists.


My last comment is applicable to sending to a distribution list. I don&#039;t understand the reasoning behind BCCing to a dlist considering that suppression capability is built into dlists.

@BrianFluet, to answer your query re. the reasoning behind BCCing to a Distribution List.

When you suggested, above, "Have you considered using distribution lists instead of BCC?" your suggestion was helpful because BCCs will only be despatched by some providers these days if the "Suppress BCC field listings in outgoing email" option has not been checked in Pegasus's "Tools" menu and because when such a BCC is then received by someone who uses Pegasus Mail (or perhaps some other sophisticated email client) and who inspects the message in the "Raw Data" window, then they can see the third email address involved, i.e. an email address additional to that of the sender and the receiver. In the "Raw Data" of such a BCCed email the following appears on the 10th line:


    X-Apparently-To: [the email address entered in the BCC field]

But, unfortunately, re-testing today your suggested route of avoiding such revelation of the BCC recipient's address to the prime recipient, I have found that using your suggestion of putting the BCC address into a Distribution List, and then posting that Distribution List's code into the BCC line of the outgoing email results in exactly the same revelation as occurs when using the BCC field. In the "Raw Data" of emails which are received because of their inclusion in a Distribution List the following entry also appears on the 10th line of the "Raw Data":


    X-Apparently-To: [the email address included in the Distribution List entered in the BCC field]

So, as far as I know, at the moment there is not a way of ensuring that the identity of a BCC recipient cannot be seen in Pegasus's "Raw Data" view. And that means that sending BCCs now involves a risk.


So, thanks to Stuart McLachlan, above, we have learnt that we can at least still send BCCs provided we choose not to suppress the revelation of the BCC email address, and my tests show that your suggestion of using a Distribution List to suppress the BCC email address doesn't get around the problem of the BCC email address being made visible in "Raw Data" view, unfortunately.


@BrianFluet, to answer your query re. the reasoning behind BCCing to a Distribution List. When you suggested, above, _&quot;Have you considered using distribution lists instead of BCC?&quot;_ your suggestion was helpful because BCCs will only be despatched by some providers these days if the &quot;Suppress BCC field listings in outgoing email&quot; option has not been checked in Pegasus&#039;s &quot;Tools&quot; menu and because when such a BCC is then received by someone who uses Pegasus Mail (or perhaps some other sophisticated email client) and who inspects the message in the &quot;Raw Data&quot; window, then they can see the third email address involved, i.e. an email address additional to that of the sender and the receiver. In the &quot;Raw Data&quot; of such a BCCed email the following appears on the 10th line: X-Apparently-To: [the email address entered in the BCC field] But, unfortunately, re-testing today your suggested route of avoiding such revelation of the BCC recipient&#039;s address to the prime recipient, I have found that using your suggestion of putting the BCC address into a Distribution List, and then posting that Distribution List&#039;s code into the BCC line of the outgoing email results in exactly the same revelation as occurs when using the BCC field. In the &quot;Raw Data&quot; of emails which are received because of their inclusion in a Distribution List the following entry also appears on the 10th line of the &quot;Raw Data&quot;: X-Apparently-To: [the email address included in the Distribution List entered in the BCC field] So, as far as I know, at the moment there is not a way of ensuring that the identity of a BCC recipient cannot be seen in Pegasus&#039;s &quot;Raw Data&quot; view. And that means that sending BCCs now involves a risk. So, thanks to Stuart McLachlan, above, we have learnt that we can at least still send BCCs provided we choose not to suppress the revelation of the BCC email address, and my tests show that your suggestion of using a Distribution List to suppress the BCC email address doesn&#039;t get around the problem of the BCC email address being made visible in &quot;Raw Data&quot; view, unfortunately.
edited Aug 5 at 3:50 pm

Try a test of sending the message to the distribution list instead of putting the distribution list in the BCC field. In the settings for the distribution list make sure that you have populated the "To: field:" in its "List address settings". Read the help file about this. As I previously stated, I have not had any problems with entering text in this field instead of a valid email address as described in the help file (eg: "F.A.S.T. Members" and "Breakfast motorcycle group" ). This may be SMTP provider specific so YMMV.


BTW, a X-Apparently-To: header was not in any of the test messages I BCC'd to my other email addresses so Pegasus Mail is not generating it. If it is being added by your SMTP provider that you not be able to conceal recipients. I am anxious to hear the results of a message sent to a dlist configured per the above.


Try a test of sending the message to the distribution list instead of putting the distribution list in the BCC field. In the settings for the distribution list make sure that you have populated the &quot;To: field:&quot; in its &quot;List address settings&quot;. Read the help file about this. As I previously stated, I have not had any problems with entering text in this field instead of a valid email address as described in the help file (eg: &quot;F.A.S.T. Members&quot; and &quot;Breakfast motorcycle group&quot; ). This may be SMTP provider specific so YMMV. BTW, a X-Apparently-To: header was not in any of the test messages I BCC&#039;d to my other email addresses so Pegasus Mail is not generating it. If it is being added by your SMTP provider that you not be able to conceal recipients. I am anxious to hear the results of a message sent to a dlist configured per the above.

Yahoo are one of the mail service providers that are known to add "x-apparently-to" to BCC copies of emails.


What is the risk of your address being in the headers of an email sent to you as a BCC recipient?


Does it matter that it is in the raw data? The only copy of the email that that header appears is the one in the BCC recipient's mailbox. The fact that it is in the mailbox is a bit of a give-away already - unless you are using a "catch-all" mailbox. If you are using a "domain catch-all" mailbox, it becomes the only way to tell which of your addresses it was actually sent to.


Similarly, it is of great value if you are downloading mail into Pegaus Mail from multiple mail accounts. Again, it is frequently the only way to tell what address has actually received the email you were BCCed in.


FWIW, my primary SMTP host inserts a "Delivered-To" header (see RFC 9228 ) into my received emails. It serves the same purpose as Yahoo's x-apparently to" and I find it very useful as above.


It's also worth noting that if you are a BCC in an email sent from GMail, your headers are likely to disclose your address in a line similar to:
Received: by xxxxx.google.com with SMTP id xxxxxxxxx for xxx@yyyyyy.zzz;


Yahoo are one of the mail service providers that are known to add &quot;x-apparently-to&quot; to BCC copies of emails. What is the risk of your address being in the headers of an email **sent to you** as a BCC recipient? Does it matter that it is in the raw data? The only copy of the email that that header appears is the one in the BCC recipient&#039;s mailbox. The fact that it is in the mailbox is a bit of a give-away already - unless you are using a &quot;catch-all&quot; mailbox. If you are using a &quot;domain catch-all&quot; mailbox, it becomes the only way to tell which of your addresses it was actually sent to. Similarly, it is of great value if you are downloading mail into Pegaus Mail from multiple mail accounts. Again, it is frequently the only way to tell what address has actually received the email you were BCCed in. FWIW, my primary SMTP host inserts a &quot;Delivered-To&quot; header (see RFC 9228 ) into my received emails. It serves the same purpose as Yahoo&#039;s x-apparently to&quot; and I find it very useful as above. It&#039;s also worth noting that if you are a BCC in an email sent from GMail, your headers are likely to disclose your address in a line similar to: Received: by xxxxx.google.com with SMTP id xxxxxxxxx for &lt;xxx@yyyyyy.zzz&gt;;
edited Aug 5 at 11:34 pm

@Stuart McLachlan, yes, thankfully BCC email addresses don't appear in the headers of emails which I send from Pegasus.

Re. whether the BCC email address appearing in "Raw Data" matters or not, I think it matters only IF the recipient uses Pegasus, and IF the recipient feels reason to check, or just out of habit checks, the "Raw Data" for evidence of any BCCing having occurred, in which case the sender has been rumbled!


I noted this morning that a BCC sent from the Gmail app on Android and opened by the main recipient in Pegasus displays no sign in the "Raw Data" of the BCC that was included. So Google seems not to be demanding the transparency which Yahoo now is. But that's no comfort to me because all my important emailing is done via Pegasus on my desktop.


@Stuart McLachlan, yes, thankfully BCC email addresses don&#039;t appear in the headers of emails which I send from Pegasus. Re. whether the BCC email address appearing in &quot;Raw Data&quot; matters or not, I think it matters only IF the recipient uses Pegasus, and IF the recipient feels reason to check, or just out of habit checks, the &quot;Raw Data&quot; for evidence of any BCCing having occurred, in which case the sender has been rumbled! I noted this morning that a BCC sent from the Gmail app on Android and opened by the main recipient in Pegasus displays no sign in the &quot;Raw Data&quot; of the BCC that was included. So Google seems not to be demanding the transparency which Yahoo now is. But that&#039;s no comfort to me because all my important emailing is done via Pegasus on my desktop.

" noted this morning that a BCC sent from the Gmail app on Android and opened by the main recipient in Pegasus displays no sign in the "Raw Data" of the BCC that was included. "


Of course it won't appear in the copy of the email received by the "main recipient". Thats't the whole point of Blind Carbon Copy". Ordinary recipients never have any indication of who may have received a BBC .


You appear to be extremely confused about what is actually happening and are misunderstanding how BCC works everywhere in email.


It doesn't matter where an email is sent from or to or what servers it goes through , the BCC recipient's address will never be included in the headers of the email received by the To: or CC: addressee. It WILL always appear somewhere in the headers of the copy received by the BCC addressee.


_&quot; noted this morning that a BCC sent from the Gmail app on Android and **opened by the main recipient** in Pegasus displays no sign in the &quot;Raw Data&quot; of the BCC that was included. &quot;_ Of course it won&#039;t appear in the copy of the email received by the &quot;main recipient&quot;. Thats&#039;t the whole point of **Blind** Carbon Copy&quot;. Ordinary recipients **never** have any indication of who may have received a BBC . You appear to be extremely confused about what is actually happening and are misunderstanding how BCC works **everywhere** in email. It doesn&#039;t matter where an email is sent from or to or what servers it goes through , the BCC recipient&#039;s address will **never** be included in the headers of the email received by the **To: or CC:** addressee. It WILL **always** appear somewhere in the headers of the copy received by the **BCC** addressee.
edited Aug 7 at 3:10 am

Just to note: There are different ways that different apps handle the BCC:
Some all everyone that is in the BCC: list to see the addresses of others, while others suppress it.
Pegasus actually lets you set option.


Tools/ Options/ Sending Email has a check box. Suppress BCC Field listing in outgoing mail.
If that is checked, the BCC emails don't get the listing of others. If unchecked they will see the others. (I believe). I've always had that checked, but rarely send BCC and have tested it in many many years. Did at one time, and that is what happened, but not sure what version of Pegasus that was.


What other apps/programs do is always a question. Pegasus usually give a lot more control to the users.


Just to note: There are different ways that different apps handle the BCC: Some all everyone that is in the BCC: list to see the addresses of others, while others suppress it. Pegasus actually lets you set option. Tools/ Options/ Sending Email has a check box. Suppress BCC Field listing in outgoing mail. If that is checked, the BCC emails don&#039;t get the listing of others. If unchecked they will see the others. (I believe). I&#039;ve always had that checked, but rarely send BCC and have tested it in many many years. Did at one time, and that is what happened, but not sure what version of Pegasus that was. What other apps/programs do is always a question. Pegasus usually give a lot more control to the users.

@Stuart McLachlan, you wrote:

<< Of course it won't appear in the copy of the email received by the "main recipient". Thats't the whole point of Blind Carbon Copy". Ordinary recipients never have any indication of who may have received a BBC . You appear to be extremely confused about what is actually happening and are misunderstanding how BCC works everywhere in email. >>


No, Stuart, I am not "extremely confused", nor even slightly confused.


The point that I have made, but which you appear to have misinterpreted, is that exactly the same form of email as can be sent from Gmail CANNOT be sent from Pegasus Mail without the BCC email address appearing in "Raw Data" view.


@Stuart McLachlan, you wrote: &lt;&lt; Of course it won&#039;t appear in the copy of the email received by the &quot;main recipient&quot;. Thats&#039;t the whole point of Blind Carbon Copy&quot;. Ordinary recipients never have any indication of who may have received a BBC . You appear to be extremely confused about what is actually happening and are misunderstanding how BCC works everywhere in email. &gt;&gt; No, Stuart, I am not &quot;extremely confused&quot;, nor even slightly confused. The point that I have made, but which you appear to have misinterpreted, is that exactly the same form of email as can be sent from Gmail CANNOT be sent from Pegasus Mail without the BCC email address appearing in &quot;Raw Data&quot; view.

@msetzerii, yes, you are correct, and as I have discovered and as I reported earlier, Gmail clearly suppresses the email address of a BCC recipient, whether one wishes it to be suppressed or not, which is fine. Pegasus, however, offers one the choice of suppressing the BCC address or not suppressing it, but if you suppress it, then some providers, like Yahoo, as we have found, will not deliver the email to the BCC recipient but will only deliver it to the main recipient.

@msetzerii, yes, you are correct, and as I have discovered and as I reported earlier, Gmail clearly suppresses the email address of a BCC recipient, whether one wishes it to be suppressed or not, which is fine. Pegasus, however, offers one the choice of suppressing the BCC address or not suppressing it, but if you suppress it, then some providers, like Yahoo, as we have found, will not deliver the email to the BCC recipient but will only deliver it to the main recipient.
123
live preview
enter atleast 10 characters
WARNING: You mentioned %MENTIONS%, but they cannot see this message and will not be notified
Saving...
Saved
With selected deselect posts show selected posts
All posts under this topic will be deleted ?
Pending draft ... Click to resume editing
Discard draft