Results 1 to 3 of 3
  1. #1
    5 Star Lounger
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Buenos Aires, Argentina
    Posts
    877
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Undisclosed Recipient (Outlook 97)

    Hi!!
    I found two threads on this subject but still some things don't fit.

    Sometimes I receive messages with Undisclosed Recipient in the TO: field. But when you check its properties, you find out no e-mail addresses are unfold.

    Quite recently, a friend of mine sent one to me which showed something like:
    TO: Undisclosed-Recipient:;@servername.com [servername is the name of the server of the business he works for]
    I asked him and told me that I should send msgs with BCC, and thus the recipient would receive a mail containing the so-longed U-R stuff. But everytime I send a BCC msg, AFAIK, recipients receive blank TO: and CC: fields. I've tested it with my oh so many e-mail accounts.
    So... what is it that triggers the trick!!?? I humbly believe it might be that when sending BCC msgs, some servers will send the recipient field as a TO: U-R, and some will not (maybe the former do not support BCC as a separate field, I dunno - I'm no IT xpert after all <img src=/S/smile.gif border=0 alt=smile width=15 height=15>)

    One last thing: in the other threads some claimed that one could force the U-R stuff by creating a group named Undisclosed-Recipient, and then send mails using this group in the TO: field. But there IS some difference, since by doing this (at least in outlook) all the recipients' mail addresses are revealed, as opposed to the U-R line I told you about.

    This Undisclosed Recipient thing is wasting me away. It seems of no real use, since BCCing recipients does the job. Yet, it's fundamental for the gotta-know-it-all dude who won't get an eye shut if he can't get the answer to such challenging puzzles- Hey, that's me!!

    If anyone knows sumn' else 'bout this, I'll bring the champaign <img src=/S/bravo.gif border=0 alt=bravo width=16 height=30>

    Thank you in advance for your help
    <img src=/w3timages/blue3line.gif width=33% height=2>
    <img src=/S/flags/Argentina.gif border=0 alt=Argentina width=30 height=18> <big><font color=4682b4><font face="Comic Sans MS">Diegol</font face=comic></font color=4682b4> </big>

  2. #2
    5 Star Lounger
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    Youngstown, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    705
    Thanks
    1
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Re: Undisclosed Recipient (Outlook 97)

    I just did a test, creating an empty 'Undisclosed Recipients' group, putting this group in the To: field and then the real recipient addresses in the BCC: field. All messages were received with the sending address in the TO: field, with the actual address the message received into not being in the header at all.

    From my experience, every message that I have ever received that had "Undisclosed" anywhere in the header has been from a spammer, so my rules generally delete such messages straight away. My thought is that the 'Undisclosed' messages you are referring to, and trying to mimic, are created by spam-churning programs.

    If you want to send messages while keeping the email addresses confidential, BCC: is the simplest and easiest... and is less likely to be insta-flagged as spam.

  3. #3
    5 Star Lounger
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Buenos Aires, Argentina
    Posts
    877
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Re: Undisclosed Recipient (Outlook 97)

    Dave,

    I've also been hit by lotsa spam with U-R in the TO: field. But I've also received mails with U-R in the TO: field from at least two friends of mine (that I remember). So maybe spammers do use some kind of Undisclosed Recipient generating software, but this is not the only way. My friend told me I had to send BCC recipients to get the Undisclosed-Recipient line. So he did it unintentionally. That's why I believe it has to do with compatibility between mail clients and servers, and between servers. There must be something in the way they communicate that creates this.

    I agree that people should get used to BCCing recipients. I tend to do this unless I intend recipients to 'see' each other so they can interact. A world campaign against spammers won't eradicate them for sure, but will at least make their lives less pleasant <img src=/S/mad.gif border=0 alt=mad width=15 height=15>.

    Back to the Undisclosed-Recipients stuff... any other thoughts?
    Thanks
    <img src=/w3timages/blue3line.gif width=33% height=2>
    <img src=/S/flags/Argentina.gif border=0 alt=Argentina width=30 height=18> <big><font color=4682b4><font face="Comic Sans MS">Diegol</font face=comic></font color=4682b4> </big>

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •