Hi, On Fri, Nov 01, 2019 at 06:42:33AM +0800, Kevin J. McCarthy wrote: > I'm looking for a bit of history and discussion of the correct behavior of > MTAs with respect to Bcc headers.
I'm sure this was discussed many years ago (but I don't remember the course). > Ticket #185 <https://gitlab.com/muttmua/mutt/issues/185> asserts that > Courier MTA doesn't remove the Bcc header when recipients are passed on the > command line. I'm currently not in a position to verify this behavior, so > I'm assuming the ticket is correct. It's not only this MTA, see "7. The Bcc: header line" here http://www.exim.org/exim-html-current/doc/html/spec_html/ch-message_processing.html > It looks like Mutt provides $write_bcc, which allows the removal of the Bcc > header from the message. However, I believe this will also remove it from > the Fcc copy. Therefore I have it set, and yes, it doesn't appear in the copy. I lived 2 decades like this. > The ticket asks if there is a way to turn off passing the recipients on the > command line. I'm wondering if this would be a generally useful option. I prefer that recipients are specified out of band, so removing Bcc: is the better option. If somebody needs Bcc: in the local copy, that should be changed. Personally I don't have a problem that the copy resembles to what recipients see. Kind regards, Gero
