Mozilla Support में खोजें

Avoid support scams. We will never ask you to call or text a phone number or share personal information. Please report suspicious activity using the “Report Abuse” option.

Learn More

All Recipients are visible as "to:" when sender addressed recipients using Bcc.

  • 6 प्रत्युत्तर
  • 34
  • 3 views
  • के द्वारा अंतिम प्रतियुतर phil7782

more options

I entered two recipients as BCC addresses. The recipients see all BCC recipients as if I entered them as 'To' recipients. All recipients are visible when the email is received by any of the BCC recipients. I was using something older than 45-2-0 and BCC was working okay. After upgrading to 45-2-0 all recipients were visible to everyone. This is a big security issue for the way I use Mozilla. Problem was initially found changing an address list to use BCC.

I entered two recipients as BCC addresses. The recipients see all BCC recipients as if I entered them as 'To' recipients. All recipients are visible when the email is received by any of the BCC recipients. I was using something older than 45-2-0 and BCC was working okay. After upgrading to 45-2-0 all recipients were visible to everyone. This is a big security issue for the way I use Mozilla. Problem was initially found changing an address list to use BCC.

passareg द्वारा सम्पादित

All Replies (6)

more options

Who is your email provider? I was reading about this in the newsgroup, and there a hotmail user was having the same problem as you, but I was not able to replicate his issue with my own hotmail account. But he is in the USA and I'm in the UK and we are almost certainly routed via different servers.

The handing of addresses and bcc is really the responsibility of the smtp server and in principle the email client has little or no influence over the outcome.

How did you learn of what happened? Did one of your correspondents report it to you? What you see in your own Sent folder isn't indicative of what is seen by your correspondents.

It would be interesting to know if reverting to the earlier version of Thunderbird changes it back to working as you expect.

more options

In another thread, I read this could happen if you leave TO completely blank. Always put yourself in the TO slot when the real recipients are in BCC.

Also, there was a problem with Outlook/Live/Hotmail accounts and BCC's recently: the BCC's never got the message.

more options

I asked a secretary for a group to install Mozilla and only send mail using Bcc so everyone's email address is not broadcast to the entire group. I received an email from him and I questioned him why he did not use BCC. He replied he did use BCC. I setup a Teamviewer connection to his desktop and sent an email to my earthlink email address and my embarqmail address. When I opened my mail it listed both email addresses as if it was sent using the To: address line. I noted he had 45.2.0. I tested the same process using my Mozilla (44.?.?) with different email addresses back to the other desktop and it did show only one BCC address. My Mozilla had a message that an upgrade was ready. I did the upgrade to 45.2.0 and retested. The BCC function now fails on both our computers. I believe I have proved there is a problem with the upgraded software. I can re-install the older software on my pc, but I know BCC was working before I upgraded to 45.2.0.

more options

@Jscher2000 I tested as you did (TB 45.2.0)

  1. To: myself and two bcc. Result: To myself in every mail.
  2. To: empty and two bcc. Result To: empty in every mail (undisclosed-recipients in header)

It never revealed the two bcc

Maybe you should look at the smtp-server-provider.

more options

Today I sent an email to an address list that included one of my email address using earthlink.net I will test other email providers to determine what my problem is/was. Thanks for everyone's help

more options

I can safely surmise that the problem is with Thunderbird 45.2.0 and NOT with the Server. I sent similar BCC emails using the Windows 10 Mail program and everything was received in each account privately. Is this usual, that fixing one issue creates another?