GNOME Bugzilla – Bug 569666
Visible BCC field included in message body
Last modified: 2010-10-19 06:34:48 UTC
Please describe the problem: BCC field is visible for all recipients it the already sent message is "postprocessed" from Sent box. Steps to reproduce: 1. I send a message to two recipients, one is hidden in BCC field. 2. I go to Sent box. 3. I click on the sent message. In headers part I can see: From: my.name@gmail.com To: recipient.no.1@gmail.com Bcc: recipient.no.2@gmail.com This is of course ok so far. 4. Then I click on Reply or Reply All button. 5. New message window appears. 6. The problem: in the message body ALL (also hidden recipients from BCC field) are shown: -----Original Message----- From: my.name@gmail.com To: recipient.no.1@gmail.com Bcc: recipient.no.1@gmail.com Subject: Test Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2009 13:52:35 +0100 I believe the BCC field should not be visible in message body as the recipient.no.1 can see it now. Actual results: BCC field is visible for all recipients. Expected results: BCC field should not be included in message body after Reply operation. Does this happen every time? Yes. Other information: No.
Note that this refers to " Message > Forward as > Inline". I think people should be able to see themselves that the entire header exists. What about the other Forward modes? And by the way: Version 2.4.x is ancient history.
The problem is the same with forwarded messages. I need to erase BCC line manually if I do not want recipient of forwarded message to see it: New text new text. -------- Forwarded Message -------- From: my.name@gmail.com To: recipient.no.1@gmail.com Bcc: recipient.no.2@gmail.com Subject: Test Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2009 15:30:23 +0100 I use GNOME: Version: 2.24.1 Distributor: Ubuntu Build Date: 24/10/08 and Evolution 2.24.3 Sorry for the mistake with Evolution version in reporting tool.
Thanks for the bug report. This particular bug has already been reported into our bug tracking system, but please feel free to report any further bugs you find. *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 567265 ***