Re: Hi!

On Fri, 26 May 2006, Máté Soós wrote:

> The problem with BCC, as far as I can see, is that the X-HASH value must 
> contain the email address of the BCC recipient, which needs to be 
> hidden. In theory, we could use some sort of masking of this email 
> address. And if we are at hashes, why not use them (after all, they are 
> one-way, not only 2nd-preimage-resistant). So, hash the address, and use 
> that(or some first bytes of that) instead of the email string. We are 
> done - hmm, well, almost. Except that if the person thinks that the 
> email might have been sent to someone he knows the email address of, he 
> could check. Well, nothing is perfect.What do you think?
============================

i'm using my own scripts to implement stamping outgoing mail. any address 
that's BCCd will generate a stamp that only goes to that particular blind 
recipient.

let's say i address an email:
 	To: alice
 	CC: bob, charlie
 	BCC: diane, eric

ALL recipients will see stamps for alice, bob and charlie. only diane will 
see a stamp for diane; and only eric will see a stamp for eric.


-- 
         ...atom

  ________________________
  http://atom.smasher.org/
  762A 3B98 A3C3 96C9 C6B7 582A B88D 52E4 D9F5 7808
  -------------------------------------------------

 	"When the President does it, that means that it's not illegal."
 		-- Richard M. Nixon, 19 May 1977