- Windows 7 beta shows off task bar, UI goodies
- How the yellow first-down line actually works
- Outlook '09
- Microsoft research projects to improve our lives
- Ballmer sets loose Windows 7 public beta
If you get stopped by a cop for breaking the speed limit and you contend you didn’t know the limit you’ll still get a ticket because ignorance of the law is no excuse. When it comes to technology the same rule applies — you don’t get a pass simply because you don’t understand it.
For example, have you ever sent e-mail to a domain you weren't exactly sure of? Maybe the intended recipient gave you an e-mail address over the phone or you used an one from memory.
I have a "catch-all" address in my domain for e-mail that isn’t destined for a names account and every day about 100 people out there in the wide electronic world assumes their recipient is at gibbs.com when what they really is something like gibbscam.com or gibbswire.com.
When I have time and can determine who the recipient was supposed to be and can be bothered I’ll be nice and resend them. Usually, however, the rest of the messages just sit in the catchall folder until I delete them every couple of months. What’s interesting is how many messages come with dire warnings such as:
"This message is intended solely for the use of the individual and entity to whom it is addressed, and may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable state and federal laws. If you are not the addressee, or are not authorized to receive for the intended addressee, you are hereby notified that you may not use, copy, distribute, or disclose to anyone this message or the information contained herein. If you have received this message in error, immediately advise the sender by reply e-mail and destroy this message."
This is something that you see on just about every other e-mail you receive and it looks serious, but is it really? Let’s look at the tone of that warning: It says quite clearly you shouldn’t consider doing anything with the message contents or, it implies, you’ll be really sorry.
That’s simply ridiculous because if the contents were that important and you weren’t certain where they might wind up (which is what your notice implies) then no amount of threatening words can prevent damage from a recipient with malicious or larcenous intent.
So, let’s say you misaddress e-mail about some financial matters that you’d rather were not made public and it winds up in my catch-all account. I could pass on the message to anyone I please and there’s no way you can prove I ever received it or acted on it for two reasons.
Comments (3)
Depends on what you want "verified" email to doIPBy billstewart on October 14, 2008, 3:01 pmWhat do you mean by "verifiable" mail? Do you mean you only want to accept email from people you trust, or people whose identities are certified by other people...
Reply | Read entire comment
Errant emailBy Anonymous on October 14, 2008, 2:16 pmI work for an organization that is 5000+ strong in the IT dept. I receive at least 10 emails per day with similar warning. You will be a fool to contact them if...
Reply | Read entire comment
Registered mailBy Victor on October 13, 2008, 12:59 pmWhen will we get verifiable mail? NWW just ran a piece about the state of CanSpam act and how it has not worked. Why can't we switch to IPV6 and verifiable mail...
Reply | Read entire comment
View all comments