> That's implementation dependent! RFC822 (I assume it is outdated,
> nevertheless) states:
> 4.5.3. BCC / RESENT-BCC
>
> This field contains the identity of additional recipients of
> the message. The contents of this field are not included in
> copies of the message sent to the primary and secondary reci-
> pients. Some systems may choose to include the text of the
> "Bcc" field only in the author(s)'s copy, while others may
> also include it in the text sent to all those indicated in the
> "Bcc" list.
RFC822 is still a standard but I think it's ammended by one of the
"Host Requirements" RFCs. I don't remember their numbers from the top
of my head, or if they say saomething on this. I _think_ it says
that the BCC-recipients should at least get a BCC-line with their
own address, so they can see why the message got sent to them,
but I'm far from certain about this.
Christer Romson