Fact-checked by Grok 2 weeks ago

Email forwarding

Email forwarding is the process of automatically redirecting incoming email messages from an original recipient's address to one or more alternative addresses, enabling efficient management of communications without the need to monitor multiple inboxes. This functionality operates at the or client level, where server-based forwarding handles redirection transparently via the email —often using MX and preserving the original message path—while client-based forwarding involves the user's email application resending the message, which may alter headers and attachments. The origins of email forwarding trace back to the early development of electronic mail standards in the 1970s. Initial email specifications, such as (1973), introduced basic header fields like "From," with "To" fields and forwarding mechanisms formalized in (1977) within the framework. Subsequent protocols such as (1982) detailed mechanisms for forwarding mail during SMTP transmission, including options for verifying mailboxes and expanding lists. Over time, forwarding became a core feature in commercial email systems, with modern implementations like those in and allowing administrators or users to configure rules for internal or external redirection, often with options to retain copies in the original mailbox. Key benefits of email forwarding include consolidating messages from various domains or aliases into a single account, which simplifies inbox and reduces the of important communications, such as redirecting emails from former employees to current staff. It also supports cost-effective setups for businesses by eliminating the need for multiple full hosting accounts, while facilitating seamless transitions during domain changes or mergers. However, forwarding introduces notable , particularly in security and deliverability: it can break protocols like and DKIM, leading to messages being flagged as or rejected, and external forwarding may bypass organizational filters, exposing sensitive data to or unauthorized exfiltration. To mitigate these, protocols like ( 8617) preserve authentication chains during forwarding, and administrators often implement policies to restrict or monitor external rules.

Overview

Definition and purpose

Email forwarding is the automatic redirection of an incoming email message from one email address to one or more other recipient addresses, while preserving the original sender, subject, and body content of the message. This process typically occurs without altering the core elements of the message, ensuring that recipients can view it as originally composed. The primary purpose of email forwarding is to allow users to receive messages at a preferred or primary email address, thereby simplifying the management of multiple accounts or enabling seamless distribution to groups. For example, individuals often use it to consolidate incoming emails from various personal or professional addresses into a single inbox for easier oversight, while organizations apply it to route shared notifications or alerts to team members automatically. Key benefits of email forwarding include enhanced convenience for multi-device access, as users can retrieve messages from a centralized without repeatedly logging into separate accounts, and reduced administrative overhead from manual checks across inboxes. This functionality supports greater by streamlining communication flows in both personal and collaborative settings.

Basic mechanisms

Server-based email forwarding operates through a standardized process on , where an incoming message is received, evaluated against configured rules, and relayed to designated recipients. Client-based forwarding, in contrast, occurs within applications and may involve resending the message, potentially altering headers; further details are covered in dedicated sections. When an arrives at a recipient's , the accepts it via the (SMTP), using commands such as MAIL FROM to specify the sender, RCPT TO for the recipient, and to transmit the message content. The then inspects the recipient address against forwarding configurations; if a rule applies, the original message is resent via SMTP to one or more target addresses, typically determined by DNS MX records for routing to the appropriate destination . This relay preserves the message content while adding trace headers, ensuring seamless redirection without altering the core . The process relies on key email protocols that handle transmission and access. SMTP serves as the primary protocol for both initial delivery and forwarding, enabling to push messages across networks reliably. In contrast, Post Office Protocol version 3 (POP3) and Internet Message Access Protocol (IMAP) facilitate client-side retrieval of stored on the , allowing users to download or synchronize messages from their local devices. For server-based forwarding, the process occurs before local storage for POP3/IMAP access, thus requiring no recipient intervention or client action to initiate the redirect. To prevent infinite loops during forwarding—where a message could endlessly between servers—systems employ safeguards based on . servers monitor the number of "Received" headers added at each , rejecting messages exceeding a (typically 100) to halt potential loops. These mechanisms ensure robust operation without recursive errors.

Server-based forwarding

Delivery mechanisms

In server-based email forwarding, mail transfer agents (MTAs) such as and Postfix play a central role in processing incoming messages and applying redirection rules during the delivery phase. These MTAs receive emails via the (SMTP) and parse the recipient addresses specified in the to determine if forwarding rules apply. For instance, Postfix's queue manager and delivery agents examine the recipient domain and local part to initiate lookups, while 's rule set processing evaluates addresses against configuration rules before routing. This server-side handling ensures efficient redirection without altering the original message content, typically occurring after SMTP acceptance but before final delivery to a mailbox or remote . Rule-based redirection in MTAs relies on configurable mapping mechanisms, such as alias files or database lookups, to translate original recipient addresses to one or more forward destinations. In Sendmail, the /etc/aliases file serves as a key component, where entries like "alias: [email protected]" map the alias to the target address, processed by the MTA during the address canonification phase. Postfix employs similar functionality through virtual_alias_maps, configured in its main.cf file (e.g., virtual_alias_maps = hash:/etc/postfix/virtual), which uses hashed database files or other backends like LDAP to perform lookups on full email addresses. These mappings support flexible redirection, including domain-wide or user-specific rules, and are applied transparently to incoming SMTP sessions. Handling of multiple recipients is built-in; for example, a single alias can expand to several addresses (e.g., "team: [email protected], [email protected]"), causing the MTA to generate parallel deliveries while preserving the original message integrity. A critical distinction in forwarding involves the separation of the SMTP envelope from the headers, ensuring traceability and compliance with protocol standards. The envelope recipient, defined by the RCPT TO command in SMTP, is modified by the to reflect the forwarded address, directing delivery to the new destination without impacting error reporting or routing. In contrast, headers such as To:, Cc:, and From: remain unchanged, as they form part of the visible content and are not used for decisions. This approach, often termed "alias expansion," replaces only the envelope recipient (RCPT TO) while leaving header fields intact, preventing loops and maintaining the original sender-recipient context for the end user. Servers like Postfix implement this by rewriting the envelope during the cleanup and queue stages, adding a Received header for the forwarding event but not altering the core or headers.

Common applications

Server-based email forwarding is commonly employed by individuals to consolidate messages across multiple accounts, particularly during transitions such as changing jobs, moving to a new provider, or updating registrations. For instance, users can set up temporary forwards from an old address to a new one, ensuring continuity without losing important communications; this is facilitated through administrative tools in platforms like , where emails are automatically redirected to an external or internal recipient while optionally retaining copies in the original mailbox. Similarly, in educational settings, students and faculty often forward university emails to personal accounts to avoid managing separate inboxes, for example, some educational institutions allow internal forwarding or limited external redirects, though policies often restrict new external forwarding for security reasons, as seen in changes at institutions like since 2019. In organizational contexts, server-based forwarding supports departmental distribution lists, where incoming messages to a shared alias are automatically routed to multiple team members, enhancing collaboration without requiring individual addressing. Businesses utilize this for scenarios like routing inquiries to relevant departments; for example, LuxSci's email alias distribution lists enable forwarding to up to 25 external recipients plus account users, managed via bulk tools for efficient group handling. Catch-all forwards are particularly valuable for support operations, capturing emails sent to any undesignated address within a domain (e.g., random typos like "[email protected]") and redirecting them to a central inbox, a feature implemented in hosting environments to streamline customer service without dedicated mailboxes for every variant. Internet service providers (ISPs) and web hosting services provide server-side forwarding as a core feature for users without custom domains, allowing simple setup through control panels like to route emails from one address to another. These services often impose limits on the number of recipients to mitigate risks; for example, caps the total number of recipient addresses across all address maps at 5,000 and enforces per-user daily limits of 2,000 messages or 10,000 total recipients, while Microsoft Exchange Online applies reduced message size limits (such as 25 MB) for distribution groups exceeding 5,000 recipients to maintain performance. Hosting providers such as InMotion Hosting enable unlimited forwarders per domain but monitor for excessive usage, typically allowing forwards to a reasonable number of destinations without specifying hard per-forward recipient caps in standard plans.

Distinctions from remailing

Server-based email forwarding differs fundamentally from remailing in how it handles message headers and identification. In forwarding, the original email's headers, particularly the "From" field containing the 's address, are preserved as per the Internet Message Format standards, ensuring the recipient can identify the true originator without alteration. This maintains the integrity of the message's , often adding "Resent-" headers (such as Resent-From and Resent-Date) to indicate the forwarding action while leaving the core details intact. In contrast, remailing—typically implemented via remailers—rewrites the information by stripping identifying headers like the return address and replacing them with a , code, or the remailer's own address, effectively concealing the original source. These distinctions arise from their respective purposes and use cases. Forwarding supports transparent communication chains, as seen in mailing lists where preserving the original sender's address allows subscribers to reply directly to the author and enables administrators to track message flows for moderation. This transparency is essential for collaborative environments like discussion groups, where accountability and direct interaction are prioritized. Remailing, however, is designed for anonymity, commonly employed in scenarios such as whistleblower communications or privacy-sensitive submissions, where revealing the sender could lead to risks; for instance, early anonymous remailers like those developed in the 1990s facilitated protected exchanges without exposing user identities. Technically, forwarding's header preservation impacts reply functionality and security processes positively for but can complicate modern authentication protocols like , as the forwarding server's may trigger checks against the original domain. Replies are routed to the preserved original sender, supporting seamless conversations. Remailing disrupts this by breaking , which hinders spam filtering (as origin cannot be verified) but aligns with its goals; however, it may route replies through the remailer, adding and potential points of failure. This highlights forwarding's role in reliable, auditable delivery versus remailing's focus on .

Client-based forwarding

Manual processes

Manual forwarding in email clients involves users directly initiating the process to resend a received message to additional recipients, typically for sharing information on an ad-hoc basis. This method relies on the user's interaction with the client interface, such as or , where the original is selected and processed into a new outgoing message without relying on server-side . Unlike automated rules, manual forwarding allows users to review, edit, and customize the content before transmission, ensuring control over the shared information. The process generally begins with opening the and locating the desired in the inbox or other folders. Users select the by clicking on it, then access the forwarding option through the interface—often via a "Forward" button in the , a right-click context menu, or a like Ctrl+F in . In , for instance, this action opens a new compose window with the original embedded, prompting the user to enter recipient addresses in the "To" or "Cc" fields and add any personal notes in the body. Similarly, in , selecting "Forward" from the menu or inserts the original content into a new window, where recipients are specified and the is sent after review. This step-by-step approach ensures the forwarded is treated as a distinct transmission, generating a new and envelope in compliance with standards like SMTP. Variations in manual forwarding include inline forwarding, where the original message body is inserted directly into the new 's body for seamless reading, and attachment forwarding, which embeds the original as a file attachment to preserve its exact format, including any elements or attachments. In , users can choose between these modes via options like "Forward" for inline or "Forward as Attachment" for the latter, which helps maintain fidelity for complex messages but may complicate viewing for recipients. defaults to inline forwarding but offers an attachment option through preferences or add-ons, ensuring the forwarded content retains original headers like "From" and "Date" within the attachment. These methods create a new , which can alter or append headers—such as adding an "In-Reply-To" field—potentially affecting traceability in threads, as the forward is not a direct but a new composition. Common scenarios for manual forwarding include one-off sharing of receipts, event invitations, or system alerts, where users often add commentary or context to the original message before resending to colleagues or contacts. For example, an employee might forward a received via , appending notes on approval status, to facilitate quick internal review without setting up permanent rules. This flexibility makes manual processes ideal for sporadic needs, though it requires user vigilance to avoid errors like incorrect recipient selection.

Automated configurations

Automated configurations in software enable users to establish persistent rules that automatically forward incoming messages based on predefined criteria, such as the sender's address, subject line keywords, or recipient details. In applications like , users create these rules by accessing the Mail preferences, selecting the Rules tab, and defining conditions (e.g., "From contains [email protected]") paired with the "Forward Message" action to a specified . Similarly, in , rules for forwarding are set up through the , where conditions like sender or subject are matched to actions that forward the , but these execute only when the Outlook application is running. These setups differ from manual forwarding processes by applying repeatedly to future matching emails without user intervention each time. When using protocols like IMAP or POP3 in client software, synchronization across multiple devices can lead to issues such as duplicate forwards if the same rule triggers on each active client before the original message is marked as processed on the . For instance, in IMAP configurations, slow or concurrent access from devices like a client and may cause the rule to evaluate and forward the multiple times, resulting in redundant copies at the destination unless unique identifiers or server-side flags are properly managed. POP3 exacerbates this by downloading messages locally without , potentially leading to independent rule executions on each device that retrieves the . A key limitation of these client-side automated configurations is their dependence on the email client being actively running and connected to the internet, as rules do not persist or execute on the server when the application is closed or offline. This contrasts with server-based forwarding, where rules operate continuously regardless of client status, potentially causing missed forwards if the user's device is powered off or disconnected. To mitigate synchronization problems, users should configure rules on a single primary client or use server-side alternatives where available to ensure consistent behavior across devices.

Historical development

Origins in early email systems

Email forwarding emerged in the early within the , the precursor to the modern , where initial implementations relied on basic commands for message redirection. In 1972, the command was specified to enable the of messages to multiple recipients across the network, marking an early form of group redirection that laid the groundwork for forwarding capabilities. In 1971, developed the SNDMSG program for TENEX systems, enabling both local and network messaging over . Forwarding capabilities emerged in subsequent tools, such as the HG system (1974-1975) and John Vittal's MSG program at USC-ISI, which introduced comprehensive forwarding features, including the ability to select, reply to, and redirect messages while preserving context, influencing subsequent ARPANET tools until the mid-1980s. To address routing issues in forwarded messages, RFC 680 standardized the field in April 1975, helping detect loops during inter-site redirections. In parallel, mainframe-based systems like IBM's PROFS (Professional Office System), deployed on VM/ starting in the late , supported admin-controlled redirects through lists and , allowing system administrators to route messages to groups or individuals without user-level . These features focused on intra-organizational efficiency, with forwarding limited to privileged operators to maintain security in controlled environments. The 1980s brought standardization through RFC 822, published in 1982 by David H. Crocker, which defined key address fields essential for forwarding, including To, Cc, Bcc, and the "Resent-" prefixed headers (e.g., Resent-To, Resent-From) to indicate and track message resending by intermediaries. This specification enabled more reliable propagation of messages across diverse systems, with initial implementations in Unix environments using admin-managed alias files like /etc/aliases for simple redirections before user-configurable options became widespread. In Unix mail systems, such as those evolving from Delivermail in 1979, forwarding was initially handled through centralized aliasing to map addresses to multiple destinations, emphasizing system administrator control over user-driven processes. These developments transitioned email from ad-hoc commands to structured protocols, facilitating broader adoption in academic and corporate networks.

Evolution with user files and virtual users

The introduction of the ~/.forward file in , released in 1983 by at the , marked a significant advancement in user-configurable forwarding. This mechanism allowed individual users to create a plain-text file named .forward in their home directories, where they could specify one or more email addresses or actions for incoming mail addressed to them. For example, a simple .forward file might contain a single line such as [email protected] to forward all mail to that address, or multiple lines like [email protected] and [email protected] for distribution to several recipients. would process this file during local delivery, appending the specified targets to the recipient list without requiring administrator intervention. However, the flexibility of ~/.forward files introduced notable implications, particularly with support for commands that enabled to be piped to external programs for processing. A line like |/usr/local/bin/process_mail in the file would execute the specified command as the user, allowing custom filtering, archiving, or integration with other tools, but this also opened avenues for exploitation if the file's permissions were misconfigured. For instance, if a user's or .forward file was writable by others, attackers could modify it to run malicious scripts, potentially leading to or file overwrites during mail delivery. To mitigate such risks, implementations recommended strict file permissions (e.g., 644 ownership by the user) and disabled usage for privileged accounts like , often routing their through aliases instead. In the , the concept of virtual users emerged as a pivotal shift in mail transfer agents (MTAs), decoupling addresses from underlying system user accounts and enhancing forwarding capabilities for multi-domain environments. MTAs like , released in 1995 by , and Postfix, introduced in 1998 by Wietse Venema, supported virtual domains through configuration files or databases that mapped addresses to forwarding rules or mailboxes without creating corresponding Unix accounts. For example, Postfix's virtual alias maps allowed entries like [email protected] [email protected] to forward mail across domains, while virtual mailbox maps stored messages in dedicated directories, all managed centrally by administrators. This abstraction enabled seamless forwarding for non-existent or "virtual" users, treating recipients as logical entities rather than tied to physical logins. These innovations profoundly impacted scalability, allowing service providers to host vast numbers of email users on shared with minimal administrative overhead. By avoiding the creation of individual system accounts for each email user— a labor-intensive process in earlier Unix-based systems— virtual user support reduced resource consumption and simplified management for thousands of domains and aliases on a single . This was instrumental in the proliferation of early services and ISP-hosted email in the late 1990s, such as those offered by America Online and early iterations of , where virtual forwarding mechanisms handled surging user volumes without proportional increases in server accounts or maintenance efforts.

Security and privacy considerations

Potential risks

Email forwarding can lead to significant privacy leaks through the exposure of message headers, which often include details of the forwarding such as original , intermediate server paths, addresses, and timestamps. These headers are typically preserved or modified in ways that reveal the complete history, allowing recipients or third parties to trace the email's origin and potentially de-anonymize users who intended to maintain . For instance, in multi-hop forwarding scenarios, the accumulation of authentication headers like (Authenticated Received ) can inadvertently disclose sensitive across providers. Security threats associated with email forwarding include the risk of infinite loops, where misconfigured rules cause messages to be repeatedly forwarded between accounts or servers, leading to server overload and denial-of-service conditions. Such loops can consume excessive resources, filling queues and potentially crashing systems, as seen in cases involving autoresponders combined with forwarding. Additionally, in traditional Unix-based systems, .forward files allow emails to external programs, enabling the execution of arbitrary commands; if compromised, these files can run harmful scripts, escalating privileges or facilitating further attacks, a rooted in early architectures. Forwarding also amplifies spam propagation by chaining messages across domains, which can bypass spam filters and protocols like , DKIM, and , increasing the for and distribution. In chained forwards, each hop may rewrite or add headers that evade detection, allowing malicious content to reach inboxes that would otherwise be protected; studies have identified such vulnerabilities in email forwarding mechanisms across 20 major services. attacks, which can exploit these forwarding issues, were implicated in 36% of over 4,000 breaches analyzed in the 2021 Verizon DBIR; as of the 2025 DBIR, phishing accounts for 14% of breaches as an initial access vector. This expansion of vectors contributes to broader dissemination, with phishing implicated in billions of daily malicious emails. In recent account compromise attacks, adversaries often configure unauthorized forwarding rules to exfiltrate sensitive , contributing to the prevalence of business email compromise (BEC) and email account compromise (EAC) incidents as of 2024.

Mitigation strategies

To mitigate risks in email forwarding, administrators should implement secure protocols such as (SMTP Secure), which encrypts transmissions using SSL or TLS on port 465 to protect message contents during relay between servers. Additionally, limiting the number of forward recipients per message—such as capping at one external forward via inbox or transport rules—reduces exposure to unauthorized dissemination. Enabling authentication mechanisms like () and () is essential; while often fails in forwarding due to IP changes, signatures remain valid if the message body is unaltered, allowing () policies to verify legitimacy and prevent spoofing. Server configurations can further enhance security by stripping sensitive headers, such as those revealing internal addresses or system details, using tools like Postfix header checks to remove fields like X-Originating-IP before forwarding. Client-side s enable selective forwarding by applying rules based on criteria like sender, subject keywords, or attachments—for instance, Gmail's options forward only matching messages while excluding others to avoid broad data exposure. To detect forwarding loops, enable comprehensive in systems like Online, where message trace reports and SMTP response codes (e.g., 550 5.4.142 for loop detection) allow monitoring of recursive paths, with automatic stamping of headers like X-MS--Inbox-Rules-Loop to limit iterations to one per rule. For legal and policy compliance, email forwarding must align with regulations like GDPR, which requires explicit, for processing and transferring across systems, particularly when forwarding to external or private addresses without safeguards. In contexts, organizations should establish policies prohibiting the forwarding of work emails to private accounts and mandating the use of BCC for distribution lists to anonymize recipients, ensuring data minimization and auditability.

References

  1. [1]
    Configure email forwarding - Microsoft 365 admin
    Jul 1, 2025 · Email forwarding lets you forward email messages sent to a user's mailbox to another user's mailbox inside or outside of your organization.
  2. [2]
    Email forwards - what are they and how to use them? - ClouDNS Blog
    Apr 24, 2025 · The email forwards are a way of automatically redirecting emails on the domain level from one email address to another.How does it work? · When should you use email... · Benefits of email forwarding
  3. [3]
    Leverage Best Email Forwarding Service To Boost Your Enterprise's ...
    Client-based email forwarding is the type of forwarding where emails are re-mailed and not just redirected to the targeted email address. The user can configure ...
  4. [4]
    Email - from the beginning to the number one means of ... - MailStore
    Jul 5, 2023 · 1971: Ray Tomlinson sends the first email. · 1973: The first email standard, with functions such as “from”, “to” and “forward” is developed.
  5. [5]
    How did email grow from messages between academics to a global ...
    Mar 7, 2016 · The first email standard was proposed in 1973 at Darpa and finalised within Arpanet in 1977, including common things such as the to and from ...
  6. [6]
    RFC 821: Simple Mail Transfer Protocol
    Following this are descriptions of forwarding mail, verifying mailbox names and expanding mailing lists, sending to terminals instead of or in combination ...
  7. [7]
    Automatically forward Gmail messages to another account
    Learn how automatic forwarding works. After you add a forwarding email address, we send a verification link to the address. After you verify, you can forward ...
  8. [8]
    The Risks of Email Forwarding | Latest Alerts and Advisories - NJCCIC
    May 1, 2025 · Furthermore, forwarding emails can impact spam filters and message authentication checks, potentially resulting in emails being flagged as spam ...
  9. [9]
    Building the future of internet email with ARC - Valimail
    RFC 8617, the Authenticated Received Chain (ARC) Protocol, describes a protocol for mail handlers to preserve authentication data when forwarding email messages ...
  10. [10]
    Configuring and controlling external email forwarding in Microsoft 365
    Oct 6, 2025 · Admins can configure mailbox forwarding (also known as SMTP forwarding) to automatically forward messages to external recipients. The admin can ...Missing: server | Show results with:server
  11. [11]
    Email Forwarding - UW-Milwaukee HD Knowledgebase
    Aug 10, 2016 · Email forwarding generically refers to the operation of re-sending an email message delivered to one email address to one or more different ...
  12. [12]
    RFC 5598: Internet Mail Architecture
    To serve as the necessary common frame of reference, this document describes the enhanced Internet Mail architecture, reflecting the current service.
  13. [13]
    Forwarding Email In Outlook - Harvard Exac
    Whether it's for personal or work-related purposes, the ability to redirect emails to different accounts or colleagues can greatly enhance productivity and ...
  14. [14]
    Email Forwarding Service - UCSD Retirement Association
    Email forwarding allows you to use your personal email account to receive messages from your ucsd.edu email address.
  15. [15]
    RFC 5321 - Simple Mail Transfer Protocol - IETF Datatracker
    This document is a specification of the basic protocol for Internet electronic mail transport. It consolidates, updates, and clarifies several previous ...
  16. [16]
    RFC 1939: Post Office Protocol - Version 3
    ### Summary of POP3 and Server-Side Forwarding from RFC 1939
  17. [17]
  18. [18]
    RFC 5322 - Internet Message Format - IETF Datatracker
    This document specifies the Internet Message Format (IMF), a syntax for text messages that are sent between computer users, within the framework of electronic ...RFC 2822 · RFC 5321 · RFC 6854<|control11|><|separator|>
  19. [19]
    Postfix Architecture Overview
    This document presents an overview of the Postfix architecture, and provides pointers to descriptions of every Postfix command or server program.Missing: mechanisms MTAs
  20. [20]
    Postfix Configuration Parameters
    Summary of each segment:
  21. [21]
    sendmail-aliases - man pages section 5: File Formats
    Jul 27, 2022 · These files contain mail addresses or aliases, recognized by send-mail(8) for the local host: /etc/passwd Mail addresses (usernames) of local users.
  22. [22]
  23. [23]
    Postfix Address Rewriting
    Although Postfix currently has no address rewriting language, it can do surprisingly powerful address manipulation via table lookup.
  24. [24]
    draft-chuang-identifying-email-forwarding-00 - IETF Datatracker
    The Alias replaces the original RCPT TO envelope recipient address but does not alter the content address field header fields. Often used for Auto-Forwarding.¶.
  25. [25]
  26. [26]
    Email Forwarding | Columbia University Information Technology
    CUIT allows you to forward your Columbia email to another address, with some limitations for security and reliability.
  27. [27]
    Email Distribution Lists at LuxSci
    May 21, 2013 · Distribution lists are email addresses, like “allstaff@your-domain.com” that accept inbound email and then forward (distribute) those messages ...Missing: departmental | Show results with:departmental
  28. [28]
    How to set up a catch-all (wildcard) email address - Namecheap
    The catch-all email forwarding allows receiving the emails sent to any random email address associated with your domain that has not been created yet. For ...
  29. [29]
    Redirect or forward Gmail messages to another user - Google Help
    As a Google Workspace admin, you can automatically redirect or forward incoming messages sent to one person in your organization, to one or more other ...
  30. [30]
    Exchange Online limits - Service Descriptions | Microsoft Learn
    Jul 11, 2025 · Maximum message size for large distribution groups: If a message is sent to 5,000 or more recipients, the message size can't exceed this limit.<|control11|><|separator|>
  31. [31]
    How to Setup an Email Forwarder in cPanel & Webmail
    Dec 4, 2023 · In this guide, we show you how to setup an Email Forwarder in both your cPanel and Webmail and how to forward it to other email accounts.
  32. [32]
    Anonymous Remailers - Stanford Computer Science
    Those wishing to send anonymous messages can use an "anonymous remailer." The most famous of these was known as 'anon.penet.fi' - operated in Finland.
  33. [33]
    [PDF] The Design, Implementation and Operation of an Email Pseudonym ...
    Type-1 remailers alone serve mostly for anonymous, rather than pseudonymous mail. However, they do allow messages to be sent to unknown destinations. As ...
  34. [34]
    Berkman Mostly Anonymous Remailing Service
    The Berkman mostly anonymous remailing service allows users transparently to exchange emails with one another without knowing each others' email addresses ...
  35. [35]
    Use rules to manage emails you receive in Mail on Mac
    Go to the Mail app on your Mac. · Choose Mail > Settings, then click Rules. · Click Add Rule, then type a name for the rule. · Indicate whether any or all of the ...
  36. [36]
    Manage email messages by using rules in Outlook - Microsoft Support
    Note: Some rules created in classic Outlook can't be processed by new Outlook because they are client-side rules. To fix a rule that was migrated from ...Edit or fix a broken rule in... · Stop processing more rules in...Missing: server- | Show results with:server-
  37. [37]
    Duplicate IMAP emails appear in the NEW Outlook - Microsoft Learn
    May 28, 2023 · Duplicate emails in new Outlook may occur due to multiple devices, sync issues, slow IMAP sessions, or some IMAP clients not sending ...How do I stop receiving duplicate emails? - Microsoft Q&AOutlook IMAP & Optimum Server - 6 Duplicates of each emailMore results from learn.microsoft.com
  38. [38]
    18 Reasons Why Outlook Duplicates Emails, Contacts, Tasks, and ...
    Causes of duplicates in MS Outlook · 1. Problem with Internet connection · 2. Corrupted message on the server · 3. Synchronization of Outlook desktop with mobile ...
  39. [39]
    Server-side Vs Client-side Rules - Intermedia Support Center
    Oct 11, 2023 · Client-side rules (those that depend on Outlook to be processed), require that an Outlook client be open when the rule is triggered.
  40. [40]
  41. [41]
    [PDF] Email Innovation Timeline
    Aug 18, 2022 · This timeline reflects the history of computer-mediated human communications (any human communication that occurs through the use of two or more ...
  42. [42]
    The Origins of E-mail - Stanford Computer Science
    Sep 17, 1999 · Ray Tomlinson created early email programs, later attached to ARPANET's file transfer protocol, and Stephen Lukasik encouraged its use.
  43. [43]
  44. [44]
    [PDF] Preserving the U.S. Government's White House Electronic Mail
    The PROFS system allowed users to exchange email, transfer text documents, and share calendar information. PROFS email functionalities provided users with the ...
  45. [45]
    [PDF] GC30-3085-3_Distributed_Office_Support_System_Ge..
    DISOSS provides distribution services support for connecting PROFS. (VM/CMS) devices to DISOSS (for MVS only). The IBM Scanmaster I can scan and print images ...
  46. [46]
    RFC 822 - STANDARD FOR THE FORMAT OF ARPA INTERNET ...
    This standard specifies a syntax for text messages that are sent among computer users, within the framework of electronic mail.
  47. [47]
  48. [48]
    mail, Mail, mailx, nail—history notes - The Heirloom Project
    The most ancient command is mail, which was included in Unix 1st Edition in 1971 according to the manuals. At this time, Unix had no remote communication ...
  49. [49]
    History - Sendmail, 3rd Edition [Book] - O'Reilly
    The delivermail program was shipped in 1979 with 4.0 and 4.1 BSD Unix. Unfortunately, delivermail was not flexible enough to handle the changes in mail-routing ...
  50. [50]
    .forward Files (System Administration Guide: Network Services)
    Users can create a .forward file in their home directories that sendmail, along with other programs, can use to redirect mail or send mail.
  51. [51]
    Permissions for ~/.forward Files - sendmail, 4th Edition [Book] - O'Reilly
    Permissions for ~/.forward FilesThe ~/.forward file can pose a security risk to individual users. There is a higher degree of risk if the user is root or ...
  52. [52]
    [PDF] Sendmail Security Gregory Neil Shapiro
    Dec 12, 2001 · ⇒ Attack: change victim's writable forward file to overwrite victim's private file; mail victim. ♢ Do not read files in group or other writable.
  53. [53]
    Postfix Virtual Domain Hosting Howto
    Postfix virtual domain hosting uses virtual aliases or mailboxes to host multiple domains, not directly associated with the machine, and can use non-UNIX ...
  54. [54]
    25 years of Postfix - LWN.net
    Dec 14, 2023 · Like maildirs, VERP support and flexible forwarding and aliasing were among the qmail features that the other big MTAs took on board fairly ...Missing: concept | Show results with:concept
  55. [55]
    [PDF] On the Security Implications of Email Forwarding Mechanism and ...
    Changing the RCPT TO header will tell mail servers to send the email to the new address's account, and leaving the FROM header intact will cause the recipient's ...
  56. [56]
    [PDF] SMTP Loop Moderate Denial of Service: InterScan VirusWall NT ...
    Jan 24, 2002 · cause a denial of service (CPU consumption) by forwarding the email to the user while autoresponse is enabled, which creates an inifinite ...
  57. [57]
    [PDF] The Internet Worm Incident Technical Report CSD-TR-933
    Sep 19, 1991 · As it was doing this, it also examined the .forward file (used to forward mail to a different host automatically) in each user home directory ...
  58. [58]
    None
    ### Summary of Email Forwarding Risks Related to Spam, Malware, Phishing, and Increased Attack Surfaces
  59. [59]
  60. [60]
    Securing SMTP & Differences Between SSL, TLS, and their Ports
    May 26, 2022 · SMTPS uses SSL or TLS for security, unlike SMTP which lacks encryption. It secures email by using TLS, and is enabled by enabling TLS on the ...
  61. [61]
    Email Forwarding and DMARC DKIM SPF - EasyDMARC
    Oct 15, 2025 · (Process is described in the RFC 7208). This mechanism fails during the email forwarding process and will be described later in this article.
  62. [62]
    Remove sensitive information from email headers with postfix
    Apr 15, 2013 · I wanted a way to remove the more sensitive email headers that are normally generated when I send mail. My goal is to hide the originating IP address of my ...
  63. [63]
    Loop Prevention in Exchange Online Demystified
    May 3, 2021 · With this blog post we will give you an overview of how we handle possible mail loop scenarios in Exchange Online and how this affects your ...
  64. [64]
    How does the GDPR affect email? - GDPR.eu
    Consent must be “freely given, specific, informed and unambiguous.” · Requests for consent must be “clearly distinguishable from the other matters” and presented ...
  65. [65]
    Data protection and email: 7 steps to ensure GDPR compliance
    1. Use BCC instead of CC in distribution lists · 2. Never send sensitive content in plain text · 3. Clearly define rules for forwarding to private mailboxes · 4.