[Mimedefang] Scary... Filtering on the outbound.

[Flatfender]

On Mon, 21 Feb 2005 11:47:56 -0800, Kenneth Porter
<shiva at sewingwitch.com> wrote:
> --On Monday, February 21, 2005 1:04 PM -0600 Flatfender
> <flatfender at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > Nothing to stop
> > the vendor from deleting an email on their webserver proving they knew
> > of something just go get out of a large claim, and if we didn't print
> > the email we would have no proof.
> 
> How do you prove that the recipient's email is not a forgery? Are you using
> digital signatures that are printed along with the rest of the email? Can
> the result even be keyed back in and checked?
>

I guess technically you don't prove it';s not a forgery, It's not much
different than forging a fax at that point.  Mostly if you can show
correspondence, then the vendors back down.  But we have had insurance
companies try to get out of paying claims, and once we provided the
emails they paid them.  It's kind of like, well we know we should pay
this claim, but were going to try not to and if you can document why
we should pay the claim then we will.  None of these instances have
had to stand up in court yet, so we haven't ever got to the level of 
is the email authentic or not.  But the point was, it sucks not having
a copy for yourself and having to rely on someone else who's best
interest may be different from yours.  I wasn't trying to say just
having a copy covers us completely, I was trying to make the point
that it's better we have a copy electronically ourselves than no copy
at all or having to print a copy.

It's kind of like archiving all corporate email.  It's a double edged
sword and it's not a perfect situation in all crircumstances.

Matt