This is NHS IT. Nothing will happen at all.
NHS IT bod sends test email to 850k users – and then responses are sent 'reply all'
A test email sent by accident to 850,000 NHS workers has caused utter chaos after being sent from an apparently incorrectly configured* email distribution list. The sender, whom The Register will identify only as R, sent the blank message with a subject line that simply read "test" to a distribution list called …
COMMENTS
-
-
Monday 14th November 2016 14:11 GMT CustardGannet
Re: Only 70 or 80 people
I've currently had 81. But the latest ones were from around 0930 (3.5 hours ago) so there may still be hundreds - if not thousands - more emails from retarH^H^H^H^H^H^H baffled people coming my way.
What's most ridiculous is that the original didn't even ask recipients to do anything, it just said 'test' in the subject, and a person's email signature.
The strongest muscles in my body are quickly becoming the ones that I use to roll my eyes.
-
Monday 14th November 2016 15:46 GMT Anonymous Coward
Re: Only 70 or 80 people
For those on the inside, my Spiceworks install created the now infamous "899" response to the original unsolicited mail. Server was taken offline as soon as the flood was discovered, we've seen far in excess of 2K responses so far.
It's been popcorn in this cinema time since about 10h00...
-
-
-
Monday 14th November 2016 13:30 GMT gw0udm
Wasn't clear to begin with
I saw this starting early this morning but it was already too late to do anything about it.
I think some of the early repliers could be forgiven, as it was not at all clear from looking at the original test email what had happened. It was from 'R' and simply contained the innocous 'CroydonPractices' in the cc field, and so one might easily have assumed you had be included by mistake. Given the size of the NHS address book this is pretty common, as most of us have namesakes around the NHS somewhere with very similar addressess (eg I have an alter ego who is a radiographer, and I used to get emails about scout group meetings and all sorts of things intended for someone else with the same name).
It was only after an hour or so that it became clear what had happened, when the number of puzzled replies began to ramp up. I did send a 'please do not reply all to this email' early on so I have probably ultimately not helped, but at that point it was not clear how widely it had gone.
Really one should not be able to include so many addresses in a mailing list, and no doubt we will see such a measure coming in now. This is one of the perils of such a large internal email system with a single address book which has probably not received sufficient attention up to now.
-
Monday 14th November 2016 14:17 GMT AMBxx
Re: Wasn't clear to begin with
Your wrong email problem would be improved if someone had come up with a standard naming policy. My wife receives email intended for some high up in the NHS. Only difference in the address is the '.' between first and last name.
This stuff was sorted 15 years ago, shouldn't happen any more.
Few subdomains would help too - everyone, even external users, are on the same nhs.net.
-
Monday 14th November 2016 13:42 GMT Anonymous Coward
Not all the numpties work with 'R'
Our smart IT department has decided that this is a phishing exercise designed to pillage our contact lists and put a big warning on the Trust intranet front page. Didn't think so myself after looking through the source of the original message: Hanlon's Razor applies yet again.
Anonymous for obvious reasons.
-
Monday 14th November 2016 13:45 GMT Anonymous Coward
Predictable?
A long time ago, the place I was working had a 3 day mail outage. I doubt any trust would have one that long nowadays. But a national system? This could be longer.
The whole thread will be made up of "important" people complaining that they are getting confusing emails and want it to stop. Then other important people complain about that one. Return to start...
This could be a good thing as it might help prevent the centralisation that the NHS.net will become.
-
Monday 14th November 2016 14:54 GMT Martin an gof
Re: Predictable?
A long time ago, the place I was working had a 3 day mail outage
Also a long time ago, when widespread corporate email was still a "new thing" and not everyone in the company had access to a computer, let alone an email address, the mail systems of the group I worked for were connected using 28k8bps dial-up modems, which dialled on demand - direct to the appropriate receiving modem (none of this send-it-via-the-internet stuff).
Somebody decided to send an everyone-on-the-system email, announcing a new launch (or maybe it was just a logo change) and had scanned, in 32bit colour, a black-and-white logo which came to a total of around 10MBytes.
Bearing in mind that the "mail server" was a re-purposed 286 with 512kB memory and a 40MB hard drive, and that in those days a typical desktop computer was a 386 with 2MB or a 486 with 4MB and that one poor secretary had (IIRC) a 286 with 1MB and a 20MB HDD (yes, just about enough room for WfW3.11 and a basic Office installation), there were some people who actually got control of their computers back by lunchtime, but others had to wait until the next day.
I had to run around the building warning people to delete that message and not to open it; the amount of page-file thrashing that ensued tied the computers up for another hour... well for a long time, anyway. Not that long waits were uncommon with MS Mail.
I don't think there were any serious effects on that particular manager, but a later send-to-all email, which was a simple 2kB text email containing a slightly "off" joke did result in disciplinary action I believe, and an edict that nobody should ever send-to-all again.
M.
-
-
-
Monday 14th November 2016 16:53 GMT Anonymous Coward
Re: Exchange not Outlook
I am not as familiar with other OWAs but the NHS one is currently offering me 4 options with nothing set to default.
Delete - Reply - Reply All - Forward
I suspect someone is looking very hard at that "Reply All" option and considering what can be done about it.
In fact, as I read left to right, I see the Reply option before the fateful Reply All. People who choose it are not picking the first option. They are picking one that is more strident.
-
-
-
-
-
-
This post has been deleted by its author
-
Monday 14th November 2016 16:56 GMT Anonymous Coward
Re: Speak to Hillary
Even funnier that none of those downvotes bothered to deny it.
I mean, you just Teflonned me - you didn't deny it either!
But for the record, there has been an influx of negative AC posters since the US election, who I've had a few run ins with.
I just think a significant part of this site's newer membership is the emboldened, negative bots / trolls who sling out negativity without ever actually posting.
I can't prove or disprove that myself; I genuinely can't think of any other reasons I would get downvotes.
-
-
Tuesday 15th November 2016 10:40 GMT Nick Ryan
Re: Speak to Hillary
You sir, seem to have mistaken this website for some other site.
Here we lambast pretty much everyone, although usually from the technical point of view ("where's the IT angle") but not always as we don't want to restrict ourselves too much. Therefore we have articles pointing out holes (and making fun of) both Trump's useless website and email configuration and Clinton's personal email server.
-
-
-
Monday 14th November 2016 14:13 GMT Anonymous Coward
NHS email
I have years of NHS experience though not there at the moment.
I have vivid memories of our service desk being asked to create such dist lists.
There were arguments in the NHS over who was allowed to dictate the members. There were arguments about IT doing it.
I was management, I gave one of our lesser skilled deskers brief training on why dist lists containing dist lists that pointed at the original dist list.
I think common sense was and remains in short supply. It shouldn't surprise anyone that my overriding experience of the NHS was shock at lack of knowledge.
-
Monday 14th November 2016 14:26 GMT TRT
It's a good job that they hit return and send too soon...
I have a copy of the full email here, it reads:
Subject: Testicle removal surgery.
Body: Dear sir / madam,
I'm pleased to inform you that the surgery to remove your left testicle [delete as appropriate] has been scheduled for 23rd December 2016 at 1pm. Please indicate by reply that this date is suitable for you. You must arrive at Southampton General [delete as appropriate] at least 4 hours before the appointed time, and you are reminded not to eat [delete as appropriate] in the 12 hours preceding the appointment and not to drink [delete as appropriate] for four (4) hours preceding the appointment.
Yours,
Mr Ivor Nicktoor Bolokov, Senior Surgical Consultant.
-
Monday 14th November 2016 14:29 GMT Bloodbeastterror
It's really not rocket science
As an ex-IT professional I worked on the principle that there are no stupid users, only poor computer systems that don't protect users from their own stupidity. Yes, I was an idealist as well as a deep-rooted cynic.
I saw several of these email firestorms during my career at a major US institution, and on every occasion I looked at the original, thought "Dope!", just deleted it, and then sat back waiting for my imbecile coworkers to start with the "Please remove me".
Apparently I was alone in just taking the simple course of deletion. Duh...
-
Monday 14th November 2016 17:35 GMT Doctor Syntax
Re: It's really not rocket science
"As an ex-IT professional I worked on the principle that there are no stupid users, only poor computer systems that don't protect users from their own stupidity."
This is the theory that systems should be made idotproof. Nature abhors an idiotproof system and responds by producing a new, improved idiot.