Security Issues With Full Name E-mails?

[Lucky.]

NOTE: This isn't about hacking, this is general personal & identity type of security!

The place where I work used to be so small that first name e-mails were fine...so e-mail addresses like so were accepted:

jimbo@work.com
josh@work.com
jessica@work.com

Lately it's grown, so I decided that we needed a naming convention for all new employees. I thought about variations of initials and first or last names (gharris@work.com for Gary Harris, ftrose@work.com for Frank Terry Rose, etc.)

It seems that many companies flat out use the full names of people, like:

tracygoodman@work.com
paulhicks@work.com

or maybe with a period or underscore in the middle...

tracy.goodman@work.com
paul.hicks@work.com

While looking into these conventions, a receptionist brought up the fact that she felt uncomfortable with her full name (or even a variation including her last name) as an e-mail address. There is no public directory, so it's not like somebody can check our website and get the names of every employee there.

Her argument was that if she answered the phone to a stranger and her or someone else's e-mail address was requested, at least giving away an e-mail address like "joe@work.com" was better than "joe.butch@work.com" Other concerns were signing up for possible sketchy services or demos online. This isn't necessarily about computer security - just more personal security in general.

At a first glimpse, the concern may seem trivial. But at the same time, I want employees to feel secure at work. I don't want to dismiss it without checking with some other people. Seems like a ton of companies use full first name/last name for e-mail addresses. But just because everybody else does it, doesn't make it right.

Any thoughts on this? Anybody have a reason not to use a full name in an e-mail address?

[Phrea]

Normally, without internet, one would only know of somebody's name if one knew that person, or knew a person who knew that person.

Different with the internet.
I'm all for somewhat disguising someones name, even if it's just the first initials.

[CharlesA]

At work my email address is firstinitiallastname@company.com

I don't really see what the big deal is, since I've seen other companies use firstname.lastname@company.com without any problems.

[Phrea]

At work my email address is firstinitiallastname@company.com

I don't really see what the big deal is, since I've seen other companies use firstname.lastname@company.com without any problems.

It won't be a problem in almost all cases, BUT it does make one feel a bit.. ..naked? It's a lot of info for an email address... It's not necessary.

Of course, this is just one persons opinion.

[CharlesA]

If you send someone an email, you would usually have your full name in your signature, right?

How is the email address any different?

[pwnst*r]

At work my email address is firstinitiallastname@company.com

I don't really see what the big deal is, since I've seen other companies use firstname.lastname@company.com without any problems.

Exactly. I work for a major corporation and have had my firstname.lastname@yourcompanyhere.com for almost 8 years now and it's never been an issue.

[Phrea]

And yet, neither of you are actually willing to post email addresses here.

Why not just not ask this from your employees, they happy, you happy, everybody happy.

[pwnst*r]

And yet, neither of you are actually willing to post email addresses here.



Bots.

[Letrazzrot]

I suppose my opinion might depend on the type of company. At a company where presenting an identity to clients is part of the job, then emails usually have a signature attached with name and contact info anyway. In this case, it may be arguably better (in a professional sense) to clearly use first and last names in the email.

It also depends on the company's procedures of using the company internet services. Is the email account being provided to be used for personal email as well? If so, then the employee should probably have some say in the matter, whether you think it's trivial or not.

On the other hand, if the email is there only to be used for professional transactions, then I don't really see how an employee has an argument.

I don't consider a name to be a privacy concern, myself. After all, I show IDs and credit cards to strangers all of the time, and answer the phone with my name at work. I'm already spewing mass amounts of data about myself every day, so I don't see how giving out my full name is a concern. Especially when I am in a work environment, and want people to remember who I am.

[CharlesA]

And yet, neither of you are actually willing to post email addresses here.

Because I would rather not be spammed to death by bots.
Private company correspondence =|= public forum.

[wojox]

I'll do it. You can find it on launchpad and my wiki as well.

pete.wojtaszek@gmail.com

Seriously, if someone calls the company and wants an email they should be directed towards Human Resources hr@work.com or info@work.com.

Everybody thinks everyone is out to get them which isn't true. :)

[KiwiNZ]

If she is the receptionist why not just create a generic contact email address for the company that forwards to her. EG sales@company.com.

That way she is happy and the contact is happy.

[Phrea]

If she is the receptionist why not just create a generic contact email address for the company that forwards to her. EG sales@company.com.

That way she is happy and the contact is happy.

+9000 free internets ;)

[PhilGil]

My work email is LastNameFirstInitial@work.com, but FirstName.LastName@work.com is extremely common in larger corporations.

The real issue here is training: instruct the employees to use their work email address for company correspondence only and to use their personal email address for everything else. As company correspondence already has the employee's full name in the signature it shouldn't raise as much concern to use the full name as an email address.

[CharlesA]

+1 to redirecting them to HR.

[PhilGil]

If she is the receptionist why not just create a generic contact email address for the company that forwards to her. EG sales@company.com.

That way she is happy and the contact is happy.
I like this idea for generic communications (random job applicants, for example). However, serious business communication should not be done through a blind email address.

[Phrea]

I like this idea for generic communications (random job applicants, for example). However, serious business communication should not be done through a blind email address.

Why? Initials and a last name isn't exactly 'blind'.

The thing is, most people WILL begin to use it for non work related contacts also, and that's where the problem begins.

Why does one need a full first name I wonder, there's no need what so ever.

EDIT: I do agree that most email addresses are well protected, and if used safely, it should not be a problem.

What I still don't understand is why a complete full name including first name is necessary.

[Letrazzrot]

Why? Initials and a last name isn't exactly 'blind'.

What I still don't understand is why a complete full name including first name is necessary.

I wouldn't say it's necessary, but I would argue that, depending on the responsibilities of the employee, it can add an air of "professionalism" to use a full name (or first initial, last name). After all, what looks better on a business card?

pink_snugglekatz@mycompany.com
A84KJD78@mycompany.com
john.smith@mycompany.com

[PhilGil]

Why? Initials and a last name isn't exactly 'blind'.
I was referring to KiwiNZ's example of sales@company.com.


The thing is, most people WILL begin to use it for non work related contacts also, and that's where the problem begins.If someone is nervous about using it they won't.


Why does one need a full first name I wonder, there's no need what so ever.It's fairly common practice at large corporations where there might be 3 or 4 employees whose first initial and last name are "mjones."

[NovaAesa]

Last place I worked at, we had group names with email. E.g. it@domail.com.au would redirect to myname@doman.com.au because I was in part of IT (although, there was only 3 of us). There was a similar thing company wide where generic emails would redirect to the actual person's email.

[pwnst*r]

Last place I worked at, we had group names with email. E.g. it@domail.com.au would redirect to myname@doman.com.au because I was in part of IT (although, there was only 3 of us). There was a similar thing company wide where generic emails would redirect to the actual person's email.

that's a distribution list and wouldn't be a good alternative to the OP's dilemma.

[lostinxlation]

Her argument was that if she answered the phone to a stranger and her or someone else's e-mail address was requested, at least giving away an e-mail address like "joe@work.com" was better than "joe.butch@work.com" Other concerns were signing up for possible sketchy services or demos online. This isn't necessarily about computer security - just more personal security in general.


In the first place, why does she have to give out someone's email address to the strangers ?
In the late 90's when the Silicon Valley was booming, head hunters randomely called us and tried to get the phone# or email address of the people. Our HR told us never to give such an info to the strangers. instead, forward the call to HR and let them handle it.

As for the email address with a full name... the phone directory has a millions of full names as well as phone#.. If an email address with full name is a problem, that's not a problem just started.

[julio_cortez]

The thing is, most people WILL begin to use it for non work related contacts also, and that's where the problem begins.
And that's where the problem lies indeed.
Why should I use a work e-mail for personal purposes?

I currently have my own email at surname@company.nation but I'm never ever using it for personal conversation.
First of all (but I know it's not a major concern) because I KNOW the ISP that provides the e-mail service and no, I won't be happy to know they store my personal e-mails on their servers.
Then, what happened if I left the company? Would I have to e-mail every of my contacts to tell them "wait, I changed my e-mail address, here's the new one"?
Waste of time.

Work e-mails are made for work (even because in the signature I have full name plus a phone, a fax and a mobile which I don't want untrusted people to know), for all the rest there's live.com or something similar.

I currently have a hotmail.com mail for general purposes and a name.surname@MY_ISP.nation for more serious conversation (such as when I applied for this job). I wouldn't ever dream of using my work e-mail for personal purposes.

So, for me, the form name@company.com or surname@company.com or even n.surname@company.com are normal things.