I just got a rejection from the CS department at Brown, and they sadly neglected to Bcc the recipients, so I now know that they rejected 362 people in one fell swoop. Just glancing through the addresses I recognized several of the recipients. I think, based on my limited expertise in privacy-preserving algorithms, that this is pretty much satisfies the Dinur-Nissim definition of blatant non-privacy: if there are 
Update: I just got a followup saying that the sender “would like to recall the message…” Alas, no.
Update 2: Another followup came in saying to “please ignore and delete” the previous message. Does this mean I still have a chance?!? (Again, alas, no).
An Ergodic Walk 
well pointed out :).
Given usually 10 to 15 are interviewed, you essentially have uncovered the whole pool of candidates. Add on the fact that CS Brown was an open call, and you have most likely found the 380 people on the CS faculty job market…
This is very embarrassing if you consider that some of the people would have legitimate concerns about remaining private (e.g. they are employed somewhere else, and have not informed their employer).
No amount of RSA can protect you from the BCC to CC error rsssss
10 to 15 are interviewed and their seminars usually announced openly in the university I meant…
Some of the applicants were definitely already in tenure-track positions elsewhere, which is why it’s quite dangerous to do things this way…
With regard to unringing bells via “Please ignore and delete” requests, the following might be a bit relevant. Many moons ago, the IT BoG was discussing a very sensitive matter xxxx. Someone suggested that the discussion should not appear in the minutes of the meeting, and made a motion that no discussion of xxxx should appear in the minutes of the meeting. Motion passed. Then someone else made a motion that the previous motion regarding xxxx not appear in the minutes……
This is the problem with information theorists! They always want to let
…