A couple of interesting questions came up recently regarding Information Rights Management that I thought I’d write about.
What is the impact of IRM-protected email on Outlook Instant Search and Windows Desktop Search?
Emails protected with IRM cannot be indexed because the body of the message is encrypted. The header information is not encrypted, though, so things like server side rules and search by header information does work.
This is a header from a standard Outlook email:
Received: from chipbcmbx01.pbc.local ([10.20.1.47]) by chipbcmbx01.pbc.local
([10.20.1.47]) with mapi; Mon, 23 Jul 2007 12:25:51 -0500
Content-Type: application/ms-tnef; name="winmail.dat"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: binary
From: Travis Nielsen <tnielsen@pointbridge.com>
To: Travis Nielsen <tnielsen@pointbridge.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2007 12:25:51 -0500
Subject: This is a Regular Email
Thread-Topic: This is a Regular Email
Thread-Index: AcfD++a6Juht4d7HRUe1EtILoqaHKgJUkAEQAAATAJA=
Message-ID: <CDFCF7D598A4A946A863361272036744A8007185@chipbcmbx01.pbc.local>
References: <51A0B44224EDA64E98281D32EEF48859A50B808B@chipbcmbx01.pbc.local>
<11609C3ECAFA6C4485C57D1148275DEAA6544CAA@chipbcmbx01.pbc.local>
In-Reply-To: <11609C3ECAFA6C4485C57D1148275DEAA6544CAA@chipbcmbx01.pbc.local>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-Exchange-Organization-SCL: -1
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: <CDFCF7D598A4A946A863361272036744A8007185@chipbcmbx01.pbc.local>
MIME-Version: 1.0
This is a header from an IRM-protected email. Note the customized content class and the fact the body of the message is included as an attachment.
Received: from chipbcmbx01.pbc.local ([10.20.1.47]) by chipbcmbx01.pbc.local
([10.20.1.47]) with mapi; Mon, 23 Jul 2007 11:18:57 -0500
Content-Type: application/ms-tnef; name="winmail.dat"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: binary
From: Travis Nielsen <tnielsen@pointbridge.com>
To: Travis Nielsen <tnielsen@pointbridge.com>
Content-Class: rpmsg.message
Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2007 11:18:56 -0500
Subject: This is an RMS test message
Thread-Topic: This an RMS test message
Thread-Index: AcfNRSrGAkYDIlTEQySmQ74ISgvtwA==
Message-ID: <CDFCF7D598A4A946A863361272036744A800716A@chipbcmbx01.pbc.local>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach: yes
X-MS-Exchange-Organization-SCL: -1
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: <CDFCF7D598A4A946A863361272036744A800716A@chipbcmbx01.pbc.local>
MIME-Version: 1.0
You can see this for yourself by saving an IRM-protected email as an .msg file and opening it in Notepad. You will also find that the body of the message cannot be viewed as with other, standard messages. As a result, the content of IRM-protected messages does not show up on desktop search. And I’m quite sure similar constraints will happen with indexes running against message archiving and journaling software.
That’s not to say IRM "breaks" email journaling and archiving. That functionality will continue to work since the message header is unmolested. It just means there is a trade-off with respect to searching IRM-protected emails and users and IT administration will need to be aware of this.
By the way, should an organization need to produce emails as part of legal discovery, access to IRM-protected messages in an archive or journal can easily be granted by virtual of the RMS "Super Users" group. Members of this group always get full access to all RMS content. Obviously, folks need to be very careful about monitoring who is a member this.
When I receive an IRM-protected email on my Windows Mobile 6 device, do I need to enter my user ID and password every time to read it?
No. You don’t. Furthermore, when your Windows password changes and you update ActiveSync, no further action is required to read IRM-protected content.
