Great!
We can conclude.with a *much* better understanding of this issue and a workaround. Thank you Kevin. Alex. IMHO your tech(s) should be made aware (Ticket on this case was #137504). As For the record, despite his lack of understanding with certificates, he did a stand-up job (so I'm told) troubleshooting and correcting our corrupt "Disclaimer Policy" folder issues. This alluded our technical expertise.and that of two other SB techs. :~) -Jeff From: Alex Eckelberry [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Friday, March 12, 2010 10:04 AM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: VIPER: NO Disclaimers in email (caused by email digital certificates) Kevin is right, and I'll make sure the techs know. Changing a signed document goes directly against what a signed document is supposed to be... Alex From: Kevin Lundy [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Friday, March 12, 2010 12:35 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: Re: VIPER: NO Disclaimers in email (caused by email digital certificates) Yes, all certificate vendors would present this problem to ANY disclaimer system. It's not limited to Viper. If you think about what a digital signature is doing - alerting to any change to a message, this makes sense. A disclaimer is a change. So if Viper were to add a disclaimer, the recipient would get a signature warning. So the fact that Viper is not adding it is a working in your favor. Honestly, I am surprised that SB told you they never heard of anyone using signatures. I suspect that was really just the technicial you were dealing with. I wouldn't be surprised if it were actually a feature they included (but the technician didn't know about). Options: 1) tell people to use the cert only when needed (e.g. contract agreement, etc) 2) limit the certs to the small population that needs them - have them put the disclaimer in their normal signature file 3) integrate the certs into AD and use the transport rule as Michael suggested Kevin On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 11:34 AM, Jeff S. Gottlieb <[email protected]> wrote: Kevin, I reworded and reposted this thread (minutes ago) hoping to stimulate more discussion.and before knowing you replied. Thank you. Interesting enough Sunbelt support, "never saw anyone using a email digital certificate".thus could not offer a remedy. We do not represent the defense department so we can live without certificates, but since we are using, and with issues *maybe* someone has a quick remedy. Let's assume we were a VERY small minority and needed certificates.is this an issue with COMODO or all certificates in Viper? Based on your logic (below) all certificates would present Viper users with this issue. -J From: Kevin Lundy [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Friday, March 12, 2010 7:46 AM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: Re: No Disclaimers in VIPER (caused by use of email digital certificates) I have no idea of that is a Viper feature or not, but I believe that is the way you would want it to operate isn't it? Otherwise, the insertion of the disclaimer would be modifying the email message, which would cause the signature to indicate tampering. On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 3:13 AM, Jeff S. Gottlieb <[email protected]> wrote: We just closed a case with Sunbelt.disclaimers appeared in all email accounts except those using digital certificates. Was wondering if anyone else experienced the same. - Jeff Exchange 2003 Outlook 2007 Digital Security COMODO ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/> ~
