Friday, May 3, 2002, 7:08:22 AM, Mandara scribbled: MR>>>> I still don't know why the two implementations should be MR>>>> incompatible, but they are. I can S/MIME sign using either one,
MD>> They weren't. This is a bug that has been reported. M> Hm, no, it refers to "normal" S/MIME implementation/standard and MS' M> a new "local" "standard" they "devised" to make things less usable, as M> usual, and by this to divide Internet "community" again. So this is M> not a bag, this is just a mess with standards and "standards". I can confirm this. I've tried reading a message originated from Outlook and TheBat! 1.60c. The implementations are mutually incompatible. So much so, that Outlook will not even recognize that the message from TB! was even signed. The behaviors are consistent with 1.53d, 1.60c, and 1.60h. This leaves the question, do we need to buckle under to MS to get S/MIME to work? If so, then I'll resume using PGP. Also, how old is this "new local standard"? Regards, Mike
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
