-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 'Lo Melissa,
On Fri, 13 Dec 2002 00:01:33 -0800 your time, you said: MR> This causes me to feel that a PGP signature is a more reliable digital MR> signature "standard" than is S/MIME (even though there may well be more MR> S/MIME users than there are PGP users). I don't believe that this is a fair assumption at all. OpenPGP users have to acquire specific software to be able to set up personal/commercial encryption. In doing so they engage in a learning process which for all intents and purposes is mostly invisible to others. Nonetheless, there is usually a fair learning curve involved, and mistakes are therefore made, but these mistakes usually aren't so visible as S/MIME because software that supports both PGP and S/MIME handle them differently. If The Bat! handled invalid PGP signatures in the same way as S/MIME then there would be many complaints about PGP as well. However, it doesn't mean that PGP is a better standard because people aren't able to immediately see an invalid signature...on the contrary in fact. New S/MIME certificate users generally don't need to download encryption specific software of course as Windows and S/MIME compliant software handle the signing and encrypting processes, but there is still a bit of a learning curve in understanding how to implement S/MIME certificates of course. And because of the way that S/MIME works/is handled in compliant software first time users are 'experimenting out in the open' so to speak as their mistakes are made visible to everyone. But the visibility of their mistakes doesn't mean that S/MIME is any less useful; the new users just haven't passed the S/MIME learning curve yet, and in many cases neither have the recipients of the certificates! As a preference I much prefer PGP to S/MIME as I enjoy the control it affords me by using it. However, S/MIME certificate users are abundant and so it is simply practical and even provident to be willing to use both if you can. I don't expect a non OpenPGP user to install some form of OpenPGP software so that they can communicate with me in privacy if they are already using S/MIME certificates... they have the advantage in many respects as they don't need to install anything but certificates to communicate with me using encryption. I may suggest that they try PGP, but in it is experience, especially of M$ email client users of course, that in the majority of cases they don't want to know. Until one becomes 'the standard', which I can't see happening, I think it is prudent to get to grips with both PGP and S/MIME and encourage others to do the same. Everyone is different and is everyone is going to have their personal preference, so being willing to deal with both will benefit everyone IMO. - -- Sl�n, Simon @ theycallmesimon.co.uk ****************************************** PGP Key: http://pgp.theycallmesimon.co.uk/ Faffing about with TB! v1.62 on W2K SP3 #1337. Lyra Id Sew Mrs Quo � -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Comment: Privacy is freedom. Protect your freedom with PGP! Comment: KeyID: 0x5C7E8966 Comment: Fingerprint: 851C F927 0296 FF1C 70A2 474F CB6E 6FFE 5C7E 8966 iQA/AwUBPfnZMMtub/5cfolmEQIXngCZAfugBTmdLjqXehmeZPWEemDXreUAoLyL HQsfEqpUMKOb0Zb9lcW/Hwxn =Eyz2 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
