Hello Melissa Reese,
On or about Friday, December 13, 2002 at 12:24:41GMT -0800 (which
was 3:24 PM in the tropics where I live) Melissa Reese scrawled;
MR> As I mentioned, regardless of the number of users of one
MR> method or the other, I still feel that "OpenPGP" is a more
MR> *reliable standard* than S/MIME. Just look at how TB! handles
MR> S/MIME differently than does Microsoft. It doesn't even
MR> matter which is "correct" or which is not. The fact that by
MR> simply switching one's preference for implementation method
MR> can yield the opposite verification result ("valid" vs.
MR> "invalid") shows that there is *not* a "standard" at work
MR> here.
Regardless of which S-Mime implementation I use, Victor's (Comodo
Class 3) certificate shows as invalid. Simon's (Certum Level I)
only shows valid under the internal implementation. Under the
Micro$haft implementation it is 'invalid' (why should I be
surprised?)!
This is why I refuse to use any M$ mailer 'product' for my
systems. Standards should be standards (unless you are
MicroShaft)! This just doesn't work for me......
--
Warmest tropical wishes,
Spike
--------------------------------------------------
Flying in the stratosphere with The Bat! V1.61 on
Windows 2000 Vers. 5 0 Build 2195 Service Pack 3
________________________________________________
Current version is 1.62 | "Using TBUDL" information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
