Most companies tend to prefer the B2C model, where they send you an email telling you that they have a secured email for you at their website. This way they can maintain full control over those messages, including revoking it. Just look at banks and healthcare for examples.
On 12/7/07, new_guy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > viq-2 wrote: > > > > <Disclaimer> > > Q: Why bother signing messages at all? > > A: Because I feel like it. > > > > Yes, I know inline signing is frowned upon, and MIME won't make it do > > the list, but that's besides the point as well. > > </Disclaimer> > > > > So, having gotten that out of the way, do you have any opinions on > > either? The architecture behind it, the technology being used, social > > implications, and so on. Which one would you choose, and why? Who would > > you get your keys signed by? > > > > I just thought I'd ask, seeing as there seem to be at least a few people > > with knowledge backing up opinions on similiar subjects. > > -- > > viq > > > > > > > > S/MIME is much more complex (IMO), but you'll find that more MTA's support > it. One can also get free Thawte certs for signing/encrypting (but I think > they are mostly intended for sigs as they expire yearly). Lots of > organization set-up their own CAs (colleges do this often) downside to this > is that the certs/sigs are only recognized internally so outside the > institution the sigs are useless... that's where something like the Thawte > certs come into play. But, then you have the Web of Trust (WOT) and need to > find WOT notaries to confirm your ID so that you can get so many points... > enough to actually attach a name to the email, national ID, etc. Is your > head spinning yet? S/MIME *is* complex! > > Personally, I like PGP much better as it's much simpler (IMO). It's been > around awhile (1991) as has been thoroughly tested. Gnupg has come a long > way too... works just as well on Windows as it does on OpenBSD and Linux > now. More problems with MTA's. Initial setup can be awkward for > non-technical users. Backup the private keys, gen revoke certs, etc. > > It seems that most companies use PGP to sign stuff, while individuals may be > more inclined to use S/MIME for MTA reasons. I use both, but prefer PGP for > the simplicity. > > Just my 2 cents, > Brad > > -- > View this message in context: > http://www.nabble.com/-OT--Signing-messages%3A-S-MIME-vs-OpenPGP---tf4965442.html#a14225222 > Sent from the openbsd user - misc mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > > -- http://www.glumbert.com/media/shift http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tGvHNNOLnCk "This officer's men seem to follow him merely out of idle curiosity." -- Sandhurst officer cadet evaluation. "Securing an environment of Windows platforms from abuse - external or internal - is akin to trying to install sprinklers in a fireworks factory where smoking on the job is permitted." -- Gene Spafford
