-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 I apologize if this is a hopelessly stupid question, but I don't really understand the relative merits of using PGP for email authentication & encryption versus using Microsoft's implementation of s/mime and digital signatures. I run a small windows network and would like to begin offering my users some way to authenticate (and if necessary encrypt) their email. Since we use Outlook pretty uniformly and Exchange Server, it would seem logical to use the built in capabilites these products have to provide security. Is there a reason not to do this and use a third party product ala PGP instead? I assume the answer has at least partly something to do with the MS tendency to avoid cross-platform compatibility by not implementing stuff completely in accord with standards (like they've done with ipsec), but I'd be interested in hearing from the experts. Thanks Fred
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGPfreeware 7.0.3 for non-commercial use <http://www.pgp.com> iQA/AwUBPJuSqLpfJ1+Q9TWkEQKAMACcCmUENdUR8OcJsegbp1ZRlNviiiwAn06V D/2TySJXUX0qOfFEQ4uFsmXo =pYUF -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
