Hello Marck, Dierk, Allie, Marck D Pearlstone wrote: > S/MIME tends to be simpler all round, but getting a certificate from a > recognised authority can be a bit of a chore and there is a 3.5k(ish) > overhead per signature.
Dierk Haasis wrote: > The difference between use of S/MIME and PGP is a conceptual one. > S/MIME relies on a centralised signer (certificate issuer), PGP relies > completely on what Phil Zimmermann called "Web of Trust" - public keys > have to be signed by other people. Allie C Martin wrote: > To add to what Marck and Dierk already mentioned. The main difference > between the two is verification of sender. Both are equally good at > confirming whether or not the message has been tampered with. Thank you to the three of you for your explanations, I think I understand the whole thing much better. I'll have to re-read your messages and thing about it. But, initially, it looks like I may go S/MIME. A bigger overhead is not an issue for my intended use and S/MIME as a whole looks simpler and "cleaner" to me (I was going to say "more elegant", but I don't want to offend anyone:). I'll think about it. Thanks again. -- Best regards, Miguel A. Urech (El Escorial - Spain) Using The Bat! v1.60c ________________________________________________________ Current Ver: 1.60c FAQ : http://faq.thebat.dutaint.com Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Archives : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
