Thanks Bob,
Dennis' message appears invalid to me (Communicator) for the same reason you
give. And
yours is invalid because it's issued by Novell, which I don't trust (yet?).
Yes, I find it amusing that there are complaints about perfectly valid S/MIME
messages
on this list. You would think this would be one of the few places that you
could send
signed messages without worrying about confusing the person at the other end.
Terry
BJUENEMAN(_at_)novell(_dot_)com wrote:
And your signed message causes GroupWise to say, effectively, that
"dennis(_dot_)glatting(_at_)plaintalk(_dot_)bellevue(_dot_)wa(_dot_)us" is
not the same person
as the "dennis(_dot_)glatting(_at_)software-munitions(_dot_)com" that was
issued a VeriSign
certificate.
But did Communicator complain because you don't haven't added the
Novell root certificate to your cache of trusted roots, or because your
incoming mail processor modified the contents somehow, or was
there some other kind of problem?
And BTW, Has anyone notied the irony of having these kinds of problem
on this list? Maybe we should all start eating our own dog food, and
actually use the stuff we're building, on this list in particular?
This is signed with a 1024 bit key, using the same root certificate, which
however uses a 2048 bit key.
Bob
Dennis Glatting
<dennis(_dot_)glatting(_at_)plaintalk(_dot_)bellevue(_dot_)wa(_dot_)us>
10/27/99 03:34PM >>>
BJUENEMAN(_at_)novell(_dot_)com wrote:
This message is signed with a 2048 bit key. So far, I haven't encountered
anyone
who hasn't been able to validate the signature with that length key.
Encryption
could conceivably be a different issue, depending on whether or not a
recipient
is constrained by export and/or import policy.
Funny you should mention that. When I clicked to read your message my
Netscape 4.61 Communicator displays an icon stating "Invalid
Signature".
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature