A Windows XP help forum. PCbanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » PCbanter forum » Windows 10 » Windows 10 Help Forum
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Word look alike?



 
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #91  
Old September 19th 20, 06:53 PM posted to alt.comp.os.windows-10
Carlos E.R.[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,356
Default Word look alike?

On 19/09/2020 19.24, nospam wrote:
In article , Carlos E.R.
wrote:


attachments are sometimes passworded, however.


Yes, my bank does that with automated emails (machine generated).


how does your bank communicate the password to you if it's a machine
generated email?


It has been agreed first. I think there is a place on the web page where
I can change it.

i hope the password is not sent via email, although it would not
surprise me at all.


Me neither, but no :-D


However, the staff don't know how to do it when I email with them.


find a new bank, one which takes security seriously.


They are all the same.

The computer staff do understand it, which is how they do the excerpt
PDFs they send periodically. But the normal staff don't.

The bosses should order the computer staff to create a messaging
platform on the web page, which is how I have been told some foreign
banks do it.



--
Cheers, Carlos.
Ads
  #92  
Old September 19th 20, 07:00 PM posted to alt.comp.os.windows-10
VanguardLH[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10,881
Default Word look alike?

"Carlos E.R." wrote:

On 19/09/2020 03.34, VanguardLH wrote:
"Carlos E.R." wrote:

In this case, on her old laptop Word would not do the conversion to
PDF, and being confined I could not have a look. So she mailed me the
.docx, and I did the conversion to PDF using LO in Linux. Nobody
noticed.


No need to have Word, or any other app, incorporate PDF conversion to
output a PDF file. Use any PDF printer emulator you want. ANY app that
has a Print function can output to a .pdf file.


I know that, but as we were all confined to our homes I could not go
there not she here, for me to add whatever was necessary or to explain
the procedure.


She cannot install software herself?

There is very little to do when installing a virtual printer. Just run
the .exe file, and it's installed. Some have lots of configuration
options, but she could just start with the defaults and learn later how
to tweak the virtual printer's configuration. However, probably the
first setting that I would change is the default save location.

The Print dialog in whatever program has a print function should let the
user select which printer to use although it might pre-select a default
choice or a prior choice. Pretty easy to select a printer in the Print
dialog.

I currently use Bullzip PDF Printer, but I've used PDFCreator in the
past. There are lots of PDF printer emulators aka virtual printer
software. Some are listed at:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...are#Creators_3
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...inter_software


Good to know.

The new laptop came with a print to PDF printer already defined.

I did not try to see what happens to an URL in such a conversion: is it
clickable in the PDF?


Putting clickable strings (e.g., URLs) into PDFs requires a PDF editor,
not a PDF viewer and not a PDF converter. They "print" what they see.
They do not interpret whatever code or scripting is employed within the
document. Every PDF viewer that I've used lets me copy a string from
the PDF document, so she can copy the URL string and paste it into the
address bar of a web browser.

Virtual printers do not support every feature of a PDF, nor do PDF
converters, like those integrated into office suites. They are not
clones of Adobe Acrobat. For example, it is possible with a PDF editor
to embed directives in a PDF document that will automatically run a
command, launch a URL when the document is opened, or open another PDF
file. This are considered highly dangerous. A malicious PDF that ran a
command on just loading the PDF (in a viewer that supported the option
or had it enabled) means it could, say, format your drive, reconfigure
and disable your network connections, ransom your files, and so on. A
PDF that automatically launched a URL could take you to a malicious
site. A PDF that launched another PDF where that other PDF launched
another PDF, and so on, could end up opening hundreds of PDF files
making use of your computer impossible during all those loads (and
perhaps just 2 of them could keep opening each others to get stuck in a
loop). Regardless of the defaults for a PDF viewer, if it supports
auto-run of commands, auto-launch of URLs, or auto-launch of PDFs just
on loading a PDF then you should disable those, um, features. They are
hazardous. Virtual printers don't have all the features of Adobe
Acrobat, and I've not run across a virtual printer that will embed
auto-run, auto-load, or auto-open commands into the output PDF,
especially since those are something the PDF author must code into their
PDF document.

The URL in your document (to which you would "print" to a PDF file) is
just a text string. It is not some active object to get replicated in
the output file. It's just a string. So, that's how it appears in the
"printed" output, too. If you want to "print" an intact HTML web page
then you need to instead Save the HTML page, so the HTML tags will be in
place and intrepeted as such to make URL strings into A tags that are
clickable in the HTML page you saved. Virtual printers behave like
printers. When did you ever print to paper with the ability to click on
a URL string on that paper?

The virtual printer "prints" what it sees. It does not interpret the
HTML code, or whatever code or script a document might be written in, to
parse out URL strings to make them clickable inside the PDF file. If
the document shows the URL string then the URL string will be available
in the output PDF file, and where you could copy the string to paste
into the address bar of a web client. If, instead, the HTML document
shows the comment field of an A tag, as in:

A href="http://host.domain.tld/path&args" ... comment /A

and the comment field has nothing of the URL string but is some
description, like "This is my site", then the virtual printer only sees
the comment which may not be a URL string (for you to copy and paste
elsewhere).

PDF virtual printers are not PDF editors. They are a quick method to
get the visible document outputted into a .pdf file. As an example, in
a web browser, I do a Google search on something. A whole bunch of
results are listed. All of them have a description (i.e., they show a
comment) as their clickable link. They do NOT show the URL to the
target site. There are lots of HTML clickable elements in the original
HTML page, but they are merely shown as text in the PDF output file.
They were shown as text (or image) in the original documents, so that's
how they are presented in the conversion to a PDF file. There is no
HTML code to PDF code translation. That's far beyond the intent of
virtual printers. They are to print, not generate a scripted document.

If she is going to insert a URL string into a Word document (not by
copying just a string, but by using Insert - Hyperlink to facilitate
employing Word-specific code to delineate a clickable URL string), why
wouldn't she supply the Word document instead of *printing* it to a PDF
file where just the URL *string* would get displayed? If the original
document where an .html file using A href={url]comment/a where just
the comment field would get displayed, she could make the comment field
have the same string as the href's value (URL string) if it was her HTML
file to edit. If it is someone else's HTML file (that she doesn't want
to save and edit), she could send the URL to the location of that web
document; i.e., point someone to where is the web page. She could Save
the web page, and send that as an attachment in an e-mail (*).

(*) Be careful when saving a web page viewed within a web browser.
Saving as "Complete" means saving the main page but creating a
folder with seperate files for all the resources within the page,
like images, CSS files, and other resources the main page
references. You end up with main.html page and a folder of
ancilliary files, so you have to zip up the file and folder and
send that to ensure the recipient gets all the files comprising
the web page. You could Save as HTML-only, but that just outputs
the main page and does not include all the resources it
references. The recipient of the main page only won't see images
or other resources, so the web document may be incomplete or not
even usable.

There is the .mhtml format which is Microsoft's archive HTML save
format. It does as above where the main.html page is outputted along
with a folder containing the ancilliary files, but rolls them into an
archive file, much like the zipping that I mention above. Only IE and
Edge natively support output to and reading from .mhtml archive files.
Well, it's a Microsoft proprietary format. There may be extensions to
add MHTML support, but I've not bothered with those for a long time. As
I recall, there was an experimental flag in Chrome that added a Save
option to MHTML; however, experimental features come and go, and, I
think, the MHTML experiment got killed.

The Save Page WE extension (Firefox and Chrome) does the same thing as
saving a web page into a unified output file.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/fir.../save-page-we/
https://chrome.google.com/webstore/d...jamoafof?hl=en

That creates a single .html output file. I've not used it.

If the web page is simple (usually meaning you wrote it, but then why
did you use HTML?) then Save as Text is often sufficient. No clickable
URL strings, but they can be copied and pasted. For most web pages you
find on the Web, they contain loads of crap that you don't want to save.
I use the Print Edit WE extension to select just what part(s) of a web
page that I want to save, and all the other crap is excluded in the
output file (whether that be to a real printer or virtual printer saving
into a .pdf file).
  #93  
Old September 19th 20, 07:12 PM posted to alt.comp.os.windows-10
VanguardLH[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10,881
Default Word look alike?

"Carlos E.R." wrote:

I've never seen encrypted fax. :-o


And why it is rarely used except for interdepartmental secure
transmission.

https://www.tccsecure.com/Products/v...pf-detail.aspx

Notice they don't provide a "Buy" link. Instead they provide a "Request
a Quote" link, because this stuff is priced outside the consumer market.
That's why there are online faxing services that offer encrypted
transmission via faxing or conversion to a passworded and encrypted PDF
or TIFF file for e-mail delivery.

Most e-mail users have never heard of encrypting their e-mails, either.
They just use what their e-mail client provides, by default. Not until
they decide it might be nice to digitally sign their e-mails which
requries an e-mail certificate might they then discover e-mails (from
others using their public half of their cert key) can be encrypted. How
many e-mails have you gotten that were digitally signed? Even for those
that were, were they signed with certs that merely had the e-mail
address of the sender? Free e-mail certs usually only include the
e-mail address of the cert holder (because that's how the CA validates
delivery of the cert), but that's not much to identify a sender. To get
more info into the cert means having to buy one to add more data fields
into the cert.
  #94  
Old September 19th 20, 07:59 PM posted to alt.comp.os.windows-10
Frank Slootweg
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,226
Default Word look alike?

Chris wrote:
Carlos E.R. wrote:
On 18/09/2020 18.27, VanguardLH wrote:
Chris wrote:

Many employers don't allow employees to choose where to store files.

Did her school provide her with VPN access to their network?


No. They provide a web page with a login and tools, and they provide
Gmail for groups.


Then they could well be breaking GDPR rules. No "personal information"
should be stored on, nor sent via, unsecured mechanisms - personal info
includes students' details. Email is not a secure mechanism by any stretch
of the imagination.


In these times, the GDPR rules are broken left, right and center. At
least in our country (The Netherlands) the relevant authorities only
have time to handle the most severe infringements.

IME, things like work from home, remote education, etc., etc., would
not be possible without 'infringements'. IMO the impact of the Corona
virus overrules the importance of the GDPR.

Case in point: The very people who work from home to do contact
tracing have to violate the GDPR in order to do their work. The IT
infrastucture has to be upscaled by order of magnitude and then security
and privacy suffer in favor of speed.
  #95  
Old September 19th 20, 08:15 PM posted to alt.comp.os.windows-10
Frank Slootweg
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,226
Default Word look alike?

Carlos E.R. wrote:
On 19/09/2020 19.24, nospam wrote:
In article , Carlos E.R.
wrote:

attachments are sometimes passworded, however.

Yes, my bank does that with automated emails (machine generated).


how does your bank communicate the password to you if it's a machine
generated email?


It has been agreed first. I think there is a place on the web page where
I can change it.

i hope the password is not sent via email, although it would not
surprise me at all.


Me neither, but no :-D

However, the staff don't know how to do it when I email with them.


find a new bank, one which takes security seriously.


They are all the same.

The computer staff do understand it, which is how they do the excerpt
PDFs they send periodically. But the normal staff don't.

The bosses should order the computer staff to create a messaging
platform on the web page, which is how I have been told some foreign
banks do it.


Our banks have messaging integrated into their Internet banking
system. So we have to log in (with a key generating device) to read
their messages.

One of them has two-way messaging, the other just one-way (bank to
customer).

One of them notifies (by e-mail or/and SMS) that their is a message on
the Internet banking platform.

So these platforms are quite secure/private.

OTOH, solicitors (notaries?), real estate agents, etc. are quite happy
to send/receive all kinds of very personal information by normal e-mail.
Things would come to a halt if they didn't.
  #96  
Old September 19th 20, 10:27 PM posted to alt.comp.os.windows-10
Chris
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 832
Default Word look alike?

Frank Slootweg wrote:
Chris wrote:
Carlos E.R. wrote:
On 18/09/2020 18.27, VanguardLH wrote:
Chris wrote:

Many employers don't allow employees to choose where to store files.

Did her school provide her with VPN access to their network?

No. They provide a web page with a login and tools, and they provide
Gmail for groups.


Then they could well be breaking GDPR rules. No "personal information"
should be stored on, nor sent via, unsecured mechanisms - personal info
includes students' details. Email is not a secure mechanism by any stretch
of the imagination.


In these times, the GDPR rules are broken left, right and center. At
least in our country (The Netherlands) the relevant authorities only
have time to handle the most severe infringements.

IME, things like work from home, remote education, etc., etc., would
not be possible without 'infringements'. IMO the impact of the Corona
virus overrules the importance of the GDPR.


Yep.

Case in point: The very people who work from home to do contact
tracing have to violate the GDPR in order to do their work. The IT
infrastucture has to be upscaled by order of magnitude and then security
and privacy suffer in favor of speed.


Disagree. It's not that difficult, but does require planning and desire to
do it properly. We do it he
1. every laptop is encrypted by default
2. all files are stored in a secure cloud
3. rules stipulate nothing personal should be sent via email - only shared
via the cloud
4. a VPN is available for all staff working remotely

Works well mostly.



  #97  
Old September 20th 20, 09:16 AM posted to alt.comp.os.windows-10
Chris
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 832
Default Word look alike?

Frank Slootweg wrote:
Chris wrote:
Carlos E.R. wrote:
On 18/09/2020 18.27, VanguardLH wrote:
Chris wrote:

Many employers don't allow employees to choose where to store files.

Did her school provide her with VPN access to their network?

No. They provide a web page with a login and tools, and they provide
Gmail for groups.


Then they could well be breaking GDPR rules. No "personal information"
should be stored on, nor sent via, unsecured mechanisms - personal info
includes students' details. Email is not a secure mechanism by any stretch
of the imagination.


In these times, the GDPR rules are broken left, right and center. At
least in our country (The Netherlands) the relevant authorities only
have time to handle the most severe infringements.

IME, things like work from home, remote education, etc., etc., would
not be possible without 'infringements'. IMO the impact of the Corona
virus overrules the importance of the GDPR.


Yep.

Case in point: The very people who work from home to do contact
tracing have to violate the GDPR in order to do their work. The IT
infrastucture has to be upscaled by order of magnitude and then security
and privacy suffer in favor of speed.


Disagree. It's not that difficult, but does require planning and desire to
do it properly. We do it he
1. every laptop is encrypted by default
2. all files are stored in a secure cloud
3. rules stipulate nothing personal should be sent via email - only shared
via the cloud
4. a VPN is available for all staff working remotely

Works well mostly.



  #98  
Old September 20th 20, 11:58 AM posted to alt.comp.os.windows-10
Carlos E.R.[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,356
Default Word look alike?

On 19/09/2020 20.00, VanguardLH wrote:
"Carlos E.R." wrote:

On 19/09/2020 03.34, VanguardLH wrote:
"Carlos E.R." wrote:

In this case, on her old laptop Word would not do the conversion to
PDF, and being confined I could not have a look. So she mailed me the
.docx, and I did the conversion to PDF using LO in Linux. Nobody
noticed.

No need to have Word, or any other app, incorporate PDF conversion to
output a PDF file. Use any PDF printer emulator you want. ANY app that
has a Print function can output to a .pdf file.


I know that, but as we were all confined to our homes I could not go
there not she here, for me to add whatever was necessary or to explain
the procedure.


She cannot install software herself?


You know that there are people that are the full reverse of a computer
geek. You try to explain something and they go in denial mode, "I don't
understand anything", with even the most simple of computer tasks.


There is very little to do when installing a virtual printer. Just run
the .exe file, and it's installed. Some have lots of configuration
options, but she could just start with the defaults and learn later how
to tweak the virtual printer's configuration. However, probably the
first setting that I would change is the default save location.


I know. But impossible.


I currently use Bullzip PDF Printer, but I've used PDFCreator in the
past. There are lots of PDF printer emulators aka virtual printer
software. Some are listed at:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...are#Creators_3
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...inter_software


Good to know.

The new laptop came with a print to PDF printer already defined.

I did not try to see what happens to an URL in such a conversion: is it
clickable in the PDF?


Putting clickable strings (e.g., URLs) into PDFs requires a PDF editor,
not a PDF viewer and not a PDF converter. They "print" what they see.


That's what I thought.

They do not interpret whatever code or scripting is employed within the
document. Every PDF viewer that I've used lets me copy a string from
the PDF document, so she can copy the URL string and paste it into the
address bar of a web browser.


Well, I know for certain that the LO integrated converter to PDF does
interpret links and creates a table of contents.

Then the print to PDF function would not work for her, because the
recipients of the PDFs expect links to work directly.


Virtual printers do not support every feature of a PDF, nor do PDF
converters, like those integrated into office suites. They are not
clones of Adobe Acrobat. For example, it is possible with a PDF editor
to embed directives in a PDF document that will automatically run a
command, launch a URL when the document is opened, or open another PDF
file. This are considered highly dangerous. A malicious PDF that ran a
command on just loading the PDF (in a viewer that supported the option
or had it enabled) means it could, say, format your drive, reconfigure
and disable your network connections, ransom your files, and so on. A
PDF that automatically launched a URL could take you to a malicious
site. A PDF that launched another PDF where that other PDF launched
another PDF, and so on, could end up opening hundreds of PDF files
making use of your computer impossible during all those loads (and
perhaps just 2 of them could keep opening each others to get stuck in a
loop). Regardless of the defaults for a PDF viewer, if it supports
auto-run of commands, auto-launch of URLs, or auto-launch of PDFs just
on loading a PDF then you should disable those, um, features. They are
hazardous. Virtual printers don't have all the features of Adobe
Acrobat, and I've not run across a virtual printer that will embed
auto-run, auto-load, or auto-open commands into the output PDF,
especially since those are something the PDF author must code into their
PDF document.


Yes, I know.


The URL in your document (to which you would "print" to a PDF file) is
just a text string. It is not some active object to get replicated in
the output file. It's just a string. So, that's how it appears in the
"printed" output, too. If you want to "print" an intact HTML web page
then you need to instead Save the HTML page, so the HTML tags will be in
place and intrepeted as such to make URL strings into A tags that are
clickable in the HTML page you saved. Virtual printers behave like
printers. When did you ever print to paper with the ability to click on
a URL string on that paper?

The virtual printer "prints" what it sees. It does not interpret the
HTML code, or whatever code or script a document might be written in, to
parse out URL strings to make them clickable inside the PDF file. If
the document shows the URL string then the URL string will be available
in the output PDF file, and where you could copy the string to paste
into the address bar of a web client. If, instead, the HTML document
shows the comment field of an A tag, as in:

A href="http://host.domain.tld/path&args" ... comment /A

and the comment field has nothing of the URL string but is some
description, like "This is my site", then the virtual printer only sees
the comment which may not be a URL string (for you to copy and paste
elsewhere).


It is not that complicated with LO. When I enter and URL that seems an
URL, say

http://somthing.org

LO automatically shows it in blue and says it is a link; and when it
converts the page to PDF it keeps it as a link. I assume Word does the
samething


PDF virtual printers are not PDF editors. They are a quick method to
get the visible document outputted into a .pdf file. As an example, in
a web browser, I do a Google search on something. A whole bunch of
results are listed. All of them have a description (i.e., they show a
comment) as their clickable link. They do NOT show the URL to the
target site. There are lots of HTML clickable elements in the original
HTML page, but they are merely shown as text in the PDF output file.
They were shown as text (or image) in the original documents, so that's
how they are presented in the conversion to a PDF file. There is no
HTML code to PDF code translation. That's far beyond the intent of
virtual printers. They are to print, not generate a scripted document.

If she is going to insert a URL string into a Word document (not by
copying just a string, but by using Insert - Hyperlink to facilitate
employing Word-specific code to delineate a clickable URL string), why
wouldn't she supply the Word document instead of *printing* it to a PDF
file where just the URL *string* would get displayed?


Because some of the recipients (parents or kids) will use a tablet, for
instance. And because it is not wanted that the recipients can edit the
documents.

If the original
document where an .html file using A href={url]comment/a where just
the comment field would get displayed, she could make the comment field
have the same string as the href's value (URL string) if it was her HTML
file to edit. If it is someone else's HTML file (that she doesn't want
to save and edit), she could send the URL to the location of that web
document; i.e., point someone to where is the web page. She could Save
the web page, and send that as an attachment in an e-mail (*).

(*) Be careful when saving a web page viewed within a web browser.
Saving as "Complete" means saving the main page but creating a
folder with seperate files for all the resources within the page,
like images, CSS files, and other resources the main page
references. You end up with main.html page and a folder of
ancilliary files, so you have to zip up the file and folder and
send that to ensure the recipient gets all the files comprising
the web page. You could Save as HTML-only, but that just outputs
the main page and does not include all the resources it
references. The recipient of the main page only won't see images
or other resources, so the web document may be incomplete or not
even usable.

There is the .mhtml format which is Microsoft's archive HTML save
format. It does as above where the main.html page is outputted along
with a folder containing the ancilliary files, but rolls them into an
archive file, much like the zipping that I mention above. Only IE and
Edge natively support output to and reading from .mhtml archive files.
Well, it's a Microsoft proprietary format. There may be extensions to
add MHTML support, but I've not bothered with those for a long time. As
I recall, there was an experimental flag in Chrome that added a Save
option to MHTML; however, experimental features come and go, and, I
think, the MHTML experiment got killed.

The Save Page WE extension (Firefox and Chrome) does the same thing as
saving a web page into a unified output file.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/fir.../save-page-we/
https://chrome.google.com/webstore/d...jamoafof?hl=en

That creates a single .html output file. I've not used it.

If the web page is simple (usually meaning you wrote it, but then why
did you use HTML?) then Save as Text is often sufficient. No clickable
URL strings, but they can be copied and pasted. For most web pages you
find on the Web, they contain loads of crap that you don't want to save.
I use the Print Edit WE extension to select just what part(s) of a web
page that I want to save, and all the other crap is excluded in the
output file (whether that be to a real printer or virtual printer saving
into a .pdf file).



--
Cheers, Carlos.
  #99  
Old September 20th 20, 12:01 PM posted to alt.comp.os.windows-10
Carlos E.R.[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,356
Default Word look alike?

On 19/09/2020 21.15, Frank Slootweg wrote:
Carlos E.R. wrote:
On 19/09/2020 19.24, nospam wrote:
In article , Carlos E.R.
wrote:




The bosses should order the computer staff to create a messaging
platform on the web page, which is how I have been told some foreign
banks do it.


Our banks have messaging integrated into their Internet banking
system. So we have to log in (with a key generating device) to read
their messages.

One of them has two-way messaging, the other just one-way (bank to
customer).


Yes, one way is indeed normal here. Two way I have not seen, except as
an instant chat; not with the person I normally talk, but with some
clerk at the central office whose job is "chat" with clients.


One of them notifies (by e-mail or/and SMS) that their is a message on
the Internet banking platform.


Yes.


So these platforms are quite secure/private.

OTOH, solicitors (notaries?), real estate agents, etc. are quite happy
to send/receive all kinds of very personal information by normal e-mail.
Things would come to a halt if they didn't.


Absolutely :-(


--
Cheers, Carlos.
  #100  
Old September 20th 20, 12:03 PM posted to alt.comp.os.windows-10
Carlos E.R.[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,356
Default Word look alike?

On 19/09/2020 20.12, VanguardLH wrote:
"Carlos E.R." wrote:

I've never seen encrypted fax. :-o


And why it is rarely used except for interdepartmental secure
transmission.

https://www.tccsecure.com/Products/v...pf-detail.aspx

Notice they don't provide a "Buy" link. Instead they provide a "Request
a Quote" link, because this stuff is priced outside the consumer market.
That's why there are online faxing services that offer encrypted
transmission via faxing or conversion to a passworded and encrypted PDF
or TIFF file for e-mail delivery.

Most e-mail users have never heard of encrypting their e-mails, either.
They just use what their e-mail client provides, by default. Not until
they decide it might be nice to digitally sign their e-mails which
requries an e-mail certificate might they then discover e-mails (from
others using their public half of their cert key) can be encrypted. How
many e-mails have you gotten that were digitally signed?


I can count them with my hands.

Even for those
that were, were they signed with certs that merely had the e-mail
address of the sender? Free e-mail certs usually only include the
e-mail address of the cert holder (because that's how the CA validates
delivery of the cert), but that's not much to identify a sender. To get
more info into the cert means having to buy one to add more data fields
into the cert.



--
Cheers, Carlos.
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off






All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:29 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2023, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2023 PCbanter.
The comments are property of their posters.