|
Posted by S. Pidgorny on September 20, 2007, 6:59 am
If you were Registered and logged in, you could reply and use other advanced thread options
Outlook works as it should - it replies to the sender.
The gateway certificate is not an accepted standard. In fact, it's the
opposite: a work around S/MIME standard that somewhat defeats its purpose.
And you observe the consequences: if the email is not signed by the sender,
the signature won't verify - that is why the sender is tampered with. Alas,
all replies should go to the sender.
--
Svyatoslav Pidgorny, MS MVP - Security, MCSE
-= F1 is the key =-
* http://sl.mvps.org * http://msmvps.com/blogs/sp *
> Our head office has recently implemented a Gateway Cerificate for their
> email (Lotus Notes environment).
>
> All of the branch offices are using Exchange with personal certificates in
> Outlook.
>
> We receive email at the international branch offices from head office with
> the sender address format as follows:
>
> username.surname@headoffice.com on behalf of Username Surname
> [securemail@headoffice.com]
>
> Because of the format, if you press reply, the email is addressed to
> securemail@kathrein.de, and does not reach the recipient. To reply to an
> email from head office, the sender would need to type in the address in
> the
> following format:
>
>
> To the best of my knowledge, Outlook Address Books do not accept email
> addresses in this format. This is hampering communication and is causing
> all
> kinds of issues.
>
> How can I get this system to work seamlessly with Exchange/Outlook and the
> address books?
> Is this Gateway Certificate an acceptable standard? Is the best solution
> to
> remove the Gateway Certificate?
>
| 
XML site map