lucky it does or many users would not know they can save the "attached"
certificate to allow encrypted email to that person.

--
Bill R MVP
"Mark J. McGinty" wrote in message
...
[apologies for multi-posting, posting to the other NG was inadvertent]

As you may know, when you digitally sign an email to an Outlook user, the
signature crypto block in a signed email is sent as one part in MIME
multi-part format. I can also
see (using OE's distressingly more capable message source viewer) that the
content-disposition of the signature block is 'attachment'.

So I'm sure someone will say that it's 'correct behavior' for Outlook to
show the attachment (paperclip) icon on any signed message -- but let's
get
real he a digital sig isn't any more an attachment, in the conventional
sense, than is a TNEF block. There is no file the average user can
save-off
and utilize, and none of the Inspector-based UI typically associated with
actual
attachments is present.

I see nothing positive that this UI flaw offers, but the negative aspects
are quite clear: recipients are no longer able to easily identify which of
my emails include a regular attachment. I send attachments with maybe
1%-10% of my outbound emails; if I sign my email, 100% look like
something's
attached from the Explorer view -- 90% to 99% of them look that way
frivolously, meaninglessly and incorrectly.

It's been like this across so many versions, it must be design -- does
anyone know why this would be?

Thanks,
Mark McGinty