If it was valid, do you really think people would be talking about it being a problem here? Please use your head a little.
Also, two entitely different meanings of the word signing being used here. Signing as in signing a bill vs. Cryptographic signing. Adobe has some weird “halfway” thing that’s more than painting the sig on the image, but isn’t gpg.
Hooray for proprietary shit becoming accepted for legal use! Yuck.
When I worked with a lot of legal documents, we just used DocuSign mostly. Have you attempted that on Linux? Not sure what it’s like these days, also curious if it’s because it’s a web application if it works the same.
PDFs have embedded digital signatures, so the signing tool needs to support the proprietary format.
What if i just sign the entire pdf file with GPG? That is not valid?
If it was valid, do you really think people would be talking about it being a problem here? Please use your head a little.
Also, two entitely different meanings of the word signing being used here. Signing as in signing a bill vs. Cryptographic signing. Adobe has some weird “halfway” thing that’s more than painting the sig on the image, but isn’t gpg.
Hooray for proprietary shit becoming accepted for legal use! Yuck.
When I worked with a lot of legal documents, we just used DocuSign mostly. Have you attempted that on Linux? Not sure what it’s like these days, also curious if it’s because it’s a web application if it works the same.
Imagine real signed file being denied and one with painted signature accepted
Well, it uses existing PKI/CAs (ie, same as your browser), which I’m not sure GPG supports? I might be wrong.
You could certainly use GPG, but it’s not what others will be looking for. Depends on your use case, I guess.