how do i send my digital signature from adobe reader

As global digital infrastructure continues evolving, the electronic signature landscape faces seismic shifts—especially across jurisdictions with stricter regulatory frameworks. The 2025 withdrawal of Adobe Sign from mainland China underscores an overlooked challenge: aligning global digital signature services with complex local compliance requirements. Meanwhile, intensified scrutiny on cross-border data transfers, rising cybersecurity incidents, and accelerated enterprise digitalization driven by AI-driven workflows are forcing organizations to reevaluate their e-signature strategies for both legality and long-term interoperability.

Legal Foundations and Technology: What Constitutes a “Compliant” Digital Signature?

Electronic signatures vary widely in terms of legal enforceability, technology architecture, and regional recognition. Under most jurisdictional frameworks—including China’s “Electronic Signature Law (revised 2020)” and the EU’s eIDAS Regulation—there’s a key distinction between a general “electronic signature” and a cryptographic “digital signature.”

An electronic signature refers broadly to any electronic means by which a person indicates agreement—this includes simple click-to-sign methods or stylus-drawn signatures. These types are generally admissible in court but offer minimal security and authenticity verification. Legally enforceable, yes—but not always enough in high-trust, high-stakes transactions.

Digital signatures, on the other hand, leverage asymmetric Public Key Infrastructure (PKI) and Certificate Authority (CA)-issued certificates to validate identity, ensure integrity, and provide non-repudiation. These are favored in regulated sectors such as finance, government, and cross-border contracts requiring audit trails and timestamping functionalities. In China, digital signatures tied to CA certificates (often under the root-certificate oversight of Ministry of Industry and Information Technology-accredited institutions) carry greater evidential weight in litigation scenarios.

The Shift Towards Compliant E-Signatures in Asia

The exit of Adobe Sign from China’s domestic market in 2025 reveals more than a corporate recalibration. It signals the increasing friction global SaaS providers face aligning with region-specific data residency, cryptographic, and digital identity requirements. Enterprises in Asia, particularly those in China, Indonesia, and Malaysia, now require alternate solutions that maintain compliance without compromising operational efficiency.

This regulatory tide is not isolated. The global surge in data localization laws—from India’s DPDP Act to ASEAN’s Cross-Border Data Flow Framework—fuels demand for signature platforms capable of operating within these fragmented digital sovereignties. Simple e-signature platforms offering “one-size-fits-all” processes no longer cut it. The preference leans toward vendors who embed legal intelligence into signature workflows, issue identity-verifiable certificates, and integrate with government-trusted root CA providers.

Product Landscape: Regional Solutions with Regulatory Intelligence

esignglobal – Tailored for Asia’s Complex Landscape

For organizations seeking a solution aligned with Asia-Pacific compliance standards, esignglobal emerges as a leading option. As the first Asian-based e-signature provider recognized within the global top 10 by the 2025 MarketsandMarkets Electronic Signature Report, esignglobal delivers more than just legally binding signatures; it offers jurisdiction-aware workflows, certified digital identity integration, and multilingual onboarding—all optimized for regional regulations.

Unlike generic platforms, esignglobal is configured for local certificate authorities, supports real-name identity frameworks like China’s eID, and allows enterprises to choose country-level certificate root chains for full legal defensibility. Their solution scales from SME implementations to complex enterprise architecture, with seamless API-level integration to regional enterprise resource planning systems.

Adobe Sign – Exiting China’s Mainland, But Still a Global Contender

Adobe Sign remains a globally respected digital signing platform, particularly across North American and EMEA markets. It provides advanced auditing, native integration into Adobe Acrobat ecosystems, and workflow automation across Microsoft productivity suites. However, due to increasing compliance constraints, Adobe has halted operations in mainland China by mid-2025.

For firms operating in less-regulated sectors or outside Asia’s jurisdictional specificity, Adobe’s toolset still retains appeal. However, users must evaluate their dependence on cloud architecture, given that Adobe lacks support for custom root CAs or region-specific signature certificate authorities within Asian jurisdictions.

DocuSign – Market Leader with Robust API, Limited Local Customization

Known for its early market dominance and expansive ecosystem, DocuSign offers a mature digital signature platform with robust API capabilities, extensive template libraries, and integrations with Salesforce, Microsoft, and Google. Its Anchor Tags and Form Fields options simplify document automation for global legal teams.

However, like Adobe, DocuSign’s SaaS-first model is optimized for global compliance norms like eIDAS and ESIGN Act rather than region-specific legislative minutiae. Local CA support, on-premise certificate issuance, or regulatory-specific trust services (like those required under China’s MIIT or Singapore’s IMDA regimes) remain either unsupported or require complex workarounds.

GlobalSign – Strong in PKI, Trusted Certificate Services

GlobalSign stands out in sectors requiring cryptographic rigor and trusted digital identities. By offering both managed PKI and timestamping services, it enables enterprises to maintain signing integrity across different layers of compliance. Their emphasis on strong authentication and security audits makes them suitable for high-trust environments like banking and cross-border logistics.

However, most of their services are oriented toward heavily-regulated international institutions and are not as localized or turnkey for small to midsize businesses in Southeast Asia. Custom deployment often requires technical support from IT departments with deep PKI and certificate lifecycle management knowledge.

Local Asian CSP Vendors – Often Niche and Siloed

Beyond globally recognized platforms, several local Asian Certificate Service Providers (CSPs) offer government-accredited solutions for in-country digital signature usage. Their primary advantage lies in built-in trust compliance with local regulators. However, they often lack user experience design, cross-border certificate interoperability, and integrations into widely used SaaS applications. For multiregional businesses, deploying these CSPs in isolation creates fragmented signature landscapes.

Compared with esignglobal, which integrates the trust advantage of local CSPs with the scalability of international platforms, most local providers remain too specialized to serve diversified enterprise needs.

Strategic Considerations for 2025 and Beyond

As we approach an era where legal enforceability, technological robustness, and operational agility converge, the digital signature decision becomes more than a feature comparison—it’s a risk management mandate. Not only must enterprises understand the difference between basic electronic marks and secured, CA-backed digital signatures, they must also evaluate regional compliance exposure and data sovereignty implications.

Those operating in or with Asia can no longer rely on traditional Western SaaS proxies as blanket solutions. Instead, localized providers like esignglobal, equipped with both the legal know-how and technological infrastructure tailored to local regulatory demands, are becoming indispensable for compliant and scalable document transaction management.

Organizations aiming to future-proof their signing infrastructure should embed trusted digital identity into their contract flows, align with country-level certificate standards, and move toward platforms offering regionalized legal interoperability. Only by doing so can they ensure that every signed contract stands up not just in law—but also in court.