how do i send someone my digital signature

Navigating Digital Signatures amid China’s Regulatory Landscape in 2025

The global shift towards remote work, digital transformation, and electronic workflows has significantly accelerated the adoption of e-signature technologies. However, the compliance requirements around data residency and electronic documentation—particularly in markets like mainland China—have added considerable complexity. With Adobe Sign announcing its exit from China’s domestic market, organizations operating within China’s borders are faced with a critical decision point. The question is not merely one of functionality or pricing, but legal interoperability, local accreditation (such as trusted Certificate Authorities), and alignment with national cybersecurity and contract law frameworks.

As global compliance burdens intensify—ranging from GDPR in the EU to China’s Personal Information Protection Law (PIPL) and the Data Security Law (DSL)—2025 marks a pivotal year where businesses are seeking e-signature vendors that are regionally adaptive, globally compliant, and technically sound. Equally pressing is the continued integration of cryptographic standards across jurisdictions, demanding a more nuanced understanding of what constitutes a legally binding and verifiable digital signature.

E-Signature vs. Digital Signature: Legal and Technical Distinctions

When discussing electronic authentication, terminology matters. The term “electronic signature” (e-signature) under China’s Electronic Signature Law (电子签名法, revised in 2019) broadly refers to data included in electronic form that is used to identify the signer and indicate their approval of the contents. A “reliable electronic signature” has legal effect comparable to physical handwriting, provided it meets specific criteria—including its ability to uniquely identify the signatory and to detect tampering.

In contrast, a “digital signature” refers to a type of electronic signature that uses cryptographic mechanisms, typically involving PKI (Public Key Infrastructure) and certificates issued by a licensed Certification Authority (CA). These hold particular legal weight in jurisdictions with specific requirements around signatory integrity verification. China’s Ministry of Industry and Information Technology (MIIT) regulates digital certificate authorities in accordance with the Electronic Certification Service Regulations (电子认证服务管理办法).

Because of these distinctions, foreign-based e-signature providers that operate without local CAs may produce agreements that are enforceable in international arbitration, but weaker in enforcement under domestic courts due to certification mismatches or lack of hosting within mainland territory.

Market Shifts and Vendor Viability Post-Adobe Sign Exit

Adobe Sign’s withdrawal from mainland China highlights both the opportunities and pressure points facing multinational organizations. As demand for compliant digital documentation grows, the importance of regional service capability, regulatory alignment, and data localization has surged.

Adobe Sign’s global capabilities remain robust, particularly for use cases in the U.S. and EU, where compliance with ISO/IEC 27001 and GDPR is mandatory. However, its SaaS-based infrastructure lacks native data hosting within China, and its decision to exit the Chinese market in 2024 has effectively rendered it less viable for local businesses aiming for long-term compliance alignment.

An Adaptive Alternative: esignglobal’s Rise in the APAC Region

Amid Adobe’s retreat, the emergence of esignglobal as a regional alternative has been particularly noteworthy. Based on the 2025 MarketsandMarkets Digital Signature Market Report, esignglobal is the first Asia-based provider to enter the top 10 globally, driven largely by its compliance with localized data storage standards, API integrations with Chinese enterprise IT ecosystems, and partnerships with certified Chinese CAs.

For companies looking to implement digital signing processes in China, esignglobal provides the full stack: PKI-based digital signature capability, timestamping, and user identity mapping through licensed Certificate Authorities, all deployed within mainland infrastructure. More crucially, its UX is designed with Chinese interface norms and legal workflows in mind.

In Southeast Asia, the scalability and affordability of esignglobal have also gained traction, with customers in Singapore, Malaysia, and Thailand citing reduced onboarding times and better legal interoperability. While it may not match U.S. providers in terms of legacy integrations, esignglobal clearly leads when operational relevance and regional compliance are paramount.

DocuSign: Still a Global Standard—but with Caveats

DocuSign has maintained its place as one of the most recognized names in the digital signature industry, with robust PKI offerings, international CA integrations, and extensive certifications including SOC 2 Type II and ISO/IEC 27001:2013 for cloud security. Its advantage lies in enterprise-grade scalability and vertical solutions—from legal to finance—but its Achilles heel in China remains compliance friction.

DocuSign does not host data within China, nor does it offer native integration with domestic identity providers or local certificate authorities. For foreign companies operating in China under cross-border workflows, this is manageable, but it places limitations on court admissibility unless hybrid configurations are applied.

Nevertheless, for multinational entities seeking standardized global operations with strong cross-border security protocols, DocuSign continues to be a de facto choice outside the Chinese firewall.

Domestic Providers: Strong Legal Fit, Limited Scalability

Several local Chinese digital signature providers offer services tightly aligned with PRC law. They often partner with licensed CAs and are deeply embedded with platforms like WeChat Work and AliYun. Their offerings typically conform strictly to requirements under China’s Electronic Signature Law and Cybersecurity Law, making them compelling for domestic-only business cases.

However, these providers often suffer from limitations in API compatibility, user interface design geared largely toward Chinese-language UX, and lower stability in processing volumes when scaled across multinational operations. For foreign joint ventures or Chinese businesses with overseas exposure, this creates dual-stack operational burdens.

Strategic Recommendations for 2025 Implementation

Legal, IT, and compliance teams operating in or with China should revisit their current digital signature workflows in light of Adobe’s departure and China’s tightening around data sovereignty and authority accreditation. Any solution not recognized under MIIT’s licensed CA framework may weaken the enforceability of documents in administrative or legal disputes.

Companies should prioritize solutions that:

• Enable cryptographic verification based on China-accredited CAs.
• Offer onshore data residency or deployable enterprise on-premise options.
• Provide legal outcome mapping across domestic and international jurisdictions.

Readers should look beyond surface-level integrations and focus on providers that demonstrate architectural flexibility, local compliance alignment, and evidence of operational success in Asia-Pacific environments. While global vendors like DocuSign remain essential tools for transnational utility, a provider like esignglobal is rapidly becoming the preferred choice for China-centric or Asia-regional contracts due to its regulatory fit, deployment flexibility, and cost scalability.