I wouldn't think about wet ink signatures as a matter of security, per se. A contract is only valid as long as both parties stick to it. If there's a disagreem

I wouldn't think about wet ink signatures as a matter of security, per se. A contract is only valid as long as both parties stick to it. If there's a disagreement, it's up to a court to figure it out. That's where you get into risk mitigation. If you are comfortable with a court making a determination based on an exchange over email, then great. Courts see email as a valid form of proving one's identity. If you want to go further to reduce the risk that a court invalidates the contract, you can do things like having witnesses, wet ink, notaries, etc. Obviously for a contract with low material value, it's not a big deal. Signing a multi-million dollar contract? People start taking whatever measures they can to ensure things are air tight. A lot of tech people think risk mitigation is only verifying somebody's identity, but a court could decide a contract is invalid because the person signing it had no idea what was inside. So there's a lot more to it.