I am currently using the Infragistics control suite, and they mention that they provide both "signed" and "unsigned" assemblies.
Looking at their topic page, they explain the following differences between "signed" and "unsigned" assemblies:
The following is a list of the usage scenarios and limitations for the signed assemblies:
- If you are achieving Microsoft® Windows® Vista™ Certification, you will need to use signed assemblies.
- If you are deploying a XAML Browser Application (XBAP), you should use the signed assemblies.
- If you are using the signed assemblies and you deploy them to an environment that cannot connect to the Internet, when you run the application for the first time within the current Windows session, it will take a long time to start (from a few seconds to possibly two or more minutes, depending on the number of signed assemblies being loaded). This is due to the fact that when the operating system loads each signed assembly, it attempts to verify that the certificate with which the assembly was signed has not been revoked. When there is no internet connection, this attempt is still made and does not return until the attempt has timed out.
It is also mentioned that the "unsigned assemblies" get into the GAC. And after checking details on both versions, I have been able to confirm that both versions are strongly named (strong-name signing being the only kind of .NET assembly signing that I know of).
In conclusion, I believe that the "assembly signing" that they are talking about is not strong name signing. The question is, what kind of signing would that be?
Its talking about assemblies that have been digitally signed using a certificate, usually from a trusted authority, like versign.
You can do this using signtool
Look at, for example, this SO post: creating a key and signing executable with signtool