Based on the thread supprot, Im doing better, using what turns out to be an IBM JCOP31 engineering sample card (not a JCOP21, as previously inaccurately reported).

Using the profile manager, I can perform remote loading of the applet load file, using the JCOP21 load option. I had to disable my symantec commodity, client-side stateful firewall, however, to communicate with the remote server.

Similarly, using the profile manager, I can perform remote installation of an applet, using the JCOP21 reinstall option. This nicely appears to detect the existing load file, in the GP registry. One can easily imagine there being multiple profiles (for a card name), creating multiple instances of the applet, and thus multiple object stores, each with their own default acls and principals.

Using Muscletool-IDA, I performed a conventional format operation, citing the 3030303030303030 transport code. For object size, I used 2048, suited to the JCOP31 apparent free resources.

Using File->Get Digital ID(VeriSign TM), the server apparently issued me a self signed cert, which appears in the IDAlly tool. A glance at the APDU log on my system show a BER-encoded (cert) stream is indeed being written.

Using the view option, windows reports that "this CA root cert"... has not been installed into one of the root stores. On inspecting the cert, it has only end-entity authority, not CA authority. Regardless of this fact, if one uses the "let windows select the cert store into which to insert the cert", it appears to be treated post-install as a CAcert, and windows indeed warns one that now cert's issued by the "CA" will automatically be recognized.

Using regedit, I confirmed that the cert currently exists in (in my SID):
HKEY_USERS\S-1-5-21-1830548265-4081794962-2048613730-1006\Software\Microsoft\SystemCertificates\Root\Certificates\16BBF457DEA5A24F747DE32F4C8D973BB4A1F651

Using Outlook, the Tools->Options->Security->Settings allows one to bind this cert to signing and encryption privileges for S/MIME v3. Depennding on the account I use, the binding options change: encryption cert was automatically chosen in one (and all alg.options were greyed out) , and in another I could change the encryption algorithm.

On attempting to send a signed message, using my normal hotmail transport provider, I could not get passed a dialog which said "error in underlying security system." (No pin was ever demanded.)

So, im summary, good progress.

I think we need a simpler test case for signing, using the CSP and the self-signed cert, than outlook. We need to seperate the fun of making outlook and PKI work, versus show a simple working unit test of signing, with the CSP.


_______________________________________________
Muscle mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.drizzle.com/mailman/listinfo/muscle

Reply via email to