Hi! > I've updated the page with my proposed architecture. I believe that > it's a bit too abstract to see immediately whether it makes sense, but > I've thrown it away and redone a few times, because I'm trying to code > it in the meantime and I've already expunged the bits that made the > least sense. ;) If everything goes all right, I should have working > code in 2-3 weeks. > > ANY and ALL suggestions, objections, sharp criticism, rotten eggs are > more than welcome from everyone, of course! :)
SM is a term from ISO-7816, which AFAIK only has something like a security environment to group operations. So why do you propose to wrap chained APDUs with SM? I understand that it can be useful to separate potentially interfering operations, but this should be done on top of SM. To be more concrete, such a separation should be done on top of libopensc, since this could also be needed for non-SM-APDUs. Cheers, Frank.
pgpMvLlu5HBch.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ opensc-devel mailing list opensc-devel@lists.opensc-project.org http://www.opensc-project.org/mailman/listinfo/opensc-devel
