Frank Morgner wrote: > > > But you can also accept the overhead and use standardized > > > interfaces. This approach gives you support for a wide variety of > > > applications and (existent) hardware/software. > > > > The *only* interface that matters is p11. > > This is not true in many regards. But if all you focus on is p11 > then I can understand you.
Let me assure that it is not by choice. I fiercely resisted p11 for a long time. I think the API reaks of DOS. But it is the only thing that the world is using for crypto tokens, so it is the only thing that matters. > the age is your argument? The layers of crap on top of layers of crap is my argument. There is no reason to deal with T=0 or T=1 when there is USB. Yet someone thought it was a good idea to make USB emulate a much more cumbersome protocol. //Peter
pgpCnKAGulm4Q.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ opensc-devel mailing list opensc-devel@lists.opensc-project.org http://www.opensc-project.org/mailman/listinfo/opensc-devel
