On 03/08/2011 21:25, Martin Paljak wrote: >> And what about smartphones? "Standard" Java is more likely to be adapted >> than proprietary interfaces. > I don't believe that current smartphone platform vendors will embrace PKCS#11 > as we know it on the desktop. At least I hope they will not. It would IMHO be > a stupid choice. Java is a platform itself, so JCE/JCA could be the key, if > anything. It might not be perfect or even most suitable. I agree with Anders > that enrollment with mobile devices (with built-in security tokens) should > eventually become as important as using keys. Take Android - it does not make > use of "standard" Java API-s (Swing), yet it is very successful. Being able > to "run the code" does not mean "having sensible support for a platform with > minimal or no code changes". Well, I hope that those portability issues are handled by someone else :) since I'm too lazy to code the same thing w/ small differences for the various platform (or I wouldn't use Java in the first place...).
> When developing a "portable" application (in Java..) I would not bet much on > PKCS#11 or similar. For optimal results assume that PKCS#11 is not available. I'm planning other possible auth methods, but I'll have to experiment what happens if I try to load my applet on a platform where there's no SunPKCS11 available. > My personal suggestion is to omit the "proprietary" excuse. Whenever running > *anything* on Windows (or OS X), you are using a proprietary platform. Either > refuse to run on it or try to live with it and make the most out of it by > using the services provided by the platform is possible and providing users > with as good experience as possible. I simply don't want to adapt my code too much. I don't mind if the platform is proprietary as long as my app works as expected. If I could do that with C, I'd do it. BYtE, Diego. _______________________________________________ opensc-devel mailing list opensc-devel@lists.opensc-project.org http://www.opensc-project.org/mailman/listinfo/opensc-devel
