On 2/22/16, 6:12 , "openssl-dev on behalf of David Woodhouse" <[email protected] on behalf of [email protected]> wrote:
>>It may even be better, instead of pushing for different engines for >> different hardware, to make PKCS#11 the only API used to talk to >> hardware. There is a quite functional (and active as project) pkcs11 >> engine for openssl [0]. > >Agreed. With the caveat that I *really* want libp11 and engine_pkcs11 >to die, and be replaced by native code in openssl/crypto/pkcs11/ Would you mind explaining what you mean by “native code” that presumably could replace the current libp11, and who in your opinion would support it?
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
-- openssl-dev mailing list To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-dev
