In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on
Fri, 11 Oct 2002 15:02:07 +0200, "Frederic DONNAT" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
frederic.donnat> As far as i can see some method like
frederic.donnat> "RSA_generate_key()" are not available in
frederic.donnat> "RSA_Method" structure, but RSA key generation can be
fr
Hi Richard,
I have a question PKCS#11 ENGINE, etc ...
As far as i can see some method like "RSA_generate_key()" are not available in
"RSA_Method" structure, but RSA key generation can be provide by hardaware even if key
is not stored on it (for example).
On the other hand, according to PKCS#
Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker wrote:
I believe there's no difference between the hardware interface in
0.9.7 and 0.9.8...
Good... :-D
madwolf> I am starting to take a look at the README for the
[...]
madwolf> command enhanced...
What are you missing in it? It may not be entirely up to dat
Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker wrote:
Better go with a snap, there are a few small bugs in beta 3 that makes
it hard to compile.
Ok, I will go with the yesterday's SNAP, although I had no problems in
compiling the beta3 version on my system... lucky me...
If you look at one of the built-in eng
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Fri, 11 Oct 2002 13:36:46 +0200,
Massimiliano Pala <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
madwolf> Ok, I hope that not much code rewriting will be required for
madwolf> the 0.9.8 version (if any).
I believe there's no difference between the hardware interface in
0.9.7 and 0.
Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker wrote:
madwolf> > If you look at one of the built-in engines, you'll see that they're
[...]
madwolf> required, I will build a separate package too...
It's good enough to build it in crypto/engine. But note that for
0.9.8-dev, there's a move to having all the hard
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Fri, 11 Oct 2002 12:29:22 +0200,
Massimiliano Pala <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
madwolf> > If you look at one of the built-in engines, you'll see that they're
madwolf> [...]
madwolf> > you to include support for having it built as a shared library.
madwolf>
madwolf
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Fri, 11 Oct 2002 11:54:16 +0200,
Massimiliano Pala <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
madwolf> I am planning to code it for the openssl-0.9.7-beta3 ( is it
madwolf> better working on latest openssl-0.9.7-stable SNAPs ? ).
Better go with a snap, there are a few small bugs
Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker wrote:
I would suggest, to make it easier, that you go for the MuscleCard API
for now. There will be a generic PKCS#11 engine at some point, and
that should then be possible to use as well.
That is my point of view, either. So I guess I will start studying the
imp
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Fri, 11 Oct 2002 12:07:31 +0200,
Massimiliano Pala <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
madwolf> Well, I am not sure about the PKCS#11 because I have not worked on it
madwolf> yet. I guess that if you code an engin that uses a PKCS#11 interface
madwolf> any PKCS#11 library
Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker wrote:
[...]
Do I get it correctly, that this would be a MuscleCard-specific
implementation of a PKCS#11 engine? We already have three other
PKCS#11 engine contribution in our pipe, unfortunately specific to the
hardware the authors were playing with instead of being
11 matches
Mail list logo
