may call the key's destroy method and handle the possible exception.
>>
>>
>> On 14 Jun 2013, at 17:42, Michael StJohns wrote:
>>
>>> Generic questions for possible future work:
>>>
>>> As a general guideline, would it make sense to add
>&
s an instance of Destroyable
>or they may call the key's destroy method and handle the possible exception.
>
>
>On 14 Jun 2013, at 17:42, Michael StJohns wrote:
>
>>Generic questions for possible future work:
>>
>>As a general guideline, would it make se
of Destroyable
or they may call the key's destroy method and handle the possible exception.
On 14 Jun 2013, at 17:42, Michael StJohns wrote:
> Generic questions for possible future work:
>
> As a general guideline, would it make sense to add
> javax.security.auth.Destroya
out in the way you
claim to be.
--
Sent from my mobile device.
Michael StJohns wrote:
>Generic questions for possible future work:
>
>As a general guideline, would it make sense to add
>javax.security.auth.Destroyable to the set of interfaces for SecretKey
>and PrivateKey impleme
Generic questions for possible future work:
As a general guideline, would it make sense to add
javax.security.auth.Destroyable to the set of interfaces for SecretKey and
PrivateKey implementation objects where possible?
Should the methods that use secret and private keys check to see if those
