On Fri, 02 Sep 2005 15:30:29 +0300, Alon Bar-Lev said: >> Most pkcs#11 stuff is not GPL compatible. >> > But it does not say that GPLed software cannot use PKCS#11 interface > in order to access none GPLed tokens!
Read the GPL again and you will see that this is not possible. > I am sorry to read that... I think it is a good standard... Just like > any RSA Security > PKCS#* standard... at least it is a standard that most programmers like PKCS#12 :-) > I don't understand why you guys did not rewritten the PKCS#7, PKCS#1, > PKCS#8, PKCS#9 pkcs#7 is nowadays called CMS. It is used by gpgsm. pkcs#1 is even part of OpenPGP. > The whole new work of gpg 1.9 was to migrate to S/MIME... Why!?!?!?! > You could have been very happy in your close PGP format world. > Even if the standards are ugly, they at least work! Depends on the standard. > I am responsible of replacing software/suggest correct software for > using smartcards. > Currently gpg is on my black list... And because of this I tried to As said in my other mail to gnupg-devel: If you have a commercial interest. talk to me about implementing pcsk#11 - but don't expect to get something for free. I have laid out the path on how to implement a pkcs#11 library to make use of gpg-agent/scdaemon as a token. It is also possible to write a pkcs#11 thingy for just that card. >> I don't meant to write another agent. Write a pkcs#11 driver which >> uses gpg-agent as its token. >> >> > This is the WRONG WRONG WRONG approach!!!!!!! Well, my opinion is different. Salam-Shalom, Werner _______________________________________________ Gnupg-users mailing list Gnupg-users@gnupg.org http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users