On Wednesday 14 November 2007 00:17, David ?Bombe? Roden wrote: > > On Tue, 2007-11-13 at 22:22 +0000, Matthew Toseland wrote: > > > > I think that's a pretty good idea. The node already handles all that > > > crypto stuff and client applications, plugins, whatever, wouldn't have > > > to bundle BouncyCastle (or similar libraries). > > What's your response to the rest of the thread on Frost? They mentioned 1010, > > they mentioned gpg...? > > a) Bugs can be in any API. When using the same crypto stuff as the node > we can at least be sure that the client crypto is never worse than the > node crypto. > > b) I'm not quite sure how GPG comes into play here. Sure, it can do all > the operations I'd need but it's another crypto layer we do not control > - does it even do its own crypto or does it rely on another layer? And > how does it integrate into Java? And what about Windows?
The common claim is gpg libraries are available for all platforms and languages. > > > Bombe > -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20071114/09ba2a03/attachment.pgp>
