Hi! I still don't get it...
> Its is not about the protocol but about the licenses incompatibility between Mozilla and GPL applications. > AFAIK, not everything in Mozilla has the option to be used under the GPL. > Because pkcs#11 is a standard to let two proprietary applications work together - that is the whole reason > for that complex and very limited beast. I still don't understand where is the licensing problem of using PKCS#11 in a GPLed application. You FAILED to answer this issue, and this is the key issue why you invent your own card structure!!! This makes gpg UNUSABLE with smartcards, and I regret this fact. Opensc uses PKCS#11 and is release under LGPL 2.1, although it LGPL I don't see any reason why the "L" is PKCS#11 depended (http://www.opensc.org/files/doc/opensc.html#opensc.license). Again, you are using a lot of PKCS#* standards in your application, and I don't understand why you have a problem only with PKCS#11... >> Can you please reconsider the PKCS#11 support, without >> a new agent branch? > Ask me for a quote. I am only trying to help! I don't think you understand how people use smartcards... The situation where you have a dedicated smartcard for every application is unacceptable. Every application that is written is such approach will be replaced, and I regret to see gpg be replaced. When user buys it's email signature/encryption certificate he expects to be able to use it in all smartcard enable applications... PKCS#11 provides this ability, and is free to use, and most commonly Implemented. Yes, I know that I can write my own agent... But I still think it will be a mistake. Best Regards, Alon Bar-Lev. _______________________________________________ Gnupg-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
