Hello. Yes, faking token based operations is not OK. We understand this and support. To provide backward compatibility with existing software we ask to keep existed for many years "wrong code" just in 0.11.14, we're not talking about 0.12. We are not against the fact that in 0.12 "Rutoken S" will only support storage operations.
Thanks. Best regards, Mescheryakov Kirill, Aktiv Company. -----Original Message----- From: Martin Paljak [mailto:mar...@paljak.pri.ee] Sent: Friday, September 03, 2010 2:17 PM To: Aktiv Co. Kirill Mescheryakov Cc: OpenSC-devel (opensc-devel) Subject: Re: [opensc-devel] Personal Review Of The Upcoming 0.12.0 Release Hello, On Sep 3, 2010, at 11:53 AM, Aktiv Co. Kirill Mescheryakov wrote: > We, as producers Rutoken well understand your decision to delete "wrong > Rutoken code" from the future release 0.12. > However, Rutoken S is very popular in Russia as a token for storing key > information. For storing keys (as data objects, not as transparent RSA objects) is OK. Faking token based operation is not OK. > We'd be very grateful if you would all still released 0.11.14 with the solved > "openssl gost" problem and backported changes (Some of them are very > necessary for us to support the new hardware). OK, good point. > We need it to ensure backward compatibility with old applications, which will > disappear when moving to version 0.12. Apparently 0.11.14 needs to be a fixup release with several fat warnings. -- Martin Paljak @martinpaljak.net +3725156495 _______________________________________________ opensc-devel mailing list opensc-devel@lists.opensc-project.org http://www.opensc-project.org/mailman/listinfo/opensc-devel
