Bitter experience is showing that card software (OS) developers are treating
ISO 7816-4 as a smorgasbord, choosing what they want to implement, and even
choosing which parts of a command definition to implement. Towards the end
of 7816-4, in the area of optional methods for a card to indicate what it
does and does not support, such practices are given some encouragement, for
example by allowing a card to indicate whether or not it implements direct
AID addressing to select an application (that in particular is the one
annoying me as I try to help make sense of the (draft) ITSO public transport
spec at www.itso.org.uk).
If you want to build a card scheme, the rule has to be to only use the
features of a card that the supplier documents as part of the contract to
supply the card. Unfortunately, many of the required documents are subject
to non-disclosure agreements, which doesn't help when trying to spec an
interoperable set of schemes.
Can anyone provide a dual interface ISO 7816 and 14443 card platform that
supports direct AID addressing for application selection?
Regards (or should it be commiserations?),
Peter Tomlinson
----- Original Message -----
From: "Friendly Aless" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, April 02, 2001 7:18 AM
Subject: Re: MUSCLE Uploading and activating Cardlet on a Schlumberger
Access (Newbie question)
> Jan,
>
> Many thanks for your response - also all the others -
> many thanks.
>
> I agree that the error status indicates the length of
> the APDU to wrong. However, the APDU in question that
> is generated in the example code starts with the bytes
> [00 08 00 00 1B <1B bytes>]. I already verified the
> APDU size and the length 1B is correct.
> Isn't it possible that this APDU is not know to the
> Cyberflex Access card but to the Cyberflex 16k only?
> The reason why I am asking this is that there is no
> [00 08 00 ...] APDU documented in the Cyberflex Access
> Software Developer's Kit 2 Release Notes (page 117f).
>
> The other thing I do not understand a 100% yet is the
> signing of the applet. Do I need to sign the applet
> only or do I need to sign the whole container? What's
> the key to use and what's the algorithm/tool to use?
> (I am looking at the packages
> opencard.opt.applet.mgmt.* and
> com.slb.opencard.CyberflexAccess.* right now).
>
>
> --- Jan Peter Hecking <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 29, 2001 at 07:08:55AM -0800, Friendly
> > Aless wrote:
> > > makeLoadAPDU() [00 08 00 00 ...] is sent to the
> > card.
> > > The card simply returns 6700 - what does that
> > mean?
> >
> > The status words returned by the card are defined in
> > ISO 7816-4.
> > Search the web to find the full document.
> > 0x6700 means "Wrong length" so the Le (length
> > expected) byte of your
> > APDU seems to be incorrect.
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail.
> http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/?.refer=text
> ***************************************************************
> Linux Smart Card Developers - M.U.S.C.L.E.
> (Movement for the Use of Smart Cards in a Linux Environment)
> http://www.linuxnet.com/smartcard/index.html
> ***************************************************************
>
***************************************************************
Linux Smart Card Developers - M.U.S.C.L.E.
(Movement for the Use of Smart Cards in a Linux Environment)
http://www.linuxnet.com/smartcard/index.html
***************************************************************
