'Lionel Elie Mamane' wrote:
I had understood that it was not a _protocol_ but a library API. HTTP is a _protocol_ for data interchange over the network. I thought PKCS#11 was a _library_ API and that you linked (dynamically at run-time) a particular "implementation" of it (the card driver) into your program to use it. If that's not the case, my previous messages are void and meaningless.
PKCS#11 IS a library API. But really, how is API different from a protocol? Is the only difference linking in the same address space? Anyway, the "right" way, as I've understood Alon, is to make gpg use gpg-agent. They communicate via a well defined _protocol_ and are not _linked_ together. So actually, the PKCS#11 licensing issue can be solved by independently writing a BSD-licensed version of the gpg-agent.
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ Gnupg-users mailing list Gnupg-users@gnupg.org http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users