I was wondering why you asked. I expected that you could and would test it. But that behavior is counter-intuitive, and should certainly be documented in the PoOp.
sas On Thu, Feb 9, 2017 at 3:07 PM, Binyamin Dissen <[email protected]> wrote: > In my tests, the key specified in R1 must exactly match. Placing 0 in R1 > only > helps for key0 storage. > > There is no way to use MVCDK without knowing the exact key of the target. > > > On Tue, 7 Feb 2017 13:51:25 -0500 Tony Harminc <[email protected]> wrote: > > :>On 7 February 2017 at 12:03, Binyamin Dissen <[email protected] > > > :>wrote: > > :>> POPs is not clear as to whether R1=0 will allow access to all keys. It > does > :>> seem logical, but is it true? > > > :>Although it perhaps doesn't say so explicitly in the descriptions for > :>MVCSK/MVCDK, I think it is completely clear from the use in those > :>instruction definitions (and others) of the phrase "access key", when > read > :>with the description of Key-Controlled Protection in Chapter 3. Storage, > :>which uses the same phrase, and says "The keys are said to match when the > :>four access-control bits of the storage key are equal to the access key, > or > :>when the access key is zero." > > -- > Binyamin Dissen <[email protected]> > http://www.dissensoftware.com > > Director, Dissen Software, Bar & Grill - Israel > > > Should you use the mailblocks package and expect a response from me, > you should preauthorize the dissensoftware.com domain. > > I very rarely bother responding to challenge/response systems, > especially those from irresponsible companies. > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > -- sas ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
