1996-03-17 - M$ CryptoAPI Question

Header Data

From: bglassle@kaiwan.com (Bob Glassley)
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Message Hash: 65b8157c2e73f32cf25d91b3923b5d8e76a1a2f57c4edc145475dd25f1cbf91f
Message ID: <314bb878.2839245@kaiwan.kaiwan.com>
Reply To: N/A
UTC Datetime: 1996-03-17 23:25:45 UTC
Raw Date: Mon, 18 Mar 1996 07:25:45 +0800

Raw message

From: bglassle@kaiwan.com (Bob Glassley)
Date: Mon, 18 Mar 1996 07:25:45 +0800
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: M$ CryptoAPI Question
Message-ID: <314bb878.2839245@kaiwan.kaiwan.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

With the current releases of the NT 4.0 betas, I would assume some of
you have had the chance to look at the API more closely.  I am getting
ready to hack my first crypto enabled app and wondered if this was
worth using or if Crypto C++ is the way to go. 

I would think that if their implementation is solid, and some of the
*real* crypto gods write stronger CSP's than the M$ RSA Base CSP, this
would be a good approach to get more enabled apps accepted for regular
usage.

Any thoughts?

- --Bob

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2

iQCVAwUBMUyb5e2vJ3dNshwFAQHN5wP7BN74aW2XhJnzfPnPyZUkg9N6asp+hCeN
Mw6B6Q7iPd3le0nd8wDLJI6zj9lJ0oOP8ViwI0tDLYbG/H3dpQrA8cgUlOioVaAF
L1ZruRvKn87gE0ZJHjIsnEeszxO+wAvnzPYPB2yTRM3LzQ1oIadjhj8FXnNxoVPN
hZ+RJSF+qpI=
=jEww
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






Thread