1996-07-10 - Re: MSoft crypto API’s
Header Data
From: David Mazieres <dm@amsterdam.lcs.mit.edu>
To: “George Kuzmowycz” <gkuzmo@ix.netcom.com>
Message Hash: 1736b58cac176d9572fd6ef8da59f1fa9a0572ed93bd5652dde0b9e95aded7c1
Message ID: <199607101610.MAA16287@extreme-discipline.lcs.mit.edu>
Reply To: <199607092319.QAA00934@dfw-ix2.ix.netcom.com>
UTC Datetime: 1996-07-10 20:58:05 UTC
Raw Date: Thu, 11 Jul 1996 04:58:05 +0800
Raw message
From: David Mazieres <dm@amsterdam.lcs.mit.edu>
Date: Thu, 11 Jul 1996 04:58:05 +0800
To: "George Kuzmowycz" <gkuzmo@ix.netcom.com>
Subject: Re: MSoft crypto API's
In-Reply-To: <199607092319.QAA00934@dfw-ix2.ix.netcom.com>
Message-ID: <199607101610.MAA16287@extreme-discipline.lcs.mit.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
What I don't underastand about this arangement is how other people are
supposed to develop crypto software under capi. I mean, how is it
possible to develop a software package if you need to go get it signed
by microsoft every time you want to test it?
Or do US customers get versions of the OS that will crypto code
without verifying the signature? Somehow I doubt that, though,
because then the NSA wouldn't be getting as much out of the deal.
David
Thread
Return to July 1996
- Return to “Black Unicorn <unicorn@schloss.li>”
- Return to “David Mazieres <dm@amsterdam.lcs.mit.edu>”
- Return to “Enzo Michelangeli <enzo@ima.com>”
Return to ““George Kuzmowycz” <gkuzmo@ix.netcom.com>”
- 1996-07-10 (Wed, 10 Jul 1996 13:12:09 +0800) - MSoft crypto API’s - “George Kuzmowycz” <gkuzmo@ix.netcom.com>
- 1996-07-10 (Wed, 10 Jul 1996 17:07:40 +0800) - Re: MSoft crypto API’s - Enzo Michelangeli <enzo@ima.com>
- 1996-07-10 (Wed, 10 Jul 1996 18:33:33 +0800) - Re: MSoft crypto API’s - Black Unicorn <unicorn@schloss.li>
- 1996-07-10 (Thu, 11 Jul 1996 04:58:05 +0800) - Re: MSoft crypto API’s - David Mazieres <dm@amsterdam.lcs.mit.edu>