[14551] in cryptography@c2.net mail archive
Re: [e-lang] Re: Protocol implementation errors
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Ben Laurie)
Tue Oct 7 09:35:39 2003
X-Original-To: cryptography@metzdowd.com
X-Original-To: cryptography@metzdowd.com
Date: Tue, 07 Oct 2003 10:38:18 +0100
From: Ben Laurie <ben@algroup.co.uk>
To: e-lang@mail.eros-os.org
Cc: jerrold.leichter@smarts.com, pgut001@cs.auckland.ac.nz,
Filed.Projects.EROS@scuzzy.ben.algroup.co.uk,
cryptography@metzdowd.com, frantz@pwpconsult.com
In-Reply-To: <200310060838.h968cjb15653@cs.auckland.ac.nz>
Peter Gutmann wrote:
> Jerrold Leichter <jerrold.leichter@smarts.com> writes:
>>I agree that ASN.1 is statically checkable, and that this is an important
>>property. However, ASN.1 is notoriously hard to parse, which leads to errors.
>
>
> ASN.1 has a *reputation* of being notoriously hard to parse, gained chiefly
> from some early bad experiences with OSI work (which would give anything a
> reputation of being hard to work with :-). I've implemented, and I know of
> others who have implemented, extremely compact and portable ASN.1 libraries.
Do you really mean ASN.1 or do you mean DER/BER?
Cheers,
Ben.
--
http://www.apache-ssl.org/ben.html http://www.thebunker.net/
"There is no limit to what a man can do or how far he can go if he
doesn't mind who gets the credit." - Robert Woodruff
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The Cryptography Mailing List
Unsubscribe by sending "unsubscribe cryptography" to majordomo@metzdowd.com
