On Sep 7, 6:55 am, Konstantin Andreev wrote:
> On 08/28/10 02:36, Michael Smith wrote:
>
> > Rather than the normal case of a client certificate belonging to the user,
> > and just added to the certificate store, we want to have a certificate that
> > nominally belongs
On Sep 3, 11:53 am, Nelson B Bolyard wrote:
> On 2010-08-30 11:04 PDT, Michael Smith wrote:
>
> > On Aug 28, 10:08 am, Nelson Bolyard
> > wrote:
> >> What is the real underlying objective of this?
> >> Is it to authenticate the individual user of the product
On Aug 28, 10:08 am, Nelson Bolyard
wrote:
> On 2010-08-27 16:48 PDT, Michael Smith wrote:
>
> > We're not really looking for a "couldn't be compromised" solutions -
> > this is a requirement from a company we're partnering with, not our
> > idea,
On Aug 27, 4:30 pm, John Dennis wrote:
> On 08/27/2010 06:36 PM, Michael Smith wrote:
>
>
>
> > Hi all,
>
> > In our (mozilla/xulrunner-based) application, we're trying to set up a
> > secure connection to a server that requires a client certificate.
>
&g
Hi all,
In our (mozilla/xulrunner-based) application, we're trying to set up a
secure connection to a server that requires a client certificate.
Rather than the normal case of a client certificate belonging to the
user, and just added to the certificate store, we want to have a
certificate that n
5 matches
Mail list logo
