[Mono-dev] Mono.Security on Compat Framework
Matthijs ter Woord
matthijsterwoord at gmail.com
Tue Feb 6 03:00:28 EST 2007
Does it contain an SSL implementation too?
Neil Cowburn wrote:
> The company I work for, OpenNETCF, already did a port of the
> System.Security.Cryptography namespace for .NET Compact Framework v1.0.
> CF v2.0 has a fairly comprehensive implementation OTB, so we removed it
> from our product, but you can still get the source for the CF v1.0
> implementation from our site. We needed S.S.C for our WSE
> Go to smartdeviceframework.com and the version you are looking for is
> Smart Device Framework 1.4.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: mono-devel-list-bounces at lists.ximian.com
> [mailto:mono-devel-list-bounces at lists.ximian.com] On Behalf Of Matthijs
> ter Woord
> Sent: 05 February 2007 16:23
> To: mono-devel-list at lists.ximian.com
> Subject: Re: [Mono-dev] Mono.Security on Compat Framework
> Hi Sebastien,
> I think my changes consist of the following:
> 1. A "compatibility layer". This contains a rough copy of some
> namespaces from mono (S.IO, S.Security.Cryptography, S.ComponentModel,
> S.Diagnostics, S.Net, S.Runtime.ConstrainedExecution, S.Security,
> 2. The addition of a utility class which lets one launch a method
> asynchronously (ie, different thread), and the usage of this method
> wherever neccessary.
> Let me know if you're interested...
> Matthijs ter Woord
> Sebastien Pouliot wrote:
>> Hello Matthijs,
>> On Mon, 2007-02-05 at 17:04 +0100, Matthijs ter Woord wrote:
>>> For some private project, we've been trying to get Mono.Security
>>> running on the Compact .NET Framework.
>>> After we spend some ours of debugging, the major problem with it was
>>> that CF.NET seems to be lacking decent async method invocation
>>> support. Once we fixed that, the only thing we needed to do was copy
>>> some other parts of mono (mostly System.Security.Cryptography
>>> into the assembly.
>>> After this journey, I'd like to see whether there's any interest of
>>> getting these changes back to the Mono repository.
>> It would be easier to answer if the patch was attached ;-)
>> My guess is that some would be better inside Mono.Security and some
>>> This should probably be in a different project, which contains all
>>> kinds of compatibility classes, to emulate the normal .NET framework,
>>> but this seems quite doable to me.
>> That would be a useful project, i.e. having an assembly for CF to
>> upgrade it's ability (up to running Mono.Security or other stuff).
>> (*)We could look at hosting (parts of) your changes into Crimson too.
>>> I hope to gain some comments on this...
>>> Matthijs ter Woord
>>> Mono-devel-list mailing list
>>> Mono-devel-list at lists.ximian.com
> Mono-devel-list mailing list
> Mono-devel-list at lists.ximian.com
More information about the Mono-devel-list