Re: Digital Signature for MIDlet?
Hartti Suomela <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.java.sun.kvm |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Most of the phones, but not all. In U.S. the situation is especially problematic because all operators have customized their phones, protection domains (T-Mobile U.S. for example does not have a trusted 3rd party domain at all) and rights available in each domain. In other parts of the world only Hutchinson 3G, Orange Israel and China Unicom seem to behave differently. I have compiled some general and Nokia related Java ME security domain materials in here http://wiki.forum.nokia.com/index.php/Java_Security_Domains best regards Hartti Suomela Forum Nokia -----Original Message----- From: A mailing list for KVM discussion [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of ext Jliss-Viewsonics Sent: Tuesday, August 07, 2007 4:28 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Digital Signature for MIDlet? Most of the phones (all of the ones I have worked with) have 4 protection domains for various API's. The MANUFACTURER DOMAIN can only be signed by the Manufacturer, OPERATOR DOMAIN can only be signed by the operator (Service Provider), TRUSTED 3RD PARTY, this can use the Verisign or Thawte signatures, and UNTRUSTED which require no signature. I have found that only the MANUFACTURER domain consistently provides access to the functions on the phone, such as SD card access. Even the OPERATOR domain accesses only a limited subset of features. This is somewhat documented in the development info for the various phones, but which features require which domains is often unclear. Jerome [email protected] =========================================================================== To unsubscribe, send email to [email protected] and include in the body of the message "signoff KVM-INTEREST". For general help, send email to [email protected] and include in the body of the message "help".