Re: [pkcs11] Re: Proposal: New CKA_DESTROYABLE attribute

[Stef Walter <stefw@redhat.com>]

On 12.06.2013 21:22, Tim Hudson wrote:
>> I wonder if we should use the same code in both places, that is:
>>
>> #define CKA_NOT_PERMITTED    0x0000001A
>> #define CKA_COPY_PROHIBITED   CKR_NOT_PERMITTED
> 
> Absolutely definitely not something I would suggest makes sense. 
> If we see the need to have a separate name for an error code then it SHALL be a separate value. 
> Aliases for error codes is not a sensible path IMHO.

This is deprecating the CKA_COPY_PROHIBITED because it was part of
PKCS#11 v2.30. There's no need for separate error codes.

Cheers,

Stef