TheHokieCoder

@MattHodgman No, currently this project only targets .NET Framework. It is on our list of new features to support .NET Core, but unfortunately me and @phantomtypist have been too busy...

@JanairoRio I believe that when you use the `SingleSignOut()` method: 1. That method is performing a redirect via the HTTP request object for you...there is no need or purpose to...

@phantomtypist Thanks for all the links/references. > Personally speaking, I'm more on the side of "it's useless" if your rationale for strong-naming is to prevent tampering/alteration... because of "security". No,...

@phantomtypist Thanks for that article on Authenticode vs. strong naming. My naiveté with respect to the whole signing vs. strong naming concept lead me to believe that the two were...

@phantomtypist Did you get anywhere with Apereo with respect to code signing?

Did you ever find out if the Apereo org has a way to get a code signing cert for this project? If so, I am curious where in the project...

Great! That sounds good. We (mostly you) should have the client _much_ more stable by then, so it'll be a good time to have the assemblies signed so consumers can...

@KhanhVanCong You will not be able to, out of the box, use the same token/authentication cookie generated by this ASP.NET CAS client to perform authentication/authorization with your API server that...

In order to fix this issue, #15 will also have to be fixed. Basically, as far as I can tell, the only differences in v2 and v3, as far as...

@phantomtypist The PR from issue #15 is effectively merged into the feature branch I have for full support of CAS v3.0. I believe that we need to reject that PR,...