Date: Tue, 16 Dec 1997 19:12:22 -0700 From: Wes Peters <softweyr@xmission.com> To: chat@FreeBSD.ORG Cc: questions@freesbd.org, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG, isp@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Support for secure http protocols Message-ID: <34973506.B112548D@xmission.com>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
FreeBies and Gentlehackers,
I've been working on a project to provide an essential service for FreeBSD
users via a web/http interface. (No, I'm not ready to discuss it yet, I
don't have time to answer 5,000 questions about "why don't you do it this
ways"). Suffice it to say that several of you will be interested in it.
Now, for the meat of the question.
This service will need secure communications with the http server in question.
I've looked and looked, and haven't found anything approaching a W3C or IETF
decision on secure communications for http. The IETF is apparently waiting
for the W3C to make up its collective mind, and W3C has done so much waffling
on this issue they've hired Aunt Jemima as their hacker relations expert.
So, my question is: if I have the capability (time, interest, etc) to
implement only ONE secure http transport, which one should it be? There
is a draft ieft standard for S-HTTP, but Netscape et al HTTP-SSL seems to
have garnered more support in the real world.
I've cc'd the questions, hackers, and isp mail lists because they represent,
collectively, the FreeBSD user base, core development team, and the people
most familiar with web servers. Please note that I've directed followups to
me, and to the chat list. </FLAME!>
I'm mostly looking for a poll of what others have implemented, and why, as
opposed to a philosophical discussion of the merits of each; I've read too
much of this in the flame wars being traded between Netscape and Terisa.
--
"Where am I, and what am I doing in this handbasket?"
Wes Peters Softweyr LLC
http://www.xmission.com/~softweyr softweyr@xmission.com
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?34973506.B112548D>