From owner-freebsd-hackers Wed Dec 17 11:08:16 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) id LAA02898 for hackers-outgoing; Wed, 17 Dec 1997 11:08:16 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-hackers) Received: from whistle.com (s205m131.whistle.com [207.76.205.131]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA02801; Wed, 17 Dec 1997 11:07:54 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from archie@whistle.com) Received: (from smap@localhost) by whistle.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) id LAA09301; Wed, 17 Dec 1997 11:07:21 -0800 (PST) Received: from bubba.whistle.com(207.76.205.7) by whistle.com via smap (V1.3) id sma009293; Wed Dec 17 11:07:15 1997 Received: (from archie@localhost) by bubba.whistle.com (8.8.7/8.6.12) id LAA26924; Wed, 17 Dec 1997 11:07:15 -0800 (PST) From: Archie Cobbs Message-Id: <199712171907.LAA26924@bubba.whistle.com> Subject: Re: Support for secure http protocols In-Reply-To: <34973506.B112548D@xmission.com> from Wes Peters at "Dec 16, 97 07:12:22 pm" To: chat@freebsd.org, softweyr@xmission.com Date: Wed, 17 Dec 1997 11:07:15 -0800 (PST) Cc: chat@freebsd.org, questions@freesbd.org, hackers@freebsd.org, isp@freebsd.org X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL31 (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk Wes Peters writes: > 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 think SSL is more prevalent than SHTTP. Also, there already exists a version of Apache (called Stronghold I think) that includes SSL. -Archie ___________________________________________________________________________ Archie Cobbs * Whistle Communications, Inc. * http://www.whistle.com