Date: Tue, 16 Dec 1997 21:49:54 -0700 (MST) From: Charles Mott <cmott@srv.net> To: Nate Williams <nate@mt.sri.com> Cc: chat@FreeBSD.ORG, softweyr@xmission.com Subject: Re: Support for secure http protocols Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.3.96.971216212337.6388A-100000@darkstar.home> In-Reply-To: <199712170414.VAA11573@mt.sri.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > Ssh and sshd are already universal in the unix world, and the Wintel > > variant (F-Secure) is reasonably priced. > > And doesn't have nearly the necessary features, is unstable, and due to > port forwarding is a *huge* security risk unless the system > administrator has set things up securely. Any secure server is a risk unless the administrator does his job. Even after that it is still a risk. Public key encryption is only as secure as the private keys. What necessary features are missing? How easy are they to add to the framework so that they can make ssh (or a derivative) useful? I can already see applications for which it can be used right now. > SSH is a *GREAT* solution for many things, but for secure HTTP stuff I > don't think it's a very good solution. I don't say use ssh for web commerce (yet), but if I had to set up a secure server (http, but maybe something else) for a limited clientele, then I personally would seriously consider an ssh solution. It works well and it encapsulates the both security and legal headaches. If you're goal is the next, great on-line commerce server, then ssh isn't the answer. But if your customer is a business or association of some sort that already thinks ssh is a good idea and has the infrastructure in place, then I think ssh makes sense even for http. Charles Mott
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.3.96.971216212337.6388A-100000>