71–80 of 237 posts
Curious, when you tell someone they need to access a website securely (or any other case where you might use the term TLS or SSL), do you: 1. Say SSL or TLS? 2. How old are you (or did you start working before 1999?) I'll reply with my answer too.
Mid 30s, SSL.
I work in cybersecurity and all the tools in the firewall/cert world still say "SSL decryption" and "SSL certificate". TLS is just a "major version" of SSL in my mind.
There are still more than 300,000 services on the Internet that support SSLv2: https://www.shodan.io/search/report?query=ssl.version%3Asslv... And a trend line of how it's changed: https://trends.shodan.io/search?query=ssl.version%3Asslv2#ov... It has dropped significantly though over the years but it will continue to stick around for a while.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Hotdogs and hamburgers are the same in all meaningful respects.
They are not. But a Chicago dog is meaningfully the same as a New York Dog (just with some more vegetables).
Curious, when you tell someone they need to access a website securely (or any other case where you might use the term TLS or SSL), do you: 1. Say SSL or TLS? 2. How old are you (or did you start working before 1999?) I'll reply with my answer too.
Wouldn't it be appropriate now to call the next version SSL again? It's still widely used by everyone, so let them keep using it.
Wouldn't it be appropriate now to call the next version SSL again? It's still widely used by everyone, so let them keep using it.
Curious, when you tell someone they need to access a website securely (or any other case where you might use the term TLS or SSL), do you: 1. Say SSL or TLS? 2. How old are you (or did you start working before 1999?) I'll reply with my answer too.
Libraries with TLS in their names are less frequently used
GnuTLS, mbedTLS, s2n-tls and RustTLS.
> As a part of the cutthroat competition, Microsoft decided to revise the SSL 2 protocol with some additions of their own, and specified a protocol called "PCT" that was derived from SSL 2. It was only supported in IE and IIS. > Netscape also wanted to address SSL 2 issues, but wasn't going to let Microsoft take leadership/ownership in the standard, so they developed SSL 3.0, which was a more significant departure. I…
Microsoft was the bad guy in a movie where you have a war right before aliens invade and you figure out that there's bigger enemies. FSF hated Microsoft because they released binaries without source code, they were THE enemy, nowadays, you are lucky if you get a binary to study and modify! The standard from any competitive developer is to hide the binary and source behind a server. Try to study and modify that!
I think that's a bit of an oversimplification - FOSS-leaning people had a pretty large set of reasons to dislike and distrust MS back then. "Embrace, Extend, Extinguish" was a big one, calling linux/FOSS a cancer, their money and influence being used to fund the whole SCO debacle amongst other things. They were pretty actively evil, not just "closed source".
There was very good reason not to let MS gain de-facto control of an open protocol, because 90s and 00s microsoft would not have hesitated to find ways to use that dominance to screw the competition.
Considering that Microsoft was a completely different beast in that time, I'm not surprised it does not seem that silly. M$ (appropriate name for that time) of the day was doing its best to own everything and the did not let up on trying to hold back the open source internet technologies until the early 2010's I believe. Its my opinion that they were successful in killing Java Applets, which were never able to improv…
It’s even more appropriate nowadays, I’d say.