On Tue, 2012-10-30 at 12:36 +1000, Empus wrote: > I've a huge fan of all things electronic security (working in this > space for a living).... but personally, I see little benefit in SSL > for IRC, because of the very architecture model. > > > > Unless you're speaking with another client on the same server, or all > people in a channel you're on is on the same server, you'd end up with > a false sense of security. > > > Without guaranteeing that ALL client<->server connections are > encrypted, and any server<->server connections in between are as well, > you could never be sure that the end to end path is encrypted and thus > MIM attacks are mitigated. > > > So without that scenario, wouldn't the client be fooled into a false > sense of security? >
I'd say yes, to large networked servers like Undernet ;) but SSL would
be a great advantage, in particular for stand alone's or small networks
where agreements mandate ssl only.
Think..
Port { server = yes; port = 4400; };
...
Port { port = 6667; };
Port { port = 8888; ssl = yes; };
anyone connects to 6667, only ssl are accepted on 8888, commenting out
the port 6667 Port entry, would mean server only accepts connections on
port 8888, that are SSL, plain connections on 8888 should be rejected.
Cheers
<<attachment: face-wink.png>>
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ Coder-com mailing list Coder-com@undernet.org http://undernet.sbg.org/mailman/listinfo/coder-com
