On Thursday 24 Jan 2008, Rick Faircloth wrote:
I think the important thing here is to anything and everything
the client wants as long as they're willing to pay for it,
Hell yes :-)
--
Tom Chiverton
Helping to dynamically strategize plug-and-play e-business
on:
A quote From O Brother, Where Art Thou?
This stew's awful good.
Wash responds, You think so? I slaughtered this horse last Tuesday. I'm
afraid she's startin' to turn.
Just sayin'... ;)
On Jan 25, 2008 5:33 PM, James Holmes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yes, wildcard certs work fine under Apache
-
From: Dave Watts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2008 7:09 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: OT: SSL Necessary? Important?
typically no, because virtual hosting relies on host
headers. The web server doesn't receive the headers until
after the connection is established
Yes, wildcard certs work fine under Apache too.
On Jan 26, 2008 2:20 AM, Dave Watts [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'd like to see some proof of this. Is this only with
wildcard certs (in which case it would only work for
*.domainname.com), or it is for any kind of cert (such that
you can have
I'd like to see some proof of this. Is this only with
wildcard certs (in which case it would only work for
*.domainname.com), or it is for any kind of cert (such that
you can have www.example.com and www.example2.com) on the
same IP with no SSL problems?
Wildcard certs only. I
: SSL Necessary? Important?
On Jan 24, 2008 11:38 AM, Claude Schneegans [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Is the SSL encryption overkill for something like this?
IMHO yes.
Unless they are willing to pay for more protection, because it is not free.
Unless they use OpenSSL and self-sign, which
a dedicated IP (required, correct?),
plus whatever other charges an ISP may charge?
Rick
-Original Message-
From: James Holmes [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2008 1:02 AM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Re: OT: SSL Necessary? Important?
On Jan 24, 2008 11:38 AM
IP (required, correct?),
plus whatever other charges an ISP may charge?
Rick
-Original Message-
From: James Holmes [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2008 1:02 AM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Re: OT: SSL Necessary? Important?
On Jan 24, 2008 11:38 AM
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2008 1:02 AM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Re: OT: SSL Necessary? Important?
On Jan 24, 2008 11:38 AM, Claude Schneegans [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Is the SSL encryption overkill for something like this?
IMHO yes.
Unless
On Thursday 24 Jan 2008, James Holmes wrote:
A dedicated IP is probably necessary with your host, since I assume
you're sharing an IP right now.
You can serve multiple different SSL'ed domains from the same IP, can't you ?
Your existing hose may also have a cheaper deal too.
--
Tom Chiverton
On Thursday 24 Jan 2008, J.J. Merrick wrote:
And on the topic I would say that it probably is overkill but a lot of
times peoples perception of security makes them happy.
But most web browser uses can't tell the difference between TLS and non-TLS,
so sometimes you have to ask yourself if it's
I've never implemented and SSL cert, so I'm not sure, but I thought
each SSL had to have a dedicated IP. ???
Rick
-Original Message-
From: Tom Chiverton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2008 9:37 AM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Re: OT: SSL Necessary? Important
Why would anybody spend more then $20 a year on an SSL cert? Godaddy's
certs are perfectly adequate.
Russ
-Original Message-
From: James Holmes [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2008 9:04 AM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Re: OT: SSL Necessary? Important?
For example
: Thursday, January 24, 2008 9:04 AM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Re: OT: SSL Necessary? Important?
For example, digicert certs are $99:
http://www.digicert.com/
A dedicated IP is probably necessary with your host, since I assume
you're sharing an IP right now
On 1/24/08, Tom Chiverton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thursday 24 Jan 2008, James Holmes wrote:
A dedicated IP is probably necessary with your host, since I assume
you're sharing an IP right now.
You can serve multiple different SSL'ed domains from the same IP, can't you ?
Your existing
Yeah, I agree with that JJ...
-Original Message-
From: J.J. Merrick [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2008 9:24 AM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Re: OT: SSL Necessary? Important?
And on the topic I would say that it probably is overkill but a lot of
times peoples
But the church is also asking about an encrypted connection using an SSL
certificate.
What a meanness! Don't they have some sort of divine protection already? ;-)
--
___
REUSE CODE! Use custom tags;
See
Subject: Re: OT: SSL Necessary? Important?
On Thursday 24 Jan 2008, J.J. Merrick wrote:
And on the topic I would say that it probably is overkill but a lot of
times peoples perception of security makes them happy.
But most web browser uses can't tell the difference between TLS and non-TLS
) as
one you buy for $600.
Russ
-Original Message-
From: Tom Chiverton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2008 9:37 AM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Re: OT: SSL Necessary? Important?
On Thursday 24 Jan 2008, James Holmes wrote:
A dedicated IP is probably necessary with your
Of course users may not desire the warning about an untrusted cert
and this can be worse than no protection at all.
--
___
REUSE CODE! Use custom tags;
See http://www.contentbox.com/claude/customtags/tagstore.cfm
(Please send any spam to this address:
@houseoffusion.com
Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2008 10:16 AM
Subject: Re: OT: SSL Necessary? Important?
On 1/24/08, Tom Chiverton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thursday 24 Jan 2008, James Holmes wrote:
A dedicated IP is probably necessary with your host, since I assume
you're sharing an IP right now
PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2008 9:10 AM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Re: OT: SSL Necessary? Important?
yeah, it really isn't bad. Depending on the host they might have a
shared SSL cert you can use. Essentially they just map your site as a
folder underneath a larger site.
In the end it is like
24, 2008 11:17 AM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Re: OT: SSL Necessary? Important?
On 1/24/08, Tom Chiverton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thursday 24 Jan 2008, James Holmes wrote:
A dedicated IP is probably necessary with your host, since I assume
you're sharing an IP right now.
You can serve multiple
Possibly... but the Scripture also teaches Christians to be
wise as serpents... :o)
Rick
-Original Message-
From: Claude Schneegans [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2008 12:45 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Re: OT: SSL Necessary? Important?
But the church is also
On 1/24/08, Russ [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Why would anybody spend more then $20 a year on an SSL cert? Godaddy's
certs are perfectly adequate.
That depends if it's an introductory rate or not. I wouldn't buy a
$20 cert if I had to pay $90 to renew it, rather I'd just buy the $25
certs that I
Godaddy certs are $20 all the time... I think they're on sale for $15 now or
something...
Russ
-Original Message-
From: Rick Root [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2008 5:29 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Re: OT: SSL Necessary? Important?
On 1/24/08, Russ [EMAIL
Why would anybody spend more then $20 a year on an SSL cert?
Godaddy's certs are perfectly adequate.
unless you have a large enough number of users visiting your site, in
which case some of them with older computers won't recognize the certificate
as valid because they don't have the
You can always generate a bogus certificate for free (Like
the default Snake Oil cert that is created by Apache).
You will get the same level of encryption as a digitally signed cert
(i.e: one that costs money) but the browser will complain
about it not being signed or something of that
typically no, because virtual hosting relies on host
headers. The web server doesn't receive the headers until
after the connection is established.
This appears to no longer be the case with IIS 6, at least. To be honest,
I'm not exactly sure how this works with IIS 6, but it appears that
I've never implemented and SSL cert, so I'm not sure, but I
thought each SSL had to have a dedicated IP. ???
This used to be the case, but isn't any more:
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/prodtechnol/WindowsServer2003/Library/IIS/5
96b9108-b1a7-494d-885d-f8941b07554c.mspx?mfr=true
However,
I tell clients with public web sites that they probably
need a cert from a popular reputable provider in order to
avoid the browser warning. But the thing to remember is that
(in most cases) the warning is saying that your company may
not be ok ... Not that the information is unencrypted
I'm not in a shared environment. I have my own VPS.
-Original Message-
From: Dave Watts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2008 7:47 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: OT: SSL Necessary? Important?
I've never implemented and SSL cert, so I'm not sure, but I
thought
Hi, all.
Pardon a quick OT question (or two). I have a client (church) that wants
to have a directory that is accessible to the membership, but not the
general public. Access will be controlled by password/username login.
But the church is also asking about an encrypted connection using an SSL
Is the SSL encryption overkill for something like this?
IMHO yes.
Unless they are willing to pay for more protection, because it is not free.
--
___
REUSE CODE! Use custom tags;
See http://www.contentbox.com/claude/customtags/tagstore.cfm
(Please send any
On Jan 24, 2008 11:38 AM, Claude Schneegans [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Is the SSL encryption overkill for something like this?
IMHO yes.
Unless they are willing to pay for more protection, because it is not free.
Unless they use OpenSSL and self-sign, which is free. Of course users
may not
35 matches
Mail list logo
