> [...]
> use. The problem is that the list is empty! The exact same list contains
> the installed certificates, when I control it in 'passive' mode so to
> speak.
> In trying to find out the problem I have visited a number of sites, but
> the picture that I get is quite confused. Which versions
Peter Xiao wrote:
--
Hi,I have a question regarding the following situation.
In the US, using strong cryptography is regulated. However, there are
certain situations under which you can use strong cryptography and the
export licenses are approved on the per case basis. I know the base
I've been trying to get SSLRequireSSL to work from .htaccess, so I can
make certain directories require ssl. Nothing I do seems to work, and if
I try to access a dir with SSLRequireSSL in the .htaccess, I get this
error:
Internal Server Error
The server encountered an internal error or misconfi
On Thu, Oct 29, 1998, Kevin West wrote:
> I've been trying to get SSLRequireSSL to work from .htaccess, so I can
> make certain directories require ssl. Nothing I do seems to work, and if
> I try to access a dir with SSLRequireSSL in the .htaccess, I get this
> error:
>
> Internal Server Error
On Thu, 29 Oct 1998, Ralf S. Engelschall wrote:
>
> Seems like you have FileInfo not allowed for this .htaccess file. Look for
> the AllowOverride directives in your server configuration. An "AllowOverride
> +FileInfo" is required for SSLRequireSSL to be useable in .htaccess files.
>
That
Hi all,
So what is the deal with using mod_ssl and SSLeay for a site that is making
some money? Does everyone actually buy a RSA license? Is it possible to? It
all seems confusing.
thanks
__
Apache Interface to SSLeay (mod_ssl)
Full_Name: Mathew Butler
Version: 2.0.13
OS: Linux/Redhat 5.1
Submission from: proxy2.insight.com (198.187.200.39)
According to the 'Additional Environment Variables' section of the mod_ssl
documentation, the SSL_SERVER_I_(x509|DN) is supposed to be the information of
the issuer of the signature
Full_Name: Mathew Butler
Version: 2.0.13
OS: Linux/Redhat 5.1
Submission from: proxy2.insight.com (198.187.200.39)
According to the 'Additional Environment Variables' section of the mod_ssl
documentation, the SSL_SERVER_I_(x509|DN) is supposed to be the information of
the issuer of the signature
On Thu, Oct 29, 1998, a wrote:
> So what is the deal with using mod_ssl and SSLeay for a site that is making
> some money? Does everyone actually buy a RSA license? Is it possible to? It
> all seems confusing.
We already discussed this stuff recently (look inside the sw-mod-ssl archives
for the
On Thu, Oct 29, 1998, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Full_Name: Mathew Butler
> Version: 2.0.13
> OS: Linux/Redhat 5.1
> Submission from: proxy2.insight.com (198.187.200.39)
>
> According to the 'Additional Environment Variables' section of the mod_ssl
> documentation, the SSL_SERVER_I_(x509|DN) is
10 matches
Mail list logo
