If RedHat does this - well - there is Suse, Debian, etc. Also we can go with
Apache/modssl and this is my prefered way
anyway... either that or twaite.
On Sat, 13 Nov 1999 15:32:18 -0600, William H. Geiger III wrote:
>In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on 11/13/99
>
> at 10:47 AM, "Erik M. A. Klin
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Sat, 13 Nov 1999, Ben Laurie wrote:
> "William H. Geiger III" wrote:
> > I am rather confused as to why Red Hat would go with a closed,
> > proprietary crypto library instead of going with OpenSSL, doesn't
> > seem to be the Linux way.
>
> Ah, bu
In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on 11/13/99
at 10:47 AM, "Erik M. A. Kline" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>> I am rather confused as to why Red Hat would go with a closed, proprietary
>> crypto library instead of going with OpenSSL, doesn't seem to be the Linux
>> way.
> I think there are stringe
On Sat, Nov 13, 1999 at 08:45:07AM -0600, William H. Geiger III wrote:
> Real-To: "William H. Geiger III" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on 11/13/99
>at 12:19 PM, Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> said:
>
> >gbroiles> It was my understanding that RHSS is
William H. Geiger III wrote:
>
>
> I am rather confused as to why Red Hat would go with a closed, proprietary
> crypto library instead of going with OpenSSL, doesn't seem to be the Linux
> way.
>
Probably because in the US if you want to use RSA then you don't have
any choice. Well at least un
