On Wed, 03 Sep 2014 16:31:13 +0200, Antoine Pitrou <solip...@pitrou.net> wrote:
> On Tue, 02 Sep 2014 21:29:16 -0400
> "R. David Murray" <rdmur...@bitdance.com> wrote:
> > 
> > The top proposal so far is an sslcustomize.py file that could be used to
> > either decrease or increase the default security.  This is a much less
> > handy solution than application options (eg, curl, wget) that allow
> > disabling security for "this cert" or "this CLI session".  It also is
> > more prone to unthinking abuse since it is persistent.  So perhaps
> > it is indeed not worth it.  (That's why I suggested an environment
> > variable...something you could specify on the command line for a one-off.)
> 
> I'll be fine with not adding any hooks at all, and letting people
> configure their application code correctly :-)

Again, the problem arises when it is not *their* application code, but
a third party tool that hasn't been ported to 3.5.

I'm OK with letting go of this invalid-cert issue myself, given the lack
of negative feedback Twisted got.  I'll just keep my fingers crossed.

--David
_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

Reply via email to