On 2007.12.20 at 16:55:43 +, Dr Stephen Henson wrote:
Well it depends what you want to do. A (usually) readable representation
of an X509 DN would have needed X509_NAME_oneline() back then.
A portable way of using DNs for access control could use either the DN
What do you mean under
Hi Bill,
Also, prefer the user specified port for example ServerName.
what do you think about making the SSL port also _properly_ configurable?
I suggested already some months ago a patch for that without feedback
I know that you do that already with the Win32 conf, and I do it for NetWare;
Guenter Knauf wrote:
Hi Bill,
Also, prefer the user specified port for example ServerName.
what do you think about making the SSL port also _properly_ configurable?
I suggested already some months ago a patch for that without feedback
I know that you do that already with the Win32 conf,
-Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
Von: William A. Rowe, Jr.
Gesendet: Freitag, 21. Dezember 2007 00:06
An: dev@httpd.apache.org
Betreff: Re: svn commit: r605396 -
/httpd/httpd/branches/2.2.x/support/httxt2dbm.c
Ruediger Pluem wrote:
On 12/19/2007 04:02 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Guenter Knauf wrote:
Hi Steve,
A patch is also in bug #34607. Originally no released version of OpenSSL
supported SNI it was an experimental addition to the HEAD which will
become 0.9.9-dev.
I recently backported it as an option to 0.9.8f. By option I mean it
is not compiled in by default
Victor Wagner wrote:
On 2007.12.20 at 16:55:43 +, Dr Stephen Henson wrote:
And most of OpenSSL applications have same problem. I've already spend
considerable time convincing authors of various applications, that
OPENSSL_config (which is already here from 0.9.7) ought to be called.
On Thu, 20 Dec 2007, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
- IMHO the example file should not override the default DocumentRoot,
ErrorLog etc. As most other things in the file, it should be
commented out by default.
We have a specialized ftproot so we don't make assumptions for the user,
and the
Nikolas Coukouma wrote:
Ian Holsman wrote:
While open source is fantastic, and provides highly visible means.
It can still be hacked.
I can describe what has happened in this case:
1. joe hacker hacks one of the 'open source groups' machines.
at this point he is assumed to have access to
