1996-04-22 - Re: ApacheSSL

Header Data

From: Jeff Weinstein <jsw@netscape.com>
To: umwalber@cc.UManitoba.CA
Message Hash: 0768c2895bfff58586b052f9dd024f970c8e673cd4ab408aedc849ea0524e03b
Message ID: <317AAC9A.3DB4@netscape.com>
Reply To: <199604201850.NAA09592@electra.cc.umanitoba.ca>
UTC Datetime: 1996-04-22 01:46:27 UTC
Raw Date: Mon, 22 Apr 1996 09:46:27 +0800

Raw message

From: Jeff Weinstein <jsw@netscape.com>
Date: Mon, 22 Apr 1996 09:46:27 +0800
To: umwalber@cc.UManitoba.CA
Subject: Re: ApacheSSL
In-Reply-To: <199604201850.NAA09592@electra.cc.umanitoba.ca>
Message-ID: <317AAC9A.3DB4@netscape.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


Sean A. Walberg wrote:
> 
> An ISP that I have ties with  is looking to set up a secure server.
> Currently, they are running Apache.  I told them that for ~$500 they
> can put on Apache SSL and be all ready.  However, they want to buy
> Netscape (for the name, I've already given them the 40bit gospel),
> put it on a separate, firewalled machine, allow no access to it, etc,
> etc.  Is all this paranoia necessary?

  I won't argue about the merits of Apache vs. Netscape servers.
However I will point out that if your ISP friend is in Canada, they
can get the 128-bit version of the Netscape server.

	--Jeff

-- 
Jeff Weinstein - Electronic Munitions Specialist
Netscape Communication Corporation
jsw@netscape.com - http://home.netscape.com/people/jsw
Any opinions expressed above are mine.





Thread