Re: IMAPS problems...
- From: Brian Stafford <brian stafford uklinux net>
- To: chbm chbm nu
- Cc: Balsa List <balsa-list gnome org>
- Subject: Re: IMAPS problems...
- Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2001 15:47:21 +0100
On Wed, 22 August 15:36 Carlos Morgado wrote:
> On 2001.08.22 15:06:53 +0100 Brian Stafford wrote:
> > Right, I missed that bit. Anyhow an OpenSSL based SSL tunnel will do TLS
> > too!
> > No matter what, if TLS is available then use it.
> TLS inside SSL = overhead
If a tunnel is in use, the server doesn't know that encryption is already
on the channel. If the server is doing the TLS/SSL session natively then
it can't apply encryption twice anyway.
What I was getting at though is that given the choice between SSL and TLS
*always* use TLS and never use SSL.
> > But that puzzles me though. If the server can do TLS/SSL directly, why
> > tunnel?
> ops, my fault, not tunnel in the sense of ssh, tunnel in the sense of SSL
OK. In this case I don't see how its possible to encrypt twice with any of
the TLS toolkits I'm aware of.
] [Thread Prev