Re: SSL/TLS instead of SSL in docs - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Euler Taveira
Subject Re: SSL/TLS instead of SSL in docs
Date
Msg-id cdc18e3b-f664-4727-8410-a5b9df482a15@www.fastmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: SSL/TLS instead of SSL in docs  (Daniel Gustafsson <daniel@yesql.se>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Wed, Jun 30, 2021, at 5:46 PM, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
> On 30 Jun 2021, at 20:20, Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@enterprisedb.com> wrote:

> I am not in favor of this direction.  I think it just adds tediousness and doesn't really help anyone.  If we are worried about correct terminology, then we should just change everything to TLS.

I actually think SSL/TLS has won the debate of "correct terminology" for
describing a secure connection encrypted by a TLS protocol.

TLS is described as a successor of SSL. However, the terminology SSL is still
popular when you are talking about secure connection over a computer network.
It seems that's one of the main reasons for articles/documentation use SSL/TLS.

The primary use of SSL/TLS is to secure WWW connections over HTTP protocol. A
recent survey reveals that SSL is supported by less than 4% of the websites in
the world [1]. SSL 3.0 (the latest published protocol version) is deprecated
since 2015 (6 years ago) [2]. There is no web browser that has SSL enabled by
default (indeed, most of them don't support SSL anymore).

I tend to agree with Peter that the correct terminology is TLS. However, SSL is
still popular (probably because popular SSL/TLS libraries contain SSL in its
name). If we change to SSL/TLS, I'm afraid we have this discussion again for
(a) remove SSL or (b) add another popular secure protocol and we end up with
SSL/TLS/FOO terminology.

Commit fe61df7f introduces a new configure option that is --with-ssl. Such
option is also used in other softwares too. All configuration parameters
related to SSL/TLS starts with ssl. It is hard to decide among popular (SSL),
correct (TLS), and mix (SSL/TLS).

If I have to pick one, it would be SSL/TLS. It mentions both acronyms that is
easier to correlate with configuration parameters, secure connections (via
--with-ssl) and current protocol (TLS).

Your patch doesn't apply anymore and requires a rebase. I'm attaching a new
version. It looks good to me. I noticed that you are using
<acronym>SSL/TLS</acronym>, however, the acronyms are declared separated. It
doesn't seem to be a presentation issue per se but I'm asking just in case.




--
Euler Taveira

Attachment

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Mark Dilger
Date:
Subject: Re: Delegating superuser tasks to new security roles (Was: Granting control of SUSET gucs to non-superusers)
Next
From: Simon Riggs
Date:
Subject: Re: pgbench using COPY FREEZE