Re: SSL without certificates
From: MS (ms_at_ms.net)
Date: 07/04/03
- Previous message:
: "2 shut ports use this" - In reply to: Splatter: "Re: SSL without certificates"
- Next in thread: Terry: "Re: SSL without certificates"
- Reply: Terry: "Re: SSL without certificates"
- Reply: RobH: "Re: SSL without certificates"
- Reply: Ms: "Re: SSL without certificates"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Date: Fri, 04 Jul 2003 12:34:33 -0400
Splatter wrote:
> "MS" <ms@ms.net> wrote in message news:3F0428C6.5020609@ms.net...
>
>> I want to use SSL for client to server communication. The server is
>> W2K. I don't care about server authentication, I just want to
>> encrypt the connection. Do I still have to create and install a
>> dummy certificate for the server, or is there a way to bypass it?
>
>
> I'm not sure what your specific needs are but I got around this using
> 2K at home by installing the windows certificate authority, and using
> it to roll my own CA & website certificate. HTH DP
>
>
In response to my question (the post attached above) I got a lot of
advice and information from Splatter and others. But I still don't know
the answer to my original question:
Does the Microsoft W2K implementation of SSL=TLS allow bypassing the
handshake step that sends server's certificate to the client? In other
words, can I set up an SSL-encrypted connections to the W2K server
without installing a certificate on the server?
The specification of the TLS standard does allow that: The handshake
protocol can be set up so that no certificates are used, and the client
and the server use an "anonymous" key exchange protocol to agree on an
encryption key. The question is, does Microsoft implementation allow it?
And if so, how do I configure the server to operate this way?
As I said in my original post, I want to use SSL to encrypt the
client-to-server connections. So the advice to use SSH or IPSec doesn't
help.
My client is not a browser, so I am not worried about any popup messages
that specific browsers may display when they cannot authenticate a web
server.
mccarthur@btinternet.com wrote that the client needs the server's cert
because the client uses the public key from the cert to encrypt the data
sent to the server. That is not correct. The data sent back and forth
along the SSL connection are encrypted using a symmetric (secret) key,
not a public key. The secret key is created during the SSL handshake.
Rainer Gerhards wrote that I can get a free certificate from sources on
the Internet. That's good information, but I would prefer not to deal
with the cert at all if I can avoid it.
ASMdood wrote that encryption without authentication is useless. I
agree, but in my application this is not an issue.
As I stated in my original post, I cannot find the answers in Microsoft
documentation. Anybody out there who is familiar with the Microsoft
implementation of SSL in W2K and can answer my question?
MS
- Previous message:
: "2 shut ports use this" - In reply to: Splatter: "Re: SSL without certificates"
- Next in thread: Terry: "Re: SSL without certificates"
- Reply: Terry: "Re: SSL without certificates"
- Reply: RobH: "Re: SSL without certificates"
- Reply: Ms: "Re: SSL without certificates"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Relevant Pages
|