[aklug] Small Rant: TLS 1.2

[begin rant]

It seems to me (anecdotal evidence only) that most people seem to have
all the wrong priorities when it comes to Web browser features and
functionality, and that these priorities then filter up into the
priorities for the actual development. E.g., most people care more about
the default color scheme of the interface, or about a 2% decrease in
load time, than they do about the truly critical features.

Firefox and Chromium are both browsers that are advertised as cutting
edge, and I think in many respects they have been. But I'm a little
annoyed that both of these browsers still only support TLS 1.0, even
though TLS 1.2 was defined two years ago and TLS 1.1 was defined 5 years
ago. Both browsers depend on the NSS library, which only supports 1.0 at
this time. Currently there are plans to implement 1.1, but nobody seems
to have any idea when 1.2 will become available.

The reason I'm rather annoyed is because version 1.2 is the only version
of SSL/TLS so far that supports the Server Name extension; i.e., TLS 1.2
is the only version of SSL that is compatible with single-IP virtual
hosting. So, I've either got to leave all my sites un-authenticated, or
buy a bunch of static IPs.

Anyway, I might be less discouraged, except for that fact that Internet
Explorer /and/ Opera have both already implemented TLS 1.2! How
embarrassing!

Anyway, I submitted my opinion to Firefox Feedback. I think tomorrow
I'll look into the NSS code, though I imagine the likelihood of my being
able to make a meaningful contribution to an encryption library is
pretty slim.

[end rant]

-- 
frigidcode.com
theologia.indicium.us
---------
To unsubscribe, send email to <aklug-request@aklug.org>
with 'unsubscribe' in the message body.