10-24-2002 02:07 AM - edited 03-09-2019 12:48 AM
I'm sorting out remote access, through the Internet, for some of our Thin Clients and I'm wondering if I need much stronger encryption then SSL. I know its a bad idea but I can't think why.
10-30-2002 07:46 AM
It really depends... firstly, if other encryption standards are supported and secondly on the level of security that is required. For example, Cisco E-Mail Manager is a Web-based, thin client solution, written in Java. Clients log in to CeM, and perform all functions, through their Web browsers. CeM doesn't handle encryption internally. Instead, it uses Secure Socket Layer (SSL) encryption support to all inbound and outbound communication. So, i guess, SSL is the only option if you are working with CeM. Of late though, progress has been made on access security using a number of different encryption-based technologies such as S-HTTP and X.509 Certificate Authorities.
11-11-2002 12:56 AM
Hi,
Yes 128 bit SSL now supported is pretty strong, unless you are transmitting extremly confidential stuff.
You can learn more about SSL at http://wp.netscape.com/eng/ssl3/
Source code for implemeting SSL is available at http://www.openssl.org
Stronger encryption can be had by using Public Key Infrastructure (PKI) more info can be had at http://www.entrust.com
Let me know if you require more info.
Discover and save your favorite ideas. Come back to expert answers, step-by-step guides, recent topics, and more.
New here? Get started with these tips. How to use Community New member guide