Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list gopher); Fri, 02 Jun 2006 11:43:58 -0500 (CDT) Received: from mx.freeshell.org ([192.94.73.18] helo=sdf.lonestar.org ident=root) by glockenspiel.complete.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1FmCka-00066Q-ML for gopher@complete.org; Fri, 02 Jun 2006 11:43:56 -0500 Received: from sdf.lonestar.org (IDENT:newmanbe@otaku.freeshell.org [192.94.73.2]) by sdf.lonestar.org (8.13.5.20060308/8.12.10) with ESMTP id k52GhZ9a004567 for <gopher@complete.org>; Fri, 2 Jun 2006 16:43:35 GMT Received: (from newmanbe@localhost) by sdf.lonestar.org (8.13.5.20060308/8.12.8/Submit) id k52GhZGZ020739 for gopher@complete.org; Fri, 2 Jun 2006 11:43:35 -0500 (CDT) Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2006 11:43:35 -0500 From: Benn Newman <newmanbe@sdf.lonestar.org> To: gopher@complete.org Subject: [gopher] Re: RFC drafts Message-ID: <20060602164335.GA13333@SDF.LONESTAR.ORG> References: <20060518150511.18149.qmail@web35505.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <20060601212829.GA3749@SDF.LONESTAR.ORG> <006201c68658$28a93660$220110ac@YTHERIX> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <006201c68658$28a93660$220110ac@YTHERIX> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i X-Spam-Status: No (score 0.1): AWL=0.088, FORGED_RCVD_HELO=0.05 X-Virus-Scanned: by Exiscan on glockenspiel.complete.org at Fri, 02 Jun 2006 11:43:56 -0500 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-archive-position: 1310 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: gopher-bounce@complete.org Errors-to: gopher-bounce@complete.org X-original-sender: newmanbe@sdf.lonestar.org Precedence: bulk Reply-to: gopher@complete.org List-help: <mailto:ecartis@complete.org?Subject=help> List-unsubscribe: <mailto:gopher-request@complete.org?Subject=unsubscribe> List-software: Ecartis version 1.0.0 List-Id: Gopher <gopher.complete.org> X-List-ID: Gopher <gopher.complete.org> List-subscribe: <mailto:gopher-request@complete.org?Subject=subscribe> List-owner: <mailto:jgoerzen@complete.org> List-post: <mailto:gopher@complete.org> List-archive: <http://www.complete.org/mailinglists/archives/> X-list: gopher

On Fri, Jun 02, 2006 at 11:21:01AM -0400, Trevor wrote: > this intrigues me. > > (sorry i don't look familiar. been lurking the last couple of years.) > > one downfall, i feel, with gopher is it is clear text. has anyone thought > about, besides me, an sGopher protocol? i think gopher would get more > mainstream use if it had security built into it. many companies refuse to > use anything that sends clear text over a wire. just a thought. Gopher over SSL/TLS (from my understanding) is easy and already possible. You can use something like stunnel (on the server) and socat (on the client) if you (the client) do not mind setting up a new socat for each server. It's really only a matter of changing the client. -- Benn Newman -- Attached file included as plaintext by Ecartis --

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (NetBSD)

iEYEARECAAYFAkSAarcACgkQFE65lPR8xrFRZQCfVlQ5P8ppZrwYs/ZF5Y4UtWix kI0An2MN8+EwmrK1zA5xvE9pz/Pfi6uD =hCXF -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----