Re: State of Gopher and TLS?
Sean Conner <sean-/[email protected]> Wed, 26 Oct 2022 12:16:40 -0400
| Newsgroups | gmane.network.gopher.general |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
It was thus said that the Great Mateusz Viste once stated: > On 25/10/2022 14:44, Josuah Demangeon wrote: > >I think it was added because the trick to allow TLS on same port (peek at > >the first byte before really reading it) was simple and easy to implement > >server-side and has no consequence client-side (not breaking TCP-only). > > Could also crash a fragile - yet conforming - server implementation that > is not expecting to receive binary garbage from a client, or at least > pollute the server's logs with weird, possibly unreadable entries. You don't need TLS for that. The modern Internet is a very unforgiving place. Over the past month, my gopher server [1][2] has received 12 requests that fit your criteria, and they aren't all TLS (only 4). From my logs (sans TLS requests): l\0\11\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0 \14\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0bbbb0100000001 \0\0\0XXSMBr\0\0\0\0\8\1@\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0@\6\0\0\1\0\0X\0\2PC NETWORK PROGRAM 1.0\0\2MICROSOFT NETWORKS 1.03\0\2MICROSOFT NETWORKS 3.0\0\2LANMAN1.0\0\2LM1.2X002\0\2Samba\0\2NT LANMAN \0\0\0qjXn0XkX\3\2\1\5X\3\2\1 \0\30\0\6\1\0\0\1\0\0\0\0\0\0\7version\4bind\0\0\16\0\3 \18\1\0\26\0\0\0\0\0\0\11\0\6\1\0\17\0\1X\8\0\1U\0\0\1 \3\0\0,'X\0\0\0\0\0Cookie: mstshash=eltons X\0\0(rX\29\19\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\2\0\1XX\0\1X|\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0 If anything, the TLS attepts have gone down over the past year. The only time I ever found it seriously annoying was one gopher bot (similar to a web bot) making a TLS request for every request instead of caching the non-TLS result. > >And gopher with TLS still need some strateg for trusting certificates. > > > >Maybe trust on first use is good? A bit like SSH? That's a major criticism of Gemini (besides the other one, which is to remove TLS completely [3], which I find funny because TLS was the sole reason it came about---as a gopher like protocol over TLS). > Use some other tunneling instead of TLS, then. But in any case, do not > call the resulting thing "Gopher", and do not hijack a TCP port that > have been in use since 30 years... Agree, and it's known as Gemini. -spc [1] gopher://gopher.conman.org/ [2] Using my own gopher server software: https://github.com/spc476/port70 [3] There are two camps here---the first one that thinks TLS is not necessary at all, too complex and therefore, should be removed; and the second camp, which finds TLS too complex and therefore, it should be replaced with a bespoke encryption scheme they saw somewhere that is "simple" but yet no implementations exist.