Does rpm -Uvh secureweb also automatically get rid of the existing initialization of httpd from rc.d level 3 file and make it httpsd initialization? So nothing else will be changed except that now it will be just httpsd.conf? "Andrew Strothers" <drew@ntech.net> wrote: Cut and paste your virtual hosts from the old file into the new file. It will work fine. Drew -----Original Message----- From: Kevin U. [mailto:kevung@usa.net] Sent: Sunday, January 02, 2000 11:21 AM To: redhat-secure-server@redhat.com Subject: httpd.conf replaced with httpsd.conf ?? Will installing SWS 3.1 replace httpd.conf with a new httpsd.conf? And we will not need to run httpd anymore? How would I recall all my preconfiguration (a lot!) from my old httpd.conf? ____________________________________________________________________ Get free email and a permanent address at http://www.amexmail.com/?A=3D1
Actually you will still have an httpd.conf file but it is a symbolic link to
httpsd.conf. Your old httpd.conf will be preserved in httpd.conf.rpmsave but
I''m paranoid and would back it up myself before I did the install.
Drew
-----Original Message-----
From: Kevin U. [mailto:kevung@usa.net]
Sent: Sunday, January 02, 2000 3:29 PM
To: redhat-secure-server@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [RE: httpd.conf replaced with httpsd.conf ??]
Does rpm -Uvh secureweb also automatically get rid of the existing
initialization of httpd from rc.d level 3 file and make it httpsd
initialization? So nothing else will be changed except that now it will be
just httpsd.conf?
"Andrew Strothers" <drew@ntech.net> wrote:
Cut and paste your virtual hosts from the old file into the new file. It
will work fine.
Drew
-----Original Message-----
From: Kevin U. [mailto:kevung@usa.net]
Sent: Sunday, January 02, 2000 11:21 AM
To: redhat-secure-server@redhat.com
Subject: httpd.conf replaced with httpsd.conf ??
Will installing SWS 3.1 replace httpd.conf with a new httpsd.conf? And we
will not need to run httpd anymore?
How would I recall all my preconfiguration (a lot!) from my old httpd.conf?
____________________________________________________________________
Get free email and a permanent address at http://www.amexmail.com/?A=1
--
PLEASE read the Red Hat FAQ, Tips, Errata and the MAILING LIST ARCHIVES!
http://www.redhat.com http://archive.redhat.com
To unsubscribe: mail redhat-secure-server-request@redhat.com with
"unsubscribe" as the Subject.
Ok, this is my first post to this group although I have been lurking for some time. I have installed Redhat6.1 and regular apache was (and still is) working fine. I''ve followed the README.SSL for apache-ssl1.3.11+openssl1.38.tar.gz from apache-ssl.org and now have the directories /usr/local/apache/bin with httpsd var/ssl and user/src/apache_1.3.11/SSLconf/conf (where i did make certificate) in addition to /etc/httpd and home/httpd from regular apache. When I got to httpsd://mywebserversip/ I get no response. Do I only have to symbolically link to httpsd.conf from /etc/httpd, and leave linuxconf unchanged to get apache-ssl to work? What do I do with the Certificate path fields in linuxconf? Also, where should I copy my .pem file to? Regards, James. ----- Original Message ----- From: Andrew Strothers <drew@ntech.net> To: <redhat-secure-server@redhat.com> Sent: Monday, January 03, 2000 5:01 PM Subject: RE: [RE: httpd.conf replaced with httpsd.conf ??]> Actually you will still have an httpd.conf file but it is a symbolic linkto> httpsd.conf. Your old httpd.conf will be preserved in httpd.conf.rpmsavebut> I''m paranoid and would back it up myself before I did the install. > > Drew > > -----Original Message----- > From: Kevin U. [mailto:kevung@usa.net] > Sent: Sunday, January 02, 2000 3:29 PM > To: redhat-secure-server@redhat.com > Subject: Re: [RE: httpd.conf replaced with httpsd.conf ??] > > > Does rpm -Uvh secureweb also automatically get rid of the existing > initialization of httpd from rc.d level 3 file and make it httpsd > initialization? So nothing else will be changed except that now it will be > just httpsd.conf? > > > "Andrew Strothers" <drew@ntech.net> wrote: > Cut and paste your virtual hosts from the old file into the new file. It > will work fine. > > Drew > > -----Original Message----- > From: Kevin U. [mailto:kevung@usa.net] > Sent: Sunday, January 02, 2000 11:21 AM > To: redhat-secure-server@redhat.com > Subject: httpd.conf replaced with httpsd.conf ?? > > Will installing SWS 3.1 replace httpd.conf with a new httpsd.conf? And we > will not need to run httpd anymore? > > How would I recall all my preconfiguration (a lot!) from my oldhttpd.conf?> > > > > > ____________________________________________________________________ > Get free email and a permanent address at http://www.amexmail.com/?A=1 > > > -- > PLEASE read the Red Hat FAQ, Tips, Errata and the MAILING LIST ARCHIVES! > http://www.redhat.com http://archive.redhat.com > To unsubscribe: mail redhat-secure-server-request@redhat.com with > "unsubscribe" as the Subject. > > > -- > PLEASE read the Red Hat FAQ, Tips, Errata and the MAILING LIST ARCHIVES! > http://www.redhat.com http://archive.redhat.com > To unsubscribe: mail redhat-secure-server-request@redhat.com with > "unsubscribe" as the Subject. >
On Thu, 17 Feb 2000, James Abbott wrote:> Ok, this is my first post to this group although I have been lurking for > some time. I have installed Redhat6.1 and regular apache was (and still is) > working fine. > I''ve followed the README.SSL for apache-ssl1.3.11+openssl1.38.tar.gz from > apache-ssl.org and now have the directories >This is not a support list for apache-ssl, which is illegal to use in the United States because of RSA Patent issues. It is only for our own SSL-enabled version of apache incorporating a licensed version of the RSA encryption engine. --- Preston Brown pbrown@redhat.com Red Hat, Inc.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1> This is not a support list for apache-ssl, which is illegal to use > in the United States because of RSA Patent issues. It is only for > our own SSL-enabled version of apache incorporating a licensed > version of the RSA encryption engine.I agree it is not a support list for Apache-SSL, but it isn''t illegal to use Apache-SSL in the US. If using Apache-SSL you must use RSAREF, which cannot be used for any activities that generate revenue, such as e-commerce, and another good example being universities which charge (however indirectly) for network resources. Kurt Seifried - Senior Analyst http://www.securityportal.com/ http://www.cryptoarchive.net/ http://www.seifried.org/ -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGPfreeware 6.5.2 for non-commercial use <http://www.pgp.com> iQA/AwUBOKtmh4b9cm7tpZo3EQLlCwCgqR9X8uokiKV4gfENbAOc53CFcq0AnRKT NjTL8CmCOkDOb6uThefoJwB0 =lnTS -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Michael H. Warfield
2000-Feb-17 07:39 UTC
Re: [RE: httpd.conf replaced with httpsd.conf ??]
On Thu, Feb 17, 2000 at 10:25:26AM -0500, pbrown@redhat.com wrote:> On Wed, 16 Feb 2000, Kurt Seifried wrote:> > I agree it is not a support list for Apache-SSL, but it isn''t illegal > > to use Apache-SSL in the US. If using Apache-SSL you must use RSAREF, > > which cannot be used for any activities that generate revenue, such > > as e-commerce, and another good example being universities which > > charge (however indirectly) for network resources.> This may or may not be true. RSA doesn''t even license RSAREF any more.No... RSA doesn''t supply or support RSAREF (actually RSAREF2) any longer. The license is still valid and you can still use it and you can still acquire it from other sources. RSA even recently blessed the buffer overflow patch that fixed one of the two problems with ssh-1.2.27 when compiled with RSAREF2 (the other was in the rsaglue.c file). They stated that it would be acceptable under the RSAREF2 license for people to apply and use the buffer overflow patch, even though the patch did not originate from them.> --- > Preston Brown > pbrown@redhat.com Red Hat, Inc.Mike -- Michael H. Warfield | (770) 985-6132 | mhw@WittsEnd.com (The Mad Wizard) | (770) 331-2437 | http://www.wittsend.com/mhw/ NIC whois: MHW9 | An optimist believes we live in the best of all PGP Key: 0xDF1DD471 | possible worlds. A pessimist is sure of it!
On Wed, 16 Feb 2000, Kurt Seifried wrote:> I agree it is not a support list for Apache-SSL, but it isn''t illegal > to use Apache-SSL in the US. If using Apache-SSL you must use RSAREF, > which cannot be used for any activities that generate revenue, such > as e-commerce, and another good example being universities which > charge (however indirectly) for network resources.This may or may not be true. RSA doesn''t even license RSAREF any more. --- Preston Brown pbrown@redhat.com Red Hat, Inc. From mail@mail.redhat.com Feb 10:39:52 2000 -0500 Received: (qmail 863 invoked from network); 17 Feb 2000 15:39:54 -0000 Received: from mail.redhat.com (199.183.24.239) by lists.redhat.com with SMTP; 17 Feb 2000 15:39:53 -0000 Received: from alcove.wittsend.com (root@alcove.wittsend.com [130.205.0.20]) by mail.redhat.com (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA28924; Thu, 17 Feb 2000 10:39:52 -0500 Received: (from mhw@localhost) by alcove.wittsend.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id KAA02483; Thu, 17 Feb 2000 10:39:51 -0500 Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2000 10:39:51 -0500 From: "Michael H. Warfield" <mhw@wittsend.com> To: pbrown@redhat.com Cc: Kurt Seifried <listuser@seifried.org>, redhat-secure-server@redhat.com, recipient list not shown: ; Subject: Re: [RE: httpd.conf replaced with httpsd.conf ??] Message-ID: <20000217103951.D26513@alcove.wittsend.com> References: <001001bf78f4$7c487560$6400030a@seifried.org> <Pine.LNX.4.10.10002171025000.21966-100000@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii User-Agent: Mutt/1.1.2i In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10002171025000.21966-100000@localhost.localdomain>; from pbrown@redhat.com on Thu, Feb 17, 2000 at 10:25:26AM -0500 On Thu, Feb 17, 2000 at 10:25:26AM -0500, pbrown@redhat.com wrote:> On Wed, 16 Feb 2000, Kurt Seifried wrote:> > I agree it is not a support list for Apache-SSL, but it isn''t illegal > > to use Apache-SSL in the US. If using Apache-SSL you must use RSAREF, > > which cannot be used for any activities that generate revenue, such > > as e-commerce, and another good example being universities which > > charge (however indirectly) for network resources.> This may or may not be true. RSA doesn''t even license RSAREF any more.No... RSA doesn''t supply or support RSAREF (actually RSAREF2) any longer. The license is still valid and you can still use it and you can still acquire it from other sources. RSA even recently blessed the buffer overflow patch that fixed one of the two problems with ssh-1.2.27 when compiled with RSAREF2 (the other was in the rsaglue.c file). They stated that it would be acceptable under the RSAREF2 license for people to apply and use the buffer overflow patch, even though the patch did not originate from them.> --- > Preston Brown > pbrown@redhat.com Red Hat, Inc.Mike -- Michael H. Warfield | (770) 985-6132 | mhw@WittsEnd.com (The Mad Wizard) | (770) 331-2437 | http://www.wittsend.com/mhw/ NIC whois: MHW9 | An optimist believes we live in the best of all PGP Key: 0xDF1DD471 | possible worlds. A pessimist is sure of it!