From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM
	autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Received: by 10.129.154.16 with SMTP id r16mr2486614ywg.39.1458130176626;
        Wed, 16 Mar 2016 05:09:36 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 10.182.125.225 with SMTP id mt1mr43303obb.17.1458130176577;
 Wed, 16 Mar 2016 05:09:36 -0700 (PDT)
Path: 
 eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!mx02.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feeder01.blueworldhosting.com!peer02.iad.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!w104no7003334qge.1!news-out.google.com!k1ni186igd.0!nntp.google.com!nt3no2133438igb.0!postnews.google.com!glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2016 05:09:36 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <87wpp3ar1l.fsf@jester.gateway.pace.com>
Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
Injection-Info: glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com;
 posting-host=169.0.179.123;
 posting-account=p-xPhAkAAADjHQWEO7sFME2XBdF1P_2H
NNTP-Posting-Host: 169.0.179.123
References: <5011d79c-aaad-464e-a68e-c31a2738a820@googlegroups.com>
 <87a8lzcv5a.fsf@jester.gateway.pace.com>
 <c74d55de-d3f8-49bb-8cfd-1e8726a51cf1@googlegroups.com>
 <87wpp3ar1l.fsf@jester.gateway.pace.com>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <e7a1c6f0-9ef2-45b5-8e06-c9d5fad3c97b@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Ada for the TLS/SSL problem?
From: Peter Brooks <peter.h.m.brooks@gmail.com>
Injection-Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2016 12:09:36 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
X-Received-Bytes: 2003
X-Received-Body-CRC: 3318761316
Xref: news.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:29801
Date: 2016-03-16T05:09:36-07:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On Wednesday, 16 March 2016 08:13:44 UTC+2, Paul Rubin  wrote:
> Peter Brooks <peter.h.m.brooks@gmail.com> writes:
> > Excellent - maybe the time for the idea is here.
> 
> I talked with some crypto people about it this evening and they were
> supportive of the idea, though the general feeling these days is that
> TLS sucks.
> 
Yes, both SSL and TLS have problems. The only reason for saying 'TLS' is to give an idea of the project.

My feeling is that we'd need a general, configurable, security layer. This can be proved to work by implementing TLS.

However, stage 2 would be to develop a better, Ada-based, security layer. That would mean also having an Ada plug-in for browsers. Then it would be possible to have a secure security layer.