Re: svn + SSL?

On Mon, Dec 21, 2015 at 2:21 PM, David Brodbeck <brodbd_at_uw.edu> wrote:
>
>
> On Sat, Dec 19, 2015 at 2:43 AM, Daniel Shahaf <d.s_at_daniel.shahaf.name>
> wrote:
>>
>> Or perhaps stunnel, which has its pros and cons (e.g., an SSL
>> vulnerability won't compromise the svn process).
>
>
> I thought about suggesting that, too, but I'm not sure it's workable. While
> it'd be easy to set up on the server side, it would be very clumsy on the
> client side, since the client isn't going to understand svn-over-TLS without
> its own stunnel instance.

Sure it can. This is similar to how svn+ssh works. For stunnel, you'd
set up a port tunnel from a port on your localhost.
Received on 2015-12-22 01:07:58 CET