frontpage.
newsnewestaskshowjobs

Made with ♥ by @iamnishanth

Open Source @Github

Open in hackernews

Why SSL was renamed to TLS in late 90s (2014)

https://tim.dierks.org/2014/05/security-standards-and-name-changes-in.html
132•Bogdanp•10h ago

Comments

WhyNotHugo•5h ago
I like this writing style. Informative, has some flavour/personality, but clear and concise.
userbinator•4h ago
tl;dr: politics.

I still like to occasionally refer to TLS 1.3 as "SSL 3.4" to see whether people are aware of the history.

ekr____•17m ago
When TLS 1.3 was finally standardized, there was quite a bit of debate about whether in light of the how different it was from TLS 1.2 we should continue to use the 1.3 version number. ISTR that TLS 2 and TLS 4.0 were both floated--though I don't recall SSL 3.4--but eventually the WG decided to stick with the 1.3 version number we had been using throughout the rest of the process.
pkulak•4h ago
“Transport Layer Security” really is a better name though. I also like to say “TLS”. Two Ses in a row makes you sound like a snake.
jeroenhd•4h ago
I think SSL is a better fit, actually. In theory TLS could be a transport-layer security mechanism that would let arbitrary protocols run on top of it (like IPSec does), but in practice it's pretty much tied up to TCP sockets. The UDP variant (DTLS, and I suppose QUIC) isn't part of the TLS spec for instance. Of course we have kernel TLS on Linux now, and Windows also has infrastructure like that, but it isn't as easy as setting a flag on a socket to turn TLS on.

Plus, who doesn't like to sound like a snake sometimes? Snakes are badass.

LukeShu•2h ago
No? The "transport" layer is layer 4 in the 7-layer OSI model (physical/datalink/network/transport/session/presentation/application) and 5-layer IP model (physical/network/internetwork/transport/application). That is: the "transport" provides reliable continuous data-stream abstraction over the lower-layers' discreet and unreliable packets; e.g. TCP.

And that data-stream the interface that TLS provides; to the higher layers it looks like a transport layer.

o11c•3h ago
The problem is that TLS was already in widespread use for "thread local storage".

Transport Layer Security is widely documented as beginning in 1999.

I can find references to "Thread Local Storage" going back to at least 1996. That particular term seems more common in the Microsoft (and maybe IBM, does anyone have an OS/2 programming manual?) world at the time; Pthreads (1995) and Unix in general tended to call it "thread-specific data".

It's possible that the highly influential 2001 Itanium ABI document (which directly led to Drepper's TLS paper) brought the term to (widespread) use in the broader Unix world, though Sun (for both Solaris and Java?) was using the term previously. But it's also possible that I'm just missing the reference material.

kstrauser•3h ago
I don’t doubt that, but I never heard Thread Local Storage until much later than that. While it might well’ve been common within its ecosystem, I don’t think it was widely known outside it.
JdeBP•2h ago
I might have an OS/2 programming manual. But I don't need it. (-: This was not an OS/2 thing. We had to make map data structures using thread IDs. Or our language runtimes did.

Look to Windows NT rather than to OS/2 for thread-local storage. TlsAlloc() et al. were in the Win32 API right from NT 3.1, I think.

andrewfromx•3h ago
picture kaa from the jungle book discussing tcp security and arguing for the s-s-l name. In fact maybe adding a 3rd s.
layer8•2h ago
“SSL” is easier to pronounce, because the tongue barely changes position between the three letters, compared to “TLS”.
chollida1•4h ago
> As a part of the cutthroat competition, Microsoft decided to revise the SSL 2 protocol with some additions of their own, and specified a protocol called "PCT" that was derived from SSL 2. It was only supported in IE and IIS.

> Netscape also wanted to address SSL 2 issues, but wasn't going to let Microsoft take leadership/ownership in the standard, so they developed SSL 3.0, which was a more significant departure.

I remember this moment and this is where I realized that Microsoft wasn't always the bad guy here. They had the better implementation and were willing to share it. But Netscape in this instance acted like kids and wouldn't cooperate at all. Which is why this meeting had to occur and by that point it was clear Netscape had lost the browser and it wasn't going to be close.

Hence the quick about face by Netscape to accept what was pretty much Microsoft's proposed solution.

I can't speak to the rest of Microsoft's browser decisions and given the court ruling it's clear they weren't the good guys either but this opened my eyes to the fact that all companies are the bad guys some time:)

TZubiri•4h ago
Microsoft was the bad guy in a movie where you have a war right before aliens invade and you figure out that there's bigger enemies.

FSF hated Microsoft because they released binaries without source code, they were THE enemy, nowadays, you are lucky if you get a binary to study and modify! The standard from any competitive developer is to hide the binary and source behind a server. Try to study and modify that!

chollida1•3h ago
I agree with your entire statement:)
simfree•1h ago
Flaky, unreliable, not web standards compliant, hosted services suck to deal with.

Who needs to add a CORS header to allow Sentry.io or Cloudflare's metrics to work on this 2014 era SaaS that the developer has wandered away from?

II2II•12m ago
For the FSF, Microsoft releasing binaries without source was reason enough to hat them but it was not the only reason why people, including those in the FSF, hated them. Microsoft was very much a company that used their dominant market position to lock customers in and the competition out. (Remember embraced, extend, extinguish?) The Microsoft of today looks like a cuddly teddy bear in comparision.
thayne•3h ago
Forcing the name to be chnaged from SSL to TLS seems pretty petty to me.

Two decades later, and it is still common for people to call TLS SSL.

hsbauauvhabzb•2h ago
Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice?
amenghra•4h ago
I remember "SSL and TLS: Designing and Building Secure Systems" by Eric Rescorla being really useful to understand the history behind TLS and how we got here. The book was written in 2001 and warned about some issues which turned into CVEs a bit later. You might find used copies for a couple bucks.
ricardo81•3h ago
This is one of those ones where it's awkward with a certain crowd. At some point SSL was https and class C meant a /24 subnetwork for webmaster types.

I've found that certain crowds will get angry about the vernacular vs a crowd that always understood something a particular way.

In any event, we have to stick with the times, especially with new entrants that stick with the new terms.

ahofmann•3h ago
Oh wow, I just discovered that my brain unconsciously had a hard time to differentiate between SSL and TLS. And now, after two friggin decades I find out, why!
oc1•3h ago
Same. I feel so dumb now. After 15 years in this industry i finally figured out that ssl and tls are the same.
0xbadcafebee•2h ago
No no, they're not. They're names of specific protocols with specific capabilities and versions. "SSL 1.0" and "TLS 1.0" are very different. (see https://aws.amazon.com/compare/the-difference-between-ssl-an...)

The important bits:

- "SSL" is a set of protocols so ridiculously old, busted and insecure that nobody should ever use them. It's like talking about Sanskrit; ancient and dead.

- "TLS" is way better than "SSL", but still there are insecure versions. Any version before 1.2 is no longer supported due to security holes.

- Technically an "ssl certificate" is neither "SSL" nor "TLS", it's really an "X.509 Certificate with Extended Key Usage: Server Authentication". But that doesn't roll off the tongue. You could use a cert from 1996 in a modern TLS server; the problem would be its expiration date, and the hash/signature functions used back then are deprecated. (some servers still support insecure methods to support older clients, which is bad)

MOARDONGZPLZ•2h ago
Right, but they accomplish the same thing and people move monotonically from SSL to TLS. It’s not like choosing between React and Angular, but like choosing between React version 5 and React version 10 for a new project. SSL and TLS are the same in all meaningful respects from this perspective.
0xbadcafebee•2h ago
Hotdogs and hamburgers are the same in all meaningful respects.
MOARDONGZPLZ•1h ago
They are not. But a Chicago dog is meaningfully the same as a New York Dog (just with some more vegetables).
JdeBP•2h ago
Back closer to the time, there were some people around who insisted that SSL specifically meant the old versions and it was all TLS now. I recall a couple of occasions where people were talking about UCSPI-SSL and someone stepped in to explain that We Don't Do SSL Now. As the headlined article says, that contrived distinction seems silly with the hindsight of decades.

The nomenclature was complicated in people's minds by SMTP. Because there was SMTP over a largely transparent encrypted connection, and SMTP where it started unencrypted and negotiated a switch, as well as plain old cleartext. It didn't help that RFC 2487 explained that STARTTLS negotiated "TLS more commonly known as SSL". RFC 8314 explains some of the historical mess that SMTP got into with two types of SMTP (relay and submission) and three types of transport.

And the "S" for "submission" could be confused with the "S"s in both "SSL" and "TLS". It's not just TLAs that are ambiguous, indeed. There was confusion over "SMTPS" and "SSMTP", not helped at all by the people who named programs things like "sSMTP".

I'm still calling it SSL in 2025. (-: And so is Erwin Hoffmann.

* https://www.fehcom.de/ipnet/sslserver.html

* https://manpages.debian.org/unstable/ssmtp/ssmtp.8.en.html

yardstick•3h ago
Would adoption of the new name been easier if the version started at TLS 3.0/matched the SSL version it originated from?
tptacek•2h ago
NB: I feel like the consensus was very firmly established by 2014 that SSL 2.0 was gravely flawed (its handshake isn't even properly authenticated).
albert_e•2h ago
Related

Randomness and the Netscape Browser January 1996 Dr. Dobb's Journal

https://people.eecs.berkeley.edu/~daw/papers/ddj-netscape.ht...

This was written in 1996. The language used feels already much different from today's publications. God I feel old.

quietbritishjim•2h ago
> This was written in 1996. The language used feels already much different from today's publications. God I feel old.

That depends on which publications you're looking at, just as it did in 1996. An article from LWN [1] today, for example, reads in a fairly similar style. Maybe slightly less stuffy, because it's targeted at a slightly more general audience.

[1] https://lwn.net/

disruptiveink•2h ago
Wait, but didn't TLS 1.0 have significant improvements over SSL 3.0? The article makes it seems that just a couple of things were tweaked just to make it different for the sake of being different.
layer8•2h ago
Indeed there are significant changes and improvements, though it’s not a complete redesign like SSL 3.0 was.
jedberg•2h ago
Curious, when you tell someone they need to access a website securely (or any other case where you might use the term TLS or SSL), do you:

1. Say SSL or TLS?

2. How old are you (or did you start working before 1999?)

I'll reply with my answer too.

jedberg•2h ago
1. SSL

2. Started working before 1999

curmudgeon22•2h ago
SSL, started computer science in 2010
jedberg•2h ago
I was going to reply to you and tell you that you're too young to be a curmudgeon, but then I realized, no, I'm just old!
gryfft•2h ago
Reflex is to say SSL but usually correct myself to TLS. Started in IT in 2006 (was a nerd a few years before that though)
jozvolskyef•2h ago
I second this, started around the same time.
Rendello•2h ago
SSL, started programming in maybe 2012. Possibly because of HTTPS or similarity with SSH.
amiga386•2h ago
I say HTTPS certificate.

If I need to specifically say SSL or TLS, it's SSL (as in OpenSSL, LibreSSL, BoringSSL, SSL certificates, Qualys SSL Labs, SSL Server Test). TLS is a made up name for SSL.

I do say e.g. "TLSv1.2" if I need to name the specific protocol, that's about it.

I was working before 1999.

firesteelrain•1h ago
I tell my developers to be compliant that they need to use TLS/SSL
Octoth0rpe•1h ago
1. SSL 2. Started working in 2000, right on the boundary
tptacek•1h ago
I say TLS, and started working in the field in 1994.
mindcrime•1h ago
These days I tend to say "TLS" more and more, but until just a year or two ago it was almost always "SSL". And "SSL" still slips out occasionally.

I'm 51, started working in IT in the mid 90's.

ThunderSizzle•1h ago
1. SSL (probably https in that specific scenario)

2. Graduated and started in 2015.

brandonmenc•1h ago
I say "https" because sometimes even regular people know what that means.
marginalia_nu•1h ago
1. SSL. For a long time I didn't even know TLS was the "same thing", but even now that I know it is, I still say SSL 9 times out of 10.

2. 38 - Started working in 2011, but my first forays into network programming was in something like 2004-2005.

Looked over onto my other screen and sure enough the function I'd literally minutes before added an if statement to went

        public Builder sslCertNotBefore(Instant sslCertNotBefore) {
            if (sslCertNotBefore.isAfter(MAX_UNIX_TIMESTAMP)) {
                sslCertNotBefore = MAX_UNIX_TIMESTAMP;
            }
            this.sslCertNotBefore = sslCertNotBefore;
            return this;
        }
I think possibly part of the problem is that we as programmers typically don't deal with TLS directly. The code above is part of a system I wrote that extracts detailed certificate information from HTTPS connections, and man was it ever a hassle to wrestle all the information I was interested in out of the java standard library.

Sure on the one hand it's easier to not mess up if it's all automatic and out of sight, but at the same time, it's not exactly beneficial to the spread of deeper awareness of how TLS actually works when it's always such a black box.

aniviacat•1h ago
1. TLS

2. Started working after 1999

cesarb•1h ago
I usually say SSL, because it has a greater chance of being understood than the more correct TLS (nobody uses SSL 3.0 anymore). It's also in the name of many SSL (I mean, TLS) libraries, like the classic OpenSSL.

But yeah, I learned about SSL back in the crypto wars days of the 1990s, back when you had to pirate the so-called "US only" version of Netscape if you wanted decent SSL encryption, so I might be just using the old term out of habit.

christophilus•1h ago
SSL. Started working around 2000.
kasey_junk•1h ago
Almost always ssl. Started professionally in 1999. But! mTLS is always mTLS
itake•1h ago
TLS. 1989.

Even today, people and marketing pages promote "SSL" term. Unless you specifically google, "What is the deference between SSL and TLS?" most people would have no idea what TLS is.

tesseract•51m ago
(1) SSL

(2) 37. I've been an Internet user since ~1995 and been working in tech since 2004.

epc•46m ago
1. SSL 2. 57
zamadatix•40m ago
1. Cloudflare could probably use my choice of the day as another source for their randomness.

2. Started my first IT job on a computer networking team in 2012.

aag•2h ago
I seem to remember that Microsoft's initial implementation used a field in the protocol in an incompatible way to encode that it was a different implementation. I remember people being annoyed at them for deliberately screwing up future compatibility. Does anyone remember the details of this?
pharos92•50m ago
1. SSL 2. 33 Started working in tech at 21.
ekr____•21m ago
The situation is additionally confused by the fact that the version numbers do not give a good clue to how different the protocols were. Specifically:

SSLv2 was the first widely deployed version of SSL, but as this post indicates, had a number of issues.

SSLv3 is a more or less completely new protocol

TLS 1.0 is much like SSLv3 but with some small revisions made during the IETF standardization process.

TLS 1.1 is a really minor revision to TLS 1.0 to address some issues with the way block ciphers were used.

TLS 1.2 is a moderately sized revision to TLS 1.1 to adjust to advances in cryptography, specifically adding support for newer hashes in response to weaknesses in MD5 and SHA-1 and adding support for AEAD cipher suites such as AES-GCM.

TLS 1.3 is mostly a new protocol though it reuses some pieces of TLS 1.2 and before.

Each of these protocols has been designed so that you could automatically negotiate versions, thus allowing for clients and servers to independently upgrade without loss of connectivity.

Oblivion Remastered is selling new horse armor like it's 2006

https://www.pcgamer.com/games/rpg/its-happening-again-oblivion-remastered-is-selling-new-horse-armor-like-its-2006/
1•aspenmayer•3m ago•1 comments

Portable EPUBs (2024)

https://willcrichton.net/notes/portable-epubs/
1•bobbiechen•5m ago•1 comments

Listen to This Harrowing Audio of B-52s Bombing Hanoi [video]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ECGKCD-pqiM
1•vinnyglennon•9m ago•0 comments

I Miss the Internet (2024)

https://www.joanwestenberg.com/p/i-miss-the-internet
2•wordhydrogen•12m ago•0 comments

Jokes and Humour in the Public Android API

https://voxelmanip.se/2025/06/14/jokes-and-humour-in-the-public-android-api/
2•todsacerdoti•14m ago•0 comments

Russian Troops Are Lobbing Chemical Rockets in Eastern Ukraine

https://daxe.substack.com/p/russian-troops-are-lobbing-chemical
1•vinnyglennon•18m ago•0 comments

Fowler Museum at UCLA returns Larrakia cultural objects to Australia

https://newsroom.ucla.edu/stories/fowler-museum-at-ucla-returns-larrakia-cultural-objects-to-australia
1•gnabgib•21m ago•0 comments

Show HN: We built a customer intelligence platform that replaces 5 tools

https://crowdapp.io/
1•josephburutu•23m ago•0 comments

How to validate scientific ideas outside academia?

https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/134476/how-to-validate-scientific-ideas-outside-academia
1•squircle•30m ago•1 comments

Assessing grand narratives of economic inequality across time

https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.2400698121
1•marojejian•47m ago•1 comments

MI6 Hires M

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2025/06/15/mi6-blaise-metreweli-intelligence-chief/
2•jlatham051•48m ago•1 comments

Building software on top of Large Language Models

https://simonw.substack.com/p/building-software-on-top-of-large
2•todsacerdoti•48m ago•0 comments

Vietnam scraps two-child policy as it tackles falling birthrate

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/jun/04/vietnam-two-child-policy-end-falling-birthrate
2•haunter•51m ago•0 comments

World Columbian Exposition in Chicago

https://www.loc.gov/item/ihas.200198127/
1•squircle•56m ago•0 comments

The Hardest Bluffing Game

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2025/07/mheibes-iraq-game/682901/
3•dan-g•57m ago•0 comments

A chat with Gemini AI that turns whacky

https://thysys.com/20250614_AI_Gemini.html
1•HocusLocus•1h ago•0 comments

Ask HN: Any enterprises experimenting with AI agents / MCP-style infra?

2•schappim•1h ago•0 comments

The Art and Science of online personal branding

https://blog.huntyourtribe.com/the-art-and-science-of-online-personal-branding/
2•kathir05•1h ago•0 comments

Should Boys Start Kindergarten a Year Later Than Girls?

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/06/14/upshot/boys-kindergarten-redshirting.html
4•bookofjoe•1h ago•5 comments

We Tested the Amazon Dash Button

https://www.precoil.com/how-i-tested-that/episodes/pat-copeland
1•dmitrygr•1h ago•0 comments

I Built Claude_max to Unlock Claude Code's Full Power with Anthropic's Max

https://idsc2025.substack.com/p/how-i-built-claude_max-to-unlock
3•arthurcolle•1h ago•0 comments

First-Ever Supercritical CO2 Circuit Breaker Debuts

https://spectrum.ieee.org/sf6-gas-replacement
13•rbanffy•1h ago•3 comments

EVO2

https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2025.02.18.638918v1
3•nico142857•1h ago•0 comments

Show HN: Personalized Wealth Management – Institutional Meets Consumer

https://www.fulfilledwealth.co/home
3•workworkwork71•1h ago•2 comments

Coding agents have crossed a chasm

https://blog.singleton.io/posts/2025-06-14-coding-agents-cross-a-chasm/
12•simonpure•1h ago•4 comments

Airbus Plans Fuel-Cell Powered, Electric Aircraft

https://spectrum.ieee.org/airbus-electric-aircraft
3•rbanffy•1h ago•1 comments

Deterministic acyclic finite state automaton

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deterministic_acyclic_finite_state_automaton
2•tomeraberbach•1h ago•0 comments

Ecovacs robot vacuums get hacked

https://www.kaspersky.com.au/blog/ecovacs-robot-vacuums-hacked-in-real-life/34514/
2•luu•1h ago•1 comments

OrangePi Equips Board with RISC-V Processor, 4x RJ45 Ports, and OpenWRT Support

https://linuxgizmos.com/orangepi-equips-gateway-board-with-risc-v-processor-four-rj45-ports-and-openwrt-support/
9•eddiemorphling•1h ago•1 comments

Strangers in the Middle of a City: The John and Jane Does of L.A. Medical Center

https://www.latimes.com/science/story/2025-06-15/l-a-seeks-help-for-a-patient-with-no-name
1•dangle1•1h ago•0 comments