| Yes

|

Fail with unknown

Comments from Bear Giles:

On a related note, I had mentioned this before but it's a subtle point

and I'm sure that it's slipped everyone's mind...

- if you need to have confidence in the identity of the database

server, e.g., you're storing sensitive information and you absolutely

must prevent any "man in the middle" attacks, use the SSL code I

provided with server-side certs. To many users, the key issue is not

whether the data is encrypted, it's whether the other party can be

trusted to be who they claim to be.

- if you just need confidentiality, but you don't need to verify the

identity of the database server (e.g., because you trust the IP address,

but worry about packet sniffers), SSH tunnels are much easier to set up

and maintain than the embedded SSL code. You can set up the database

server so it doesn't require a certificate (hell, you can hard code a

fallback certificate into the server!), *but that violates the common

practice of SSL-enabled servers.* I cannot overemphasize this - every

other SSL-enabled server requires a certificate, and most provide

installation scripts to create a "snake oil" temporary certificate. I

can't think of any server (apache+mod_ssl, courier-imap, postfix(+tls),

etc.) that uses anonymous servers.

- if you don't need confidentiality, e.g., you're on a trusted network

segment, then use direct access to the server port.