Thanks much for the response, Danijel.
Actually, I am not using a standard port, especially not on a development system with so many web services running. Sorry for the confusion. However, I can't assume this app will listen on any specific port once it is deployed.
Regardless, I am not providing two interfaces as you described, but just one interface that uses the crypt plugin. Since I only want to support SSL based traffic, I do not want to provide a standard http (80) interface.
So, really, I was actually more concerned that someone could bypass the crypt plugin functionality by simply diverting the browser port selection using something like "
http://someserver:443/somepage". Actually, I thought I had seen this type or redirection work during some testing, which is why I was concerned. However, I can't seem to reproduce it now. I must have been mistaken about what happened.
So, perhaps, the more appropriate question then would be, is it possible for someone to successfully access my server interface that uses the SBB SSL crypt plugin by using plain http with a redirected URL of that nature? And if so, how could I tell that they were using http instead of https? But, if that is not possible to bypass the plugin that way, then I guess the question is moot.
BTW, I saw in your email about the upcoming changes in RTC that StreamSec will be releasing a version that supports your unicode string changes. Do you know if ElDos/SBB will be supporting that at some point soon as well?
Thanks much...
Hoby