SSL在90年代末（并非2014年）更名为TLS的原因是由于商标纠纷以及为了明确其与TLS协议的演进关系。 SSL最初是由网景公司开发的，而TLS是IETF标准化的协议，虽然两者在技术上非常相似，但名称上的改变是为了避免商标问题，并确立一个正式的、开放的标准。

SSL在90年代末（并非2014年）更名为TLS的原因是由于商标纠纷以及为了明确其与TLS协议的演进关系。 SSL最初是由网景公司开发的，而TLS是IETF标准化的协议，虽然两者在技术上非常相似，但名称上的改变是为了避免商标问题，并确立一个正式的、开放的标准。
Why SSL was renamed to TLS in late 90s (2014)

原始链接: https://tim.dierks.org/2014/05/security-standards-and-name-changes-in.html

在90年代中期浏览器大战中，网景的SSL协议（对在线安全至关重要）成为竞争的焦点。在最初版本和随后的SSL 2.0出现缺陷后，微软推出了自己竞争的协议PCT，加剧了分裂。为了防止协议分裂，共识开发公司促成了网景和微软之间的会面。这导致双方同意将该协议交给IETF进行标准化。作为妥协的一部分，SSL 3.0进行了修改并更名，以避免仅仅认可网景工作的表象。这项协议最终促成了TLS 1.0的诞生，它实际上是略微修改后的SSL 3.1，标志着朝着统一安全标准迈出的合作的一步，尽管其中充满了政治因素。

Hacker News 的讨论线程讲述了 SSL 和 TLS 的历史，解释了为什么 SSL 在 90 年代后期改名为 TLS。虽然 SSLv2 存在问题，但 SSLv3 进行了重大改进。TLS 1.0 主要基于 SSLv3，并进行了少量修订以实现标准化，而 TLS 1.1 则解决了分组密码的使用问题。TLS 1.2 带来了更显著的变化，增加了对更新的哈希函数和 AEAD 密码套件的支持。TLS 1.3 则是一个几乎全新的协议，建立在一些 TLS 1.2 的基础之上。自动版本协商允许独立升级，但也引入了降级攻击的可能性。一些人认为，协议的广泛错误使用本身就构成了一种缺陷。微软试图引入自己的版本 PCT，进一步复杂化了局面，导致与 Netscape 的政治对抗。尽管官方已转向 TLS，但由于 OpenSSL 等库中的普遍存在和常用习惯，许多人仍然使用“SSL”一词。讨论还涉及到在没有自动协商的情况下部署新版本所面临的困难，一些用户建议将下一个版本重新命名为 SSL。

原文

The Netscape/Microsoft browser wars in the mid-90's were really vicious and competitive. They really had it out for each other.

Netscape had developed the SSL protocol. The initial version had cryptographic flaws and was broken pretty quickly, and never released. The first production version was SSL 2, which was in use for a few years. (I don't know the exact versions of Navigator it shipped in.)

SSL 2 had some flaws, both cryptographic and practical; not dramatic enough to make replacing it a crisis, but it clearly needed some work from early on.

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.

Various people in the industry & community didn't want a fork, so we (Consensus Development, where I worked with Christopher Allen at the time, and where I had written the SSL 3.0 reference implementation under contract to Netscape) hosted a meeting between representatives from Netscape and Microsoft; I forget everyone who was there, but I recall that Bruce Schneier was there (before he was famous), and probably Paul Kocher, who had designed the SSL 3 protocol; Barbara Fox represented Microsoft. And we negotiated a deal where Microsoft and Netscape would both support the IETF taking over the protocol and standardizing it in an open process, which led to me editing the RFC.

As a part of the horsetrading, we had to make some changes to SSL 3.0 (so it wouldn't look the IETF was just rubberstamping Netscape's protocol), and we had to rename the protocol (for the same reason). And thus was born TLS 1.0 (which was really SSL 3.1). And of course, now, in retrospect, the whole thing looks silly.