Comments on: System.Net.WebException: The underlying connection was closed: Could not establish trust relationship for the SSL/TLS secure channel.

By: Alan Churchill

Alan Churchill — Sun, 21 Feb 2010 05:00:22 +0000

Thank you! Worked first time.

By: T.

T. — Mon, 08 Feb 2010 12:24:21 +0000

+=1.
This solution worked like a charm for me as well. Problem solved

By: Steve Mck

Steve Mck — Sat, 06 Feb 2010 06:50:38 +0000

Thanks, this fixed my problem. I was receiving this error when calling the “Campaign Monitor” API.

By: Terence

Terence — Thu, 04 Feb 2010 10:38:29 +0000

Thanks. work like a charm.

By: hidha

hidha — Mon, 11 Jan 2010 00:04:13 +0000

Thanks for the solution. It worked.

By: Dennis Parks

Dennis Parks — Mon, 04 Jan 2010 18:30:22 +0000

This helped me out too. Thanks much!

By: Subhash Maji

Subhash Maji — Mon, 21 Dec 2009 10:46:30 +0000

my issue was also solved…
thanks..

By: Shrini Viswanathan

Shrini Viswanathan — Tue, 08 Dec 2009 04:04:58 +0000

This method is now deprecated. Below is the new code. Thanks for pointing me in the right direction.

System.Net.ServicePointManager.ServerCertificateValidationCallback += delegate(object sender,
System.Security.Cryptography.X509Certificates.X509Certificate certificate,
System.Security.Cryptography.X509Certificates.X509Chain chain,
System.Net.Security.SslPolicyErrors sslPolicyErrors) { return true; };

By: Katerina Pilchova

Katerina Pilchova — Thu, 02 Jul 2009 14:22:03 +0000

Czescz Jarek,

thank you so much, it really helped me

katka

By: Lee Oades

Lee Oades — Wed, 20 May 2009 11:19:48 +0000

If there is a situation in which multiple delegates responding to this callback makes sense, then += will retain any existing delegates. I’m not sure whether this works in practice – whether the callbacks will all be called until one returns true – or if they all have to return true – or other?

I don’t have enough knowledge of this process to know whether that this a requirement/good idea or not but my gut feeling is that it isn’t.

I think what should actually happen is that if we just want to return true all the time, then assigning (using =) an anonymous delegate once (no need to keep creating and reassigning it) is fine.

If there is to be any logic to whether to return true or false, then it would make sense to create a “real” named method and set it as the handler for this callback.