Re:Wikipedia’s Switch to HTTPS Has Successfully Fought Gover...
by hannob on Monday May 29, 2017 @07:57PM
(#14442166)
If you censor too much people may be pissed. It's much easier to decide "we censor specific articles about specific subjects" than "we censor all of wikipedia". Censoring a popular mainstream webpage may cause too much opposition. Maybe even the politicians who make the decision and their families like to look up things on wikipedia.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Wikipedia’s Switch to HTTPS Has Successfully Fought Gover...
by jasonkostempski on Monday May 29, 2017 @08:48PM
(#14442381)
Then https will force them to either extreme which I think is a good thing. No option to slowly raise the temperature so the frogs won't jump out of the pot.
Re:Wikipedia’s Switch to HTTPS Has Successfully Fought Gover...
by SomeStupidPoint on Monday May 29, 2017 @08:39PM
(#14442335)
But can't they just download the Wikipedia backup, purge the articles they don't like, and redirect the DNS lookup to a local copy?
To the average citizen, it won't look much different than going to actual Wikipedia.
Re:Wikipedia’s Switch to HTTPS Has Successfully Fought Gover...
by FreeFull on Monday May 29, 2017 @08:46PM
(#14442371)
This is feasible, assuming the government is willing to pay for the hosting.
Re:Wikipedia’s Switch to HTTPS Has Successfully Fought Gover...
by kijin on Monday May 29, 2017 @10:08PM
(#14442646)
As well as forge an SSL certificate for *.wikipedia.org.
Last time I checked, Wikipedia had HSTS enabled. So trying to forge their DNS without also forging their SSL certificate would be equivalent to total censorship for anybody who has previously visited Wikipedia.
Re:Wikipedia’s Switch to HTTPS Has Successfully Fought Gover...
by gjjrfcbugxbhf on Tuesday May 30, 2017 @08:42AM
(#14444850)
Assuming the government in question has access to a root certificate this should be possible.